Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter presents the result of the data gathered and analyzed.

Findings are statistically interpreted and analyzed. Results are shown in

tabular format for easier understanding of data. For consistency in the

discussion, the data are presented in order and sequence of the problems

presented Chapter I.

1. Profile of Respondents of the Study

1.1 Rank or Position of Respondents

Table number one (1) shows the profile of respondents of the study in

terms of position or rank aboard the 8 ships of the company subjected to

assessment.

Table1

Profile of the respondents in terms of Position

Position Respondents Percentage ( %)

Master 8 25 %

Chief Mate 8 25 %

Chief Engineer 8 25%

Second Engineer 8 25%

Total 32 100%
 36

Table 1 showed that the position and the corresponding number of

respondents during the survey conducted. There were 8 master mariners; 8

chief mates; 8 chief engineers and 8 second engineers, with a total of 32

respondents. It can be seen that the management level positions were equally

distributed and each rank comprised about 25% of the total population.

Respondent's Position

25% 25%
Master
Chief Mate
Chief Engineer
Second Engineer
25% 25%

Respondents’ Position

Graph Chart 1
 37

1.2 Age of Respondents

In Table 2, the profile of respondents according to age bracket is

presented.

Table2

Profile of the respondents in terms of Age

Age Respondents Percentage (%)

25 – 34 years old 3 9.38 %

35 – 44 years old 0 0

45 – 54 years old 10 31.25 %

55 years old and above 19 59.38 %

Total 32 100 %

Table 2 revealed that there were 3 respondents within the age group of

25-34 years old, 10 respondents in the 45-54 years old range, and 19

respondents in the age bracket of 55 years old and above. There was no

respondent within the age group of 35-44 years old.

By percentage distribution, It can be seen that the 59.38% of the

respondents were 55 years old and above, 31.25% within 45-54 years old,

9.38% within 25-34 years old and 0% for 34-44 years old. The majority of the

respondents were over 50 years old and they comprised about 90.63% of the

respondents. Obviously, great majority of the ship officers of OCLI are well

aged.
 38

Re spondent's Age

9% 0%

25 – 34 y ears old
35 – 44 y ears old
31% 45 – 54 y ears old
60%
55 y ears old and abov e

Respondents’ Age

Graph Chart 2

1.3 Shipboard Experience of Respondents

The data regarding the profile of respondents with respect to shipboard

experience can be seen in the next table.

Table 3

Profile of the respondents in terms of Shipboard Experience

Shipboard Experience Respondents Percentage (%)

1 – 10 years 6 18.75 %

11 – 20 years 6 18.75 %

21 – 30 years 7 21.88 %

31 years and above 13 40.62 %

Total 32 100 %
 39

Table 3 disclosed in terms of years of shipboard experience of the

respondents, there were 6 respondents within the 1-10 years range. Another

set of 6 respondents were in the 11-20 years range; 7 respondents in the 21-

30 years range, and finally, 13 respondents in the 31 years and above range.

By percentage distribution, It can be seen that about 18.75% of the

respondents have 1-10 years shipboard experience, 18.75% with 11-20 years

shipboard experience, 21.88% with 21-30 years shipboard experience, while

40.62%, with 31 years and above shipboard experience, It can be observed

that a high percentage of OCLI officers, or about 81.55% have been in their

profession for more than 10 years experience.

Respondent's Shipboard Experience

19%

40% 1 – 10 years
11 – 20 years
21 – 30 years
19% 31 years and above

22%

Respondents’ Shipboard Experience

Graph Chart 3

1.4 Tenure or Length of Service with OCLI

Table 4 presents the profile of respondents in terms of years of service

with the OCLI.

 40

Table 4

Profile of the respondents in terms of Tenure

Tenure with OCLI Frequency Percentage (%)

Less than 1 year 10 31.25 %

1 – 4 years 12 37.25 %

5 – 8 years 3 9.38 %

9 years and above 7 21.88 %

Total 32 100 %

As shown in Table 4, there were 10 respondents with less than one

year tenure with OCLI; 12 with 1-4 years tenure; 3 with 5-8 years tenure; and

lastly, 7 respondents with 9 years and above tenure with OCLI.

By percentage distribution, it can be seen that 37.5% of the

respondents have been with OCLI for 1-4 years, 31.25% in less than one

year; 21.88% with 9 years and above tenure; and 9.38% of the respondents

have been with the company for 5-8 years. More than the majority the

respondents have been with the company from less than 1 year (there were

10 of them) and from 1 year up to 4 years (12 of them). They comprised about

68.5% of the total respondents.

 41

Respondent's Tenure

22%
31%
Less than 1 year
1 – 4 years
5 – 8 years
9%
9 years and above

38%

Respondents’ Tenure with OCLI

Graph Chart 4

2. Level of effectiveness of ISM to the company's operations

The assessment on the level of effectiveness of the ISM Code was

measured along the areas of Operational Safety, Health & Welfare,

Environmental Protection and Operational Efficiency. The respondents were

not grouped anymore but the response was treated as one group only. Table

5 revealed the effectiveness of the ISM Code of the company, based on

perception of the 32 ship officers in the management level positions.

The data in the table clearly manifested that in terms of operational

safety, health and welfare and operational efficiency, each mean clustered

towards the same value of 3.25 (effective).

 42

Table 5

Level of Effectiveness of ISM to Company’s Operation

Level of Effectiveness Mean Interpretation

Operational Safety 3.25 Effective

Health and Welfare 3.25 Effective

Environmental Protection 3.28 Very Effective

Operational Efficiency 3.25 Effective

Overall 3.25 Effective

This degree of response was second to the highest level of the four-

point measurement scale used in the study. The response was indicative of

the agreement of the respondents that the ISM Code implementation by the

company attained an effective level, though failed to achieve the highest

degree of effectiveness or the “very effective level”. This result implies that the

level of implementation of operational safety, health and welfare and

operational efficiency need a little more improvement to achieve the highest

level of effectiveness.

Table 5 further disclosed that, among the four areas assessed by the

group of respondents, it was only the implementation of “environmental

protection” that achieved the highest degree of effectiveness. The mean was

3.28 or within the verbal description of “very effective”. As such, it can be

deduced that the company succeeded to the fullest extent the implementation

of ISM Code as far as protecting the marine environment was concerned.

 43

The overall mean clustered towards a value of 3.25 (effective) and

visibly manifested the need of the company to consider improving the

implementation of the three areas of ISM code as these affected the overall

success of the compliance by the company to the requirements of the Code.

The overall result, however, obviously implies that the company was able to

achieve an effective level of implementation and it wants to achieve the most

successful level, it has to look into the improvement of operational safety,

health and welfare and operational efficiency factors.

Level of Effectiveness of the ISM in the Company's Operations

4
3.5 3.25 3.25 3.28 3.25
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
Operational Safety Health and Welfare Environmental Operational Efficiency
Protection

Level of Effectiveness of the ISM to Company’s Operations

Graph Chart 5

3. Level of difficulty in implementing the ISM Code

In order to determine which areas of ISM Code compliance have been

difficult to implement based on perception of the ship officers, these were

included in the survey. The respondents were asked the degree of difficulties

along the following: understanding the principles of the ISM; adapting the

procedure and protocol; and conforming to documentary requirements. Table

6 revealed the response.

 44

Among others, the data showed that the level of difficulty in

implementing the ISM Code in terms of understanding the principles of the

ISM obtained a mean of only 2.03 (fair). This response was indicative of the

low degree of difficulty encountered by the respondents in implementing the

ISM Code. Obviously, they understood the principles of the ISM Code well

enough, and this had been the reason why they effectively carried out the

implementation of the same.

Table 6

Level of Difficulty in Implementing of ISM

Level of Difficulty Mean Interpretation

Understanding the Principles of
2.03 Fair
the ISM
Adapting the procedures and
2.19 Fair
protocols
Conforming to documentary
2.00 Fair
requirements

Overall 2.07 Fair

In terms of difficulty in adapting the procedures and protocols, the

respondents rated this problem with mean of 2.19 (Fair). Again, this response

was indicative of the confidence of the ship officer respondents regarding their

full understanding about the adapting the procedures and protocols of the ISM

Code requirements. They found low degree of difficulty and this explained the

reason why the ISM Code has been effectively implemented by the company.
 45

With regard to the difficulty in conforming to documentary

requirements, the respondents got a mean of 2.00 (fair). Conspicuously, this

response manifested the quite low level of difficulty encountered by the

respondents in the implementation of the ISM Code and indicative of the

reason why the ISM Code as a whole was effectively implemented by the

company.

The overall mean was 2.07 (fair) and suggestive of the very low level of

difficulties met by the ship officers in implementing the ISM Code. Clearly, the

result implies that the officers might have had encountered problems or

difficulties in the implementation of the ISM Code aboard the ships. However,

such difficulties or problems were too minor or considered as almost

negligible and resolved very easily by them. The difficulties did not hamper

the effective implementation of the ISM Code.

L e v e l o f D i ffi c u lty i n Im p l e m e n ti n g th e I S M

4
3 .5
3
2 .5 2 .1 9
2 .0 3 2
2
1 .5
1
U n d e r s ta n d in g th e Pr in c ip le s oAf dth
a petin g th e p r o c e d u r e s a nCd o n f o r m in g to d o c u m e n ta r y
IS M p r o to c o ls r e q u ir e m e n ts

Level of Difficulty in Implementing of ISM

Graph Chart 6
 46

4. Level of effectiveness of the recognition system

The level of effectiveness of the recognition system being adapted by the

company was measured along the areas of: enhancing and or improving the

development of safety culture among ship officers; professional development

of the officers; and commercial competitiveness of the company. The tabular

data can be seen in Table 7.

Table 7

Level of effectiveness of the Recognition System of OCLI

Level of Effectiveness Mean Interpretation

Development of safety culture
3.19 Effective
(Safety awareness)
Professional development
3.16 Effective
(Performance of responsibilities)
Commercial competitiveness
3.16 Effective
(Reduced accident/incidents/off-hire)

Overall 3.17 Effective

As disclosed in Table 7, the level of effectiveness of the recognition

system in enhancing and improving the crew in terms of development of

safety culture (Safety awareness) clustered towards a mean of 3.19

(effective). Based on the four-point measurement scale established in

interpreting the response, the result reached only the second to the highest

level of effectiveness. This implies the need of the company to make a little

improvement in the implementation of the recognition systems in order to

reach the highest degree of effectiveness.

 47

Along the areas of professional development of the ship officers, and

commercial competitiveness (i.e. reduction of accident and off-hire), both

obtained a mean of 3.16 (effective).The numerical mean was a little lower

than that given for “safety culture development”, but visibly within the same

verbal description of “effective”.

This result was indicative of the same level of perception of the

respondents over the three assessed areas. They felt that the recognition

system were generally effective but also believed that improvements are

needed in some areas to make it fully successful in terms of acceptance.

The overall mean was 3.17 and plainly projected the similarity in

feelings of the group over the three areas subjected to assessment.

Apparently, they believed that with a little more improvement, the recognition

system can be fully successful and very effective,

Level of Effectiveness of the Recognition System

4
3.5 3.19 3.16 3.16
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
Development of safety Professional development Commercial
culture competitiveness

Level of Effectives of the Recognition System

Graph Chart 7
 48

5. Relationship between the Effectiveness of Recognition

system and the Effectiveness of implementation of ISM to the

company’s operations

It must be recalled that in the theoretical and conceptual framework of

this research, it was postulated that positive and direct relationship existed

between the levels of effectiveness of recognition system and effectiveness of

ISM Code along the areas of operational safety; health and welfare;

environmental protection; and operational efficiency.

Subsequently, the null hypothesis was stated after the presentation of

the statement of sub-problems, for the purpose of proving the hypothesis. In

the treatment of the data, the Pearson r correlation of coefficient formula was

applied to determine the linear relationship between the two sets of variables.

The purpose was to establish the type of relationship and measure the

strength of relationship between the two variables.

Thereafter, the test of the hypothesis was utilized, by applying the

Pearson r-test. The variations or differences of the obtained results in the

output variables were explained by using the Pearson r-square or the

correlation of determination.

Table 8 revealed the results of the Pearson r or correlation of

coefficient; Pearson r- square or correlation of determination; and test of

significant relationship. The decision rule applied is: reject the null hypothesis

if the computed value of Pearson r is higher than the critical or tabular value.
 49

Table 8
Significant Relationship between the Effectiveness of Recognition System and
the Effectiveness of ISM to the company’s operations

Computed- Pearson r-
Value Square
Pearson r (Coefficient of
P-
Variables (Coefficien Determination Interpretation Decision Conclusion
Value
t of (in %)
Correlation

Recognition
system and 0.3214 or
Moderate Reject Significant
operational .567 32.14% .001
Correlation Ho Relationship
safety

Recognition
system and 0.0992 No
Low Accept
health and .315 9.92% .079 Significant
Correlation Ho
welfare Relationship

Recognition
system and 0.5126 0r
High Reject Significant
environmental .716 51.26% .000
Correlation Ho Relationship
protection

Recognition
system and 0.3214 or
Moderate Reject Significant
operational .567 32.14% .001
Correlation Ho Relationship
efficiency

*Significant at 0.05

However, since the SPSS was used in the treatment of the data, the

rejection of the null hypothesis was based on the p-value, in which the

decision is: reject the null hypothesis if the computed p-value is less than the
 50

decided level of significance, which in this case was pegged at 0.05 alpha

level.

As disclosed in Table 8, In terms of relationship between recognition

systems and operational efficiency of the ISM Code implementation, the

computed correlation coefficient or Pearson r was positive 0.567 and

interpreted as moderate and substantial relationship.

It means that recognition systems positively influenced the

effectiveness of the operational safety implementation of the ISM code and

such degree of influence was established but merely reached the moderate

level. In fact the influence of the recognition systems over this factor was

merely 32.14% in terms of percentage. In other words, more than one half of

about 68% of the effectiveness of ISM Code implementation was not

attributed to the recognition system.

When the test of Pearson r was conducted, the result of the test came

out to be 0.001 or less than the hypothesized level of confidence interval of

0.05. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected and significant relationship

existed between the two variables (recognition and operational safety of ISM.

Along the area of health and welfare of the ISM Code implementation,

the computed value of Pearson r was positive 0.315 but interpreted as low

correlation. The computed Pearson-r square was merely 9.92 in terms of

percentage.

Therefore, very great portion of the effectiveness of ISM Code in terms

of health and welfare was not attributed to the recognition systems. Roughly
 51

10% or to be exact 9.92 % was the only influence of the recognition systems

over this factor of the ISM Code implementation

In other words, very large proportion of the effectiveness of ISM Code

implementation in terms of health and welfare effectiveness can be attributed

to factors other than that of the recognition system.

When the test of Pearson was conducted, the result came out to be

0.079 or much higher than the 0.05 level of significance. Therefore, the null

hypothesis was retained, and the alternative hypothesis was accepted. There

was no significant relationship established between the recognition system

and effectiveness of ISM Code in terms of health and welfare.

With regard to the recognition system vis-à-vis environmental factor of

the ISM Code implementation, the computed Pearson r was positive 0.716

and interpreted as high correlation. The computed r-square was 51.26% and

indicative that more than one half of the effectiveness in the implementation of

ISM Code in terms of environmental protection was influenced by the

recognition systems.

The test of Pearson r revealed a p-value of 0.000 or much less than the

0.05 hypothesized level of significance. Therefore, it was established that

significant relationship existed between the recognition system and the

effectiveness of ISM Code in terms of environmental protection.

It further revealed that such relationship was positive and direct. In

other words, as the level of effectiveness of recognition accelerates, the level

of effectiveness of implementation of ISM Code along this particular area

likewise soars or in the same upward direction.

 52

In terms of relationship between recognition system and operational

efficiency area of the ISM Code implementation effectiveness, the computed

Pearson r was positive 0.567 and interpreted as positive but moderate

correlation.

The computed r-square was about 32.14% and indicative that more

than one half of the operational efficiency effectiveness was not influenced or

cannot be attributed to the recognition systems. The computed p-value of the

test of Pearson r was, however, 0.001 or less than the hypothesized level of

significance. Therefore, the null hypothesis was rejected and significant

relationship was established between recognition system and operational

efficiency. Such relationship was low but positive.

6. Proposed actions on the recognition system

In the survey questionnaire, the respondents were also asked to

identify what course of action do they feel should be taken by the company

regarding the recognition system. There were three identified options given to

respondents to choose from. These included the following: continue

implementation; improve the existing system; or stop the implementation.

The survey disclosed only 18 respondents or approximately, 56% of

the 32 respondents provided response to the questions asked. The remaining

14 respondents or roughly 44% did not respond at all. It can only be surmised

that the 14 respondents had reservations to give their opinions on the

questions, or were not sure about their feelings at the time of the survey.
 53

However, all of the 18 officers who responded to the questions or

100% of them suggested to continue the implementation of the recognition

system.

None of the 18 respondents suggested to improve the current system

nor wanted to cease the implementation of the recognition system. The

overall response, however, suggests the positive attitude of the majority 32

respondents regarding the current recognition systems.