CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the analysis, findings, and interpretation of the data collected in accordance
with the study objective, which was to investigate the effects of human resource management
(HRM) practices on employee performance in Nairobi County.

4.2 Response Rate

The study targeted a total population of 150 respondents. Out of these, 120 completed and
returned the questionnaires, resulting in a response rate of 80%. According to Mugenda and
Mugenda (2003), a response rate above 70% is considered excellent, making this response rate
sufficient for data analysis.

Response Rate Analysis Frequency Percentage Valid Percentage Cumulative Percentage

Responded 120 80% 80% 80%
Not Responded 30 20% 20% 100%
Total 150 100% 100% 100%

Source: Researcher (2023)

4.3 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents

4.3.1 Gender Distribution

The gender distribution of respondents is illustrated in Figure 4.1. The majority of respondents
were male (60%), while females constituted 40%. This indicates a gender imbalance among the
respondents, with males dominating.

Source: Researcher (2023)

4.4 Analysis of Key Variables

4.4.1 Training

The study examined the impact of training on employee performance using a Likert scale (1-5).
The findings, presented in Table 4.2, indicate that most respondents agreed that training
workshops had significantly improved their performance, with a mean score of 3.8 and a
standard deviation of 1.29. Education opportunities like scholarships also contributed positively,
though to a lesser extent, with a mean score of 3.4 and a standard deviation of 1.39. Overall,
training was seen as a crucial factor in enhancing job performance, reflected in an aggregate
mean of 3.6 and a standard deviation of 1.30.

Statement N Mean Std. Deviation

Workshops on job performance improved daily performance 120 3.8 1.29
Education opportunities (scholarships) improved performance 120 3.4 1.39
Aggregate 3.6 1.30

Source: Researcher (2023)

4.4.2 Team Building

The impact of team building on employee performance was assessed, with results shown in
Table 4.3. Team building activities were found to foster trust and cohesiveness, reflected by a
high mean score of 4.1 and a standard deviation of 1.01. However, fewer respondents felt that
team building significantly boosted morale, indicated by a mean score of 3.7 and a standard
deviation of 1.41. Overall, team building was acknowledged as a significant factor, with an
aggregate mean of 3.9 and a standard deviation of 1.17.

Statement N Mean Std. Deviation

Team building activities increased trust and cohesiveness 120 4.1 1.01
Teamwork and bonding efforts boosted morale 120 3.7 1.41
Aggregate 3.9 1.17

Source: Researcher (2023)

4.4.3 Delegation of Authority

Table 4.4 presents the findings on the effects of delegation of authority on job performance.
Most respondents agreed that supervisors delegate authority, with a mean score of 4.3 and a
standard deviation of 0.94. Delegation was also seen as exposing employees to new tasks, with a
mean of 3.8 and a standard deviation of 1.11. The overall aggregate mean was 3.9 with a
standard deviation of 1.16, indicating that delegation is moderately important for employee
performance.

Std.
Statement N Mean
Deviation
Supervisors delegate authority to employees 120 4.3 0.94
Delegation exposes employees to new tasks 120 3.8 1.11
Extensive delegation, individual responsibility, and autonomy in
120 4.0 1.10
decision-making
Delegation reduces top management workload 120 3.8 1.39
Aggregate 3.9 1.16

Source: Researcher (2023)

4.4.4 Creativity and Innovation

The study investigated the influence of creativity and innovation on job performance, as shown
in Table 4.5. Management's encouragement of new ideas and decision-making methods was
rated with a mean score of 3.4 and a standard deviation of 1.40. However, fewer respondents
agreed that employees are rewarded for trying new methods, indicated by a mean score of 3.0
and a standard deviation of 1.65. Overall, creativity and innovation were considered important,
with an aggregate mean of 3.2 and a standard deviation of 1.50.

Statement N Mean Std. Deviation

Management encourages new ideas and decision-making methods 120 3.4 1.40
Employees are rewarded for trying new methods 120 3.0 1.65
Empowered employees are a source of new ideas and innovation 120 3.2 1.53
There is a culture of creativity and innovation in the institution 120 3.3 1.43
Aggregate 3.2 1.50

Source: Researcher (2023)

4.5 Employee Job Performance

The study assessed various aspects of employee job performance, including quality of work,
absenteeism, speed, and service delivery.

4.5.1 Quality of Work

Table 4.6 shows the findings on the quality of work. Most respondents agreed that the quality of
work was high, with a mean score of 4.0 and a standard deviation of 1.61. However, some
indicated that a portion of the work needed to be redone, reflected by a mean score of 3.6 and a
standard deviation of 1.24. Overall, the quality of work was seen as an important performance
determinant, with an aggregate mean of 3.7 and a standard deviation of 1.19.

Statement N Mean Std. Deviation

Most employees' work is accurate and credible 120 4.0 1.61
Some employees' work needs to be redone 120 3.6 1.24
Aggregate 3.7 1.19

Source: Researcher (2023)

4.5.2 Absenteeism

The study's findings on absenteeism are presented in Table 4.7. Most respondents agreed that
employees consistently reported to work, with a mean score of 4.0 and a standard deviation of
1.61. However, some noted instances of absenteeism, with a mean score of 3.2 and a standard
deviation of 1.48. The aggregate mean of 3.8 and standard deviation of 1.5 indicates that
absenteeism is a significant factor affecting performance.
 Statement N Mean Std. Deviation
Most employees report to work regularly 120 4.0 1.61
Some employees are frequently absent 120 3.2 1.48
Aggregate 3.8 1.50

Source: Researcher (2023)

4.5.3 Speed

Table 4.8 illustrates the findings on the speed of task completion. Most respondents agreed that
employees generally finished their tasks before deadlines, with a mean score of 4.3 and a
standard deviation of 0.94. A smaller number indicated that some employees did not meet
deadlines, with a mean score of 3.7 and a standard deviation of 1.28. The overall mean was 3.9
with a standard deviation of 1.16, showing that speed is an important determinant of
performance.

Statement N Mean Std. Deviation

Most employees finish their work before deadlines 120 4.3 0.94
Some employees finish their work past deadlines 120 3.8 1.11
Aggregate 3.9