You are on page 1of 12

Chapter 4

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA


(RESULTS AND DISCUSSION)

This chapter provided the gathered data and the researchers analysis and interpretation
of the results of the distributed surveys. The data were presented in a clear and concise
form, most which used tables.

1. The Profile of the Respondents in Terms of Age, Sex, Length of Service and
Monthly Income

Table 1. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of


the Age of the Respondents

Age Frequency Percentage (%)


21 10 9.2
22 23 21.1
23 29 26.6
24 26 23.9
25 14 12.8
26 7 6.4
Total 109 100.0

Weighted Mean = 23.29

Table 1 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of the 109 BSHM
graduated SY 2010 2011. Twenty nine (29) respondents have age of 23 which
comprises 26.6%, followed by age 24 (26, 23.9%), age 22 (23, 21.1%), age 25 (14,
12.8%), age 21 (10, 9.2%) and age 26 (7, 6.4%).

Also, it can be seen in Table 1 that the mean age of the respondents is 23.29 years
old.

Table 2. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the


Sex of the Respondents

Sex Frequency Percentage (%)


Male 57 52.3
Female 52 47.7
Total 109 100.0
Table 2 presents the frequency and percentage distribution of the respondents.
Among the 109 graduates of BSHM batch 2010-2011, majority of them are male (57,
52.3%) and the remaining are female (52, 47.7%).

Table 3. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Length of Service


of the Respondents

Length of Service Frequency Percentage (%)


Less than 10 years 39 35.8
10 years and above 46 42.2
20 years and above 24 22.0
Total 109 100.0

Table 3 illustrates the frequency and percentage distribution of the Length of Service of
the Respondents. We can see that forty six (46) of the respondents correspondence to
42.2% has been 10 years and above in the service, followed by less than 10 years (39,
35.8%) and 20 years and above (24, 22.0%) respectively.

Table 4. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Monthly Income


of the Respondents

Monthly Income Frequency Percentage (%)


Less than half a million 28 25.7
Less than a million 52 47.7
1 - 5 million 23 21.1
Less than 10 million 6 5.5
Total 109 100.0

The frequency and percentage distribution of the Monthly Income of the Respondents
shown in Table 4. The monthly income with less than a million has 52 respondents with
47.7%, followed by less than half a million (28, 25.7%), 1 5 million monthly income (23,
21.1%), and less than 10 million monthly income (6, 5.5%)
Table 5. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Number of Staff
of the Respondents

Number of Staff Frequency Percentage (%)


Less than 20 44 40.4
20 - 30 44 40.4
30 - 40 20 18.3
40 - 50 1 .9
Total 109 100.0

Table 5 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of the Number of Staff of the
Respondents. As seen, the number of staff with less than 20 and 20 30 staff has the
same respondents of 44 and 40.4%, followed by 30 40 number of staff with 20
respondents and 18.3%. Last, 40 50 number of staff (1, 0.9%)

Table 6. Frequency and Percentage Distribution of the Type of Service


of the Respondents

Type of Service Frequency Percentage (%)


Fine Dining 16 14.7
Casual Style 45 41.3
Family Style 25 22.9
Buffer Style 16 14.7
Others 7 6.4
Total 109 100.0

The frequency and percentage distribution of the Type of Service of the Respondents
shown in Table 6. The Casual Style type of service has the highest respondents of 45 with
41.3%, next is the Family Style type of service (25, 22.9%), the Fining Dining and Buffer
Style type of service has the same 16 respondents and 14.7%. Lastly, is the others with 7
respondents, 6.4%.
2. Assessment of the Job Competencies of BSHM Graduated SY 2010 2011.

Table 7. The Job Competencies of BSHM Graduates SY 2010-2011

Verbal
Job Competencies Weighted Mean sd
Interpretation
1. Ability to work in a cultural diverse work
4.450.67 Great Extent
environment
2. English conversation skills 4.420.71 Great Extent
3. Flexibility, adaptability, ability to work under
4.400.72 Great Extent
pressure
4. Independence & ability to assume responsibility
4.350.77 Great Extent
of one's work
5. Entrepreneurial/ Business/ Finance Skills 4.340.84 Great Extent
6. Result-orientation and ability to deliver results on
4.280.79 Great Extent
time
7. Management and leadership skills 4.250.75 Great Extent
8. Problem-solving/ Decision making 4.230.78 Great Extent

9. Technical and practice skills 4.220.75 Great Extent

10. Critical/ Analytical thinking 4.090.71 Great Extent

11. Initiative/ Creativity 4.010.92 Great Extent

12. Correspondence / letter writing skills 3.590.94 Great Extent

13. Research/ technical reporting skills 3.451.16 Good Extent

14. Basic Computer Skills 3.370.94 Good Extent

15. Theoretical knowledge/ Conceptual skills 3.191.04 Good Extent

Overall Weighted Mean Great Extent

Table 7 depicts the job competencies of 109 BSHM graduates SY 2010-2011. Among the
15 job competencies considered in the study, ability to work in a cultural diverse work
environment obtained the highest weighted mean of 4.45 interpreted to be great extent,
followed by English conversation skills (4.42, great extent), flexibility, adaptability, ability
to work under pressure (4.40, great extend), independence & ability to assume
responsibility of one's work (4.35, great extend), Entrepreneurial/ Business/ Finance
Skills (4.34, great extend), result-orientation and ability to deliver results on time (4.28,
great extend), management and leadership skills (4.25, great extend), problem-
solving/decision making (4.23, great extend), technical and practice skills (4.22, great
extend), critical/analytical thinking (4.09, great extend), initiative/creativity (4.01, great
extend), correspondence/letter writing skills (3.59, great extend), research/technical
reporting skills (3.45, great extend), basic computed skills (3.37, great extend).
The job competency theoretical knowledge/ Conceptual skills got the lowest weighted
mean of 3.19 which means good extent.

3. The Comparison Between the Job Competencies When the BSHM Graduates are
Grouped According to their Profile

Table 8. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Theoretical Knowledge /


Conceptual Skills When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Age Using
ANOVA

Job Std. F- p-
Age Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
21 3.10 .316
22 3.30 1.105
Theoretical 23 3.17 1.167 Do not
Knowledge / Reject the Not
24 3.15 1.190 0.079 0.995
Conceptual null Significant
25 3.21 1.051
Skills hypothesis
26 3.14 .378
Total 3.19 1.041
Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 8 displays the comparison on the job competency in terms of theoretical knowledge
/ conceptual skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their age using
ANOVA. The obtained p-value of 0.995 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05. This
indicates that the null hypothesis stating that there's no difference between the means is
not rejected. Thus, it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the
respondents in terms of this approach.

Table 9. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Technical and Practice Skills
When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Age Using ANOVA

Job Std. F- p-
Age Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
21 4.00 .471
22 4.04 .928
23 4.41 .628 Do not
Technical
Reject the Not
and Practice 24 4.15 .784 0.958 0.447
null Significant
Skills 25 4.36 .745
hypothesis
26 4.29 .756
Total 4.22 .750
Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.
Table 9 presents the comparison on the job competency in terms of technical and practice
skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their age using ANOVA. The
obtained p-value of 0.447 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05. This indicates that
the null hypothesis stating that there's no difference between the means is not rejected.
Thus, it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the respondents
in terms of this approach.

Table 10. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of English Conversation Skills
When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Age Using ANOVA

Job Std. F- p-
Age Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
21 4.30 .483
22 4.39 .839

English 23 4.07 .704 Reject the


Conversation 24 4.65 .629 3.019 0.014 null Significant
Skills 25 4.71 .611 hypothesis
26 4.71 .488
Total 4.42 .711
Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 10 depicts the comparison on the job competency in terms of English conversation
skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their age using ANOVA. The
obtained p-value of 0.014 is less than the level of significance, 0.05. This indicates that
the null hypothesis stating that there's no difference between the means is rejected. Thus,
it can be concluded that a significant difference exists between the respondents in terms
of this approach.

Table 11. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Correspondence / letter writing
skills When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Age Using ANOVA

Job Std. F- p-
Age Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
21 3.80 1.229
22 3.65 1.112
23 3.55 .910 Do not
Correspondence Reject the Not
24 3.69 .884 0.519 0.761
/ letter writing null Significant
25 3.29 .726
skills hypothesis
26 3.43 .535
Total 3.59 .935
Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.
Table 11 presents the comparison on the job competency in terms of correspondence /
letter writing skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their age using
ANOVA. The obtained p-value of 0.761 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05. This
indicates that the null hypothesis stating that there's no difference between the means is
not rejected. Thus, it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the
respondents in terms of this method.

Table 12. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Research / technical reporting
skills When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Age Using ANOVA

Job Std. F- p-
Age Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
21 3.70 .949
22 3.22 1.347
Research / 23 3.34 1.261 Do not
technical Reject the Not
24 3.46 1.029 0.663 0.653
reporting null Significant
25 3.86 1.099
skills hypothesis
26 3.43 .976
Total 3.45 1.159
Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 12 demonstrates the comparison on the job competency in terms of research /


technical reporting skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their age
using ANOVA. The obtained p-value of 0.653 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05.
This indicates that the null hypothesis stating that there's no difference between the means
is not rejected. Thus, it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between
the respondents in terms of this style.

Table 13. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Entrepreneurial / Business /


Finance Skills When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Age Using
ANOVA

Job Std. F- p-
Age Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
21 4.70 .483
22 3.91 1.125
23 4.21 .819 Reject the
Entrepreneurial
24 4.38 .697 3.060 .013 null Significant
/ Business /
25 4.71 .611 hypothesis
Finance Skills
26 4.86 .378
Total 4.34 .841
Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.
Table 13 displays the comparison on the job competency in terms of entrepreneurial /
business / finance skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their age
using ANOVA. The obtained p-value of 0.013 is less than the level of significance, 0.05.
This indicates that the null hypothesis stating that there's no difference between the means
is rejected. Thus, it can be concluded that a significant difference exists between the
respondents in terms of this approach.

Table 25. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Technical and Practice Skills When
the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Sex Using T-Test

Job Std. F- p-
Sex Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
Male 4.35 .641
Do not Reject
Technical and Not
Female 4.08 .837 3.722 .056 the null
Practice Skills Significant
hypothesis
Total 4.22 .750

Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 25 shows the comparison on the job competency in terms of technical and practice
skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their sex using T-TEST. The
obtained p-value of 0.056 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05. This indicates that
the null hypothesis that there's no difference between the means is not rejected. Hence,
it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the respondents in
terms of this method.

Table 26. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of English Conversation Skills When
the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Sex Using T-Test

Job Std. F- p-
Sex Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
Male 4.46 .629
English Do not Reject
Not
Conversation Female 4.38 .796 .273 .602 the null
Significant
Skills hypothesis
Total 4.42 .711

Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 26 displays the comparison on the job competency in terms of English conversation
skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their sex using T-TEST. The
obtained p-value of 0.602 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05. This indicates that
the null hypothesis that there's no difference between the means is not rejected. Hence,
it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the respondents in
terms of this approach.

Table 27. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Correspondence / letter writing skills
When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Sex Using T-Test

Job Std. F- p-
Sex Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
Male 3.72 .901
Correspondence Do not Reject
Not
/ letter writing Female 3.44 .958 2.418 .123 the null
Significant
skills hypothesis
Total 3.59 .935

Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 27 displays the comparison on the job competency in terms of correspondence /


letter writing skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their sex USING
T-TEST. The obtained p-value of 0.123 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05. This
indicates that the null hypothesis that there's no difference between the means is not
rejected. Hence, it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the
respondents in terms of this approach.

Table 28. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Research / technical reporting skills
When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Sex Using T-Test

Job Std. F- p-
Sex Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
Male 3.53 1.136
Research / Do not Reject
Not
technical Female 3.37 1.189 .522 .471 the null
Significant
reporting skills hypothesis
Total 3.45 1.159

Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 28 presents the comparison on the job competency in terms of research / technical
reporting skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their sex using T-
TEST. The obtained p-value of 0.471 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05. This
indicates that the null hypothesis that there's no difference between the means is not
rejected. Hence, it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the
respondents in terms of this style.
Table 29. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Entrepreneurial / Business / Finance
Skills When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Sex Using T-Test

Job Std. F- p-
Sex Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
Male 4.46 .758
Entrepreneurial Do not Reject
Not
/ Business / Female 4.21 .915 2.327 .130 the null
Significant
Finance Skills hypothesis
Total 4.34 .841

Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 29 displays the comparison on the job competency in terms of entrepreneurial /


business / finance skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their sex
using T-TEST. The obtained p-value of 0.13 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05.
This indicates that the null hypothesis that there's no difference between the means is not
rejected. Hence, it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the
respondents in terms of this approach.

Table 30. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Basic Computer Skills When the
BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Sex Using T-Test

Job Std. F- p-
Sex Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
Male 3.39 1.048
Do not Reject
Basic Computer Not
Female 3.35 .814 .048 .826 the null
Skills Significant
hypothesis
Total 3.37 .939

Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 30 displays the comparison on the job competency in terms of basic computer skills
when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their sex using T-TEST. The
obtained p-value of 0.826 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05. This indicates that
the null hypothesis that there's no difference between the means is not rejected. Hence,
it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the respondents in
terms of this approach.
Table 31. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Management and Leadership skills
When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Sex Using T-Test

Job Std. F- p-
Sex Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
Male 4.30 .731
Management Do not Reject
Not
and Leadership Female 4.19 .768 .544 .462 the null
Significant
skills hypothesis
Total 4.25 .747

Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 31 shows the comparison on the job competency in terms of management and
leadership skills when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their sex using T-
TEST. The obtained p-value of 0.462 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05. This
indicates that the null hypothesis that there's no difference between the means is not
rejected. Hence, it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the
respondents in terms of this method.

Table 32. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Problem-solving / Decision making
When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Sex Using T-Test

Job Std. F- p-
Sex Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
Male 4.33 .740
Problem-solving Do not Reject
Not
/ Decision Female 4.12 .808 2.160 .145 the null
Significant
making hypothesis
Total 4.23 .777

Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 32 displays the comparison on the job competency in terms of problem-solving /


decision making when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their sex using T-
TEST. The obtained p-value of 0.145 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05. This
indicates that the null hypothesis that there's no difference between the means is not
rejected. Hence, it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the
respondents in terms of this approach.
Table 33. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Critical / Analytical thinking When
the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Sex Using T-Test

Job Std. F- p-
Sex Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
Male 4.02 .694
Critical / Do not Reject
Not
Analytical Female 4.17 .734 1.293 .258 the null
Significant
thinking hypothesis
Total 4.09 .714

Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 33 depicts the comparison on the job competency in terms of critical / analytical
thinking when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their sex using T-TEST. The
obtained p-value of 0.258 is greater than the level of significance, 0.05. This indicates that
the null hypothesis that there's no difference between the means is not rejected. Hence,
it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between the respondents in
terms of this approach.

Table 34. Comparison on the Job Competency in Terms of Result-orientation and ability to
deliver results on time When the BSHM Graduates are Grouped According to their Sex Using
T-Test

Job Std. F- p-
Sex Mean
Deviation Decision Remark
Competency value value
Result- Male 4.30 .731
Do not Reject
orientation and Not
Female 4.25 .860 .100 .752 the null
ability to deliver Significant
hypothesis
results on time Total 4.28 .792

Note: If the p-value is less than 0.05 (level of significance), the decision is to reject Ho, otherwise accept.

Table 34 displays the comparison on the job competency in terms of result-orientation and
ability to deliver results on time when the BSHM graduates are grouped according to their
sex using T-TEST. The obtained p-value of 0.752 is greater than the level of significance,
0.05. This indicates that the null hypothesis that there's no difference between the means
is not rejected. Hence, it cannot be concluded that a significant difference exists between
the respondents in terms of this approach.