RESISTANCE TO CHANGE AMONG EMPLOYEES OF A PUBLIC SECTOR UNDERTAKING With Special Reference To HINDUSTAN ORGANIC CHEMICALS LTD

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As it goes in the popular saying, There is nothing permanent in this world except change. Change is inevitable in every organization. This 6-letter word will determine the organizations direction; either to success or to failure. All organizations which implement this process, have to always confront resistance from people in the organization and HR Managers will have to address it with systematic planning and solutions. The purpose of this study was to examine the readiness among the employees of HOCL to undergo change from which the researcher tried to assess the level of resistance to accept change. It is very important to understand and learn the different issues associated with resistance to change. The value of this study lies in the contribution it gives to the knowledge basein the realm of resistance to change.It also has tried to study the determinants factors of that lead to readiness and resistance to change among employees of HOCL.The study used a cross sectional descriptive methodology using sample survey research. 40, sixth and seventh scale employees of HOCL were interviewed using a structured questionnaire and the collected data were analyzed using SPSS software. From the study the researcher found that the employees of HOCL showed readiness to change.The study proved that the major determinant in influencing the readiness among employees is Equitable Remuneration. It was also found that the resistance to change is also prevailing among employees in HOCL but is not to the level which necessitates any administrative action from HOCL.The researcher recommended that the management should be proactive to maintain the present level ofreadiness consistently.Employees should be consulted in the change process actively by hearing their views and considering their opinions. It is essential to discuss with them before initiating any change. The resistance to change among the employees of HOCL was studied by analyzing the opinion of the employees in the 6th and 7th scales working in the morning shift, and it can be considered as the major limitation of the study also.

TABLE OF CONTENTS SL. NO. CHAPTER TITLE PAGE NO. 1-7 1 2 3 3 4 6 7 7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8

INTRODUCTION Introduction Statement of the Problem Objectives of the Study Scope of the study Research Methodology Sampling Plan Limitations of the Study Chapter Scheme

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 3 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 3.11 3.12 3.13 3.14 3.15 3.16 3.17 3.18 3.19

INDUSTRY PROFILE History of Chemical Industry International Scenario Indian Scenario State Scenario Current Scenario Future Prospectus COMPANY PROFILE History of chemical industry Mission Objectives Company Policies Major Customers of HOCL Product Profile Market Share Management and Organization Achievements and Accomplishments Future Plans Financial performance Departments of HOCL Details of P & A Department Functions & Job Allocation Classification of Workers Conduct of Employees Attendance Leave Recruitment

8-13 5 9 10 12 12 13 14-35 14 15 15 15 16 17 18 19 19 20 20 23 25 25 27 29 29 29 29

37 38 39 40 41 42 43

3.20 3.21 3.22 3.23 3.24 3.25 3.26

Selection Process Training Training Interventions Performance Appraisal Welfare and Administration Industrial Relations Company Discipline

30 30 30 32 33 34 35

44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57

4 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.10 4.11 4.12 4.13

LITERATURE REVIEW Change - An Ongoing Process The Notion of the Change in the Organization Types of Changes Models of Change Alternative Strategies of Change Resistance to Change Overcoming Resistance To Change Reducing Resistance to Change Literature Review Positive Approaches to Resistance Why Employees Resist Change Why People Accept or Welcome Change References

36- 67 36 36 37 39 40 45 49 50 53 61 63 66 67

58

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

68 - 138

58

6.

FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION

139-141

60 61 62

6.1 6.2 6.3

Findings Suggestions Conclusion

139 140 141

63 64

7 8

APPENDIX BIBILOGRAPHY

142 145

LIST OF TABLES
Sl.No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Table No 3.1 3.2 3.3 4.1 5.1 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12 5.13 5.14 Particulars Achievements and Accomplishments Performance Indicators Balance Sheet One-Dimensional Classification of Changes Introduced to the Organization Department wise Frequency of the Employees in the Study Frequency of Educational Qualification of the Respondents Frequency Distribution of Gender of the Respondents Age Wise Distribution of the Respondents Frequency of Experience of the Respondents Frequency of Prior Training given to the Respondents Factor Analysis Computation Based on the Tested Value of Overall Readiness to Change among Employees Overall Readiness to Change among Employees Factors Determining Overall Readiness of Employees Anova Test for Factors Determining Overall Readiness of Employees Influence of Department that the Respondents Work on their Overall Readiness Anova Table for Influence of Department that the Respondents Work on their Overall Readiness Influence of the Gender of the Respondents on their Overall Readiness Influence of the Gender of the Respondents on their Overall Readiness Page No 19 20 21 39 70 71 71 72 72 73 74 77 77 78 78 79 79 80 80

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

5.15 5.16 5.17 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 5.22 5.23 5.24 5.25 5.26 5.27 5.28 5.29 5.30 5.31 5.32

Influence of Education on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Anova Table for Influence of Education on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Influence of Age on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Anova Test for Influence of Age on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Influence of the Gender of the Respondents on their Overall Readiness Influence of Experience on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Anova Table for Influence of Experience on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Influence of Prior Training on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Computation Based on the Tested Value of Environment One Sample Test for Work Environment Influence of Department on the Satisfaction of Work of the Respondents Anova Table for Influence of Department on the Satisfaction of Work of the Respondents Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Work Environment Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Work Environment Influence of Education of the Respondents on Work Environment Influence of Education of the Respondents on Work Environment Anova Table for Influence of Education of the Respondents on Work Environment Work

80 81 81 82 82 83 83 84 84 85 85 86 86 87 87 88 88 89

38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55

5.33 5.34 5.35 5.36 5.37 5.38 5.39 5.40 5.41 5.42 5.44 5.45 5.46 5.47 5.48 5.49 5.50 5.51

Influence of Age of the Respondents on Work Environment Anova Table for Influence of Age of the Respondents on Work Environment Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Work Environment Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Work Environment Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Work Environment One Sample Test for Equitable Remuneration Computation Based on the Tested Value of the Factor with Equitable Remuneration Influence of Department of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Influence of Education of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Anova Table for Influence of Education of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Influence of Age of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Anova Table for Influence of Age of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration

89 90 90 91 91 92 92 93 93 94 94 95 95 96 96 97 98 98

56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74

5.52 5.53 5.54 5.55 5.56 5.57 5.58 5.59 5.60 5.61 5.62 5.63 5.64 5.65 5.66 5.67 5.68 5.69 5.70

Computation Based on the Tested Value of the Factor with Need for Change One Sample Test for Need for Change Influence of Department of the Respondents on Need for Change Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Need for Change Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Need for Change Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Need for Change Influence of Education of the Respondents on Need for Change Anova Table for Influence of Education of the Respondents on Need for Change Influence of Age of the Respondents on Need for Change Anova Table for Influence of Age of the Respondents on Need for Change Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Need for Change Anova Table for Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Need for Change Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Need for Change Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Need for Change Computation Based on the Tested Value of the Factor with Willingness To Learn One Sample Test for Willingness to Learn Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Computation Based on the Tested Value of the Factor with Need for Change

99 99 100 100 101 102 102 102 103 104 104 105 105 106 106 107 107 108 108

75 76

5.71 5.72

Influence of Educational Qualification of Respondents on Willingness to Learn Anova Table for Influence of Educational Qualification of the Respondents on Willingness to Learn Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Willingness to Learn Anova Table for Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Willingness to Learn Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Willingness to Learn Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Willingness to Learn Computation Based on the Tested Value of the Factor with Flexibility One Sample T Test for Flexibility Influence of Department of the Respondents on Flexibility Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Flexibility Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Flexibility Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Flexibility Influence of Educational Qualification of the Respondents on Flexibility Anova Table for Influence of Educational Qualification of the Respondents on Flexibility 5.85 Influence of Age of the Respondents on Flexibility Anova Table for Influence of Age of the Respondents on Flexibility Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Flexibility Anova Table for Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Flexibility Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Flexibility

109 109

77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93

5.73 5.74 5.75 5.76 5.77 5.78 5.79 5.80 5.81 5.82 5.83 5.84 5.85 5.86 5.87 5.88 5.89

110 110 110 111 111 112 112 112 113 113 114 114 114 115 115 116 116

94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112

5.90 5.91 5.92 5.93 5.94 5.95 5.96 5.97 5.98 5.99 5.100 5.101 5.102 5.103 5.104 5.105 5.106 5.107 5.108

Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Flexibility Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Flexibility Factors Determining Resistance to Change One Sample Test for Factors Determining Resistance to Change Influence of Department of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Influence of Educational Qualification Respondents on Resistance to Change of the

117 117 118 118 118 119 119 120 120 121 121 122 122 123 123 124 124 125 125

Anova Table for Influence of Educational Qualification of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Influence of Age of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Anova Table for Influence of Age of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Factors Determining Resistance to Change Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Computation Based on the Tested Value of Fear of Job Security Influence of Department of the Respondents on Fear of

10

Job Security 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 5.109 5.110 5.111 5.112 5.113 5.114 5.115 5.116 5.117 5.118 5.119 5.120 5.121 5.122 5.123 5.124 5.125 5.126 Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Influence of Educational Qualification of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Influence of Age of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Anova Table for Influence of Age of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Anova Table for Influence of Education of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Anova Table for Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Computation Based on the Tested Value of Fear of Technological Change One Sample Test for Fear of Technological Change Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Influence of Department of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Anova Table for Influence of Educationof the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change 126 126 127 127 128 128 129 129 130 130 131 131 132 132 133 133 134 134

11

131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138

5.127 5.128 5.129 5.130 5.131 5.132 5.133 5.134

Influence of Ageof the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Influence of Educational Qualificationof the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Anova Table for Influence of Ageof the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Computation Based on the Tested Value of Fear of Technological Change Fear of Technological Change Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change

135 135 136 136 137 137 138 138

LIST OF FIGURES
Sl.No 1 2 3 4 5 Fig. No 3.1 3.2 4.1 4.2 4.3 Particulars Organizational Structure of HOCL Department Structure of Personnel & Administration Lewins Force Field Analysis Burke-Litwin First Order Change Burke-Litwin Second order Change Page No 6 10 11 48 50

12

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction

Modern enterprises operate on a global and competitive market, in an everchanging environment which is often unpredictable. They lose their effectiveness and competitivenessif they follow the traditional way of management. These enterprises are expected to apply new solutions to the whole management system. The methods of management (Lean Management, Outsourcing, Spin Off, and Agile Management, Just in Time) are to make the organizationsmore flexible, so as to quickly and painlessly adapt to the new market requirements and expectations. Thus new trends in changes management appear. Only yesterday change was perceived as a risk. At the moment change is regarded as an opportunity. Only yesterday a good idea for company operation could only be given by a specialist. Now, a good idea may come from various sources. Eventually, change itself is subject to changes. Few organizations may perceive change as an example of disruption of otherwise peaceful world. Too many thingsare changing too fast for the managers of any organization to afford to be calm. The changes are becoming increasingly dynamic. Change, in general, indicates any act of making something different. The factors that necessitate change in organizations are broadly categorized into people, technology, information processing and communication, and competition. Some changes in the organization occur suddenly without the conscious efforts of the people. These are called unplanned changes. On the other hand, some changes are initiated by the management to accomplish certain goals and objectives. These are called planned changes. More often, change is met with resistance. The resistance can be implicit (or covert) or explicit (or overt). Resistance to change can be classified into individual resistance and organizational resistance. Individuals resist change because they consider it as a threat to their habits, security and economic conditions.

13

Organizational resistance occurs mainly because of structural inertia, group inertia, and fear of losing power, expertise or control over resources. To overcome resistance to change, management can educate employees, involve employees in change decisions, and go for negotiation, manipulation, co-option and coercion. Modern organizations emphasize on innovation and learning to cope with changes in the business environment and stay ahead of competition. The different sources of innovation include change in awareness due to acquisition of new knowledge, changing perceptions of people, demographic changes, rapid changes in industry and market structure, imperfect processes, incongruity between reality and expectation and unexpected happenings. Organizations need to be committed to change and innovation and change their structure and culture so as to facilitate continuous learning of employees. A change is also an intentional introduction or design (by man) of cybernetic systems which are based onreplacing the current state of affairs by other states of affairs, evaluated in a positive in the terms of established criteria, and together creating progress. But in some cases change is expressed somewhat differently; to change is to take different actions than previously. To take different actions than previously means to make different choices. Different choices produce change. The same choices produce sameness, reinforcementof the status quo.Change activities are involved in: defining and instilling new values, attitudes, norms, and behaviors within an organization that support new ways of doing work and overcome resistance to change, building consensus among customers and stakeholders on specific

changes designed to better meet their needs, and planning, testing, and implementing all aspects of the transition from one organizational structure or business process to another. 1.2 Statement of the Problem Change is a persistent element of organizational life; so too is resistance to change. Change, in organizations as elsewhere, involves moving from a known state to a new state one that is to some degree unknown. It involves letting go of things as they are in order to take up new ways of doing things. Organizational change challenges the status quo and it may challenge the values and perceived rights of 14

workers and workgroups. Understanding why and how opposition to change occurs, and developing the ability to respond effectively to manifestations of change resistance, is crucial to the success or failure of organizational change. The current study is conducted in a government organization and the general perception is that the employees of such organizations are not reluctant to changes. 1.3 Objectives of the Study 1. To know the perception of employees regarding change in HOCL. 2. To study the nature of resistance to change among employees. 3. To identify specific reasons behind the resistance to change. 4. To suggest if necessary the strategies to overcome the resistance to change. 5. To review the literature on resistance to change.

1.4 Scope of the Study 1. The study helped HOCL to understand the perception of employees about change. 2. This study helps the company to avoid unnecessary industrial relations by preparing the employees for a change. 3. The study on perception for change was carried out by studying the employees in the 6th& 7th scales in HOCL, Ambalamugal unit. 4. Knowledge about various factors which influences employeesresistance can helpHOCL to develop a better working environment. 1.5 Research Methodology 1.5.1 Research design Research design provides the glue that holds the research project together. A design is used to structure the research, to show how all of the major parts of the research project work together to try to address the central research questions. The design chosen for the study is descriptive research design.Descriptive research deals with everything that can be counted and studied.

15

1.5.2 Research Approach Research Approach refers to the approach or the methodology that is adopted to conduct the research. The research approach that was used in this study was survey researchto collect information.Survey research is one of the most important areas of measurement in applied social research. The broad area of survey research encompasses any measurement procedures that involve asking questions of respondents in the formof a short paper-and-pencil feedback. There are 98 employees in HOCL in 6th& 7th scales and as it was difficult because of short span of time, a sample survey research was done. 1.5.3a Research Instrument A structured closed ended questionnaire was used to collect the data. The questionnaire used had two parts, a set of 25 questions using a five point likert scale to measure the respondents opinions and the other part had the classification questions such as age, gender, department, educational qualification,etc. The questions were asked to know about the satisfaction level with their present working environment, to measure the need for change and their willingness to learn new things and also to know how they will perceive changes brought in HOCL. By these questions we can find out their resistance to change among employees. 1.5.3b Tools for Analysis 1. T-Test: A t-test is any statistical hypothesis test in which the test statistic follows a Student's t distribution, if the null hypothesis is supported. It is most commonly applied when the test statistic would follow a normal distribution if the value of a scaling term in the test statistic were known. When the scaling term is unknown and is replaced by an estimate based on the data, the test statistic follows a Student's t distribution. 2.Factor Analysis: It is used mostly for data reduction purposes a. To get a small set of variables (preferably uncorrelated) from a large set of variables (most of which are correlated to each other) 16

b. To create indexes with variables that measure similar things (conceptually) 3. Annova: In statistics, analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a collection of statistical models, and their associated procedures, in which the observed variance in a particular variable is partitioned into components attributable to different sources of variation. In its simplest form ANOVA provides a statistical test of whether or not the means of several groups are all equal, and therefore generalizes t-test to more than two groups. ANOVAs are helpful because they possess an advantage over a twosample t-test. Doing multiple two-sample t-tests would result in an increased chance of committing a type I error. For this reason, ANOVAs are useful in comparing two, three or more means. 1.5.4Data Sources Both Primary data and Secondary data were used for the study. a. Primary Data : Primary data are collected by the researcher mainly with the help of two methods. The key point here is that the data collected is unique to the researcher and the research, until it is published; no one else has access to it. Methods used for collecting primary data for the present study were: 1. Survey and 2. Personal interview b. Secondary Data: Secondary data is the data that have been already collected and readily available from other sources. Such data are cheaper and more quickly obtainable than the primary data and also may be available when primary data cannot be obtained at all. The sources of secondary data were the journals of HR department, annual report of the company, company website, journals, magazines and other published records of the company.

17

1.6 Sampling Plan The sampling plan consists of the sampling unit and the sampling procedure which is given below: 1.6.1 Sampling Unit The population of this study was the sixth and seventh scale employees in HOCL. So the sampling unit is either a sixth or seventh scale employee working in the company. 1.6.2 Sample Size The Sampling size was restricted to only 40 employees as it was not possible to meet all people within the short span of time and it was difficult to meet people working in shifts. And to perform a statistical analysis the minimum sample taken should be 30 thus, the sample size was taken as 40. 1.6.3 SamplingMethod Sampling method is of two types: Non Probability Method and Probability Method.Under probability method, systematic random sampling is used in the study selecting the samples to be surveyed. 1.6.4 Sampling Procedure From the list of the selected samples, every second employee was selected starting from the first name with a skip interval of 2 approx.which was calculated by dividing the sample 40 by the total population of 98. 1.6.5 Contact Method The researcher used direct personal contact for collecting the primary data. The respondents in this study were approached directly by the researcher and their responses were collected using the pretested questionnaire. 1.6.6 Research Period The study was conducted from 7/3/2011 to 7/5/2011.

18

1.7 Limitations of the Study a) The employees may be busy and so may not be able to give sufficient time for interview and for filling the questionnaire. b) Being an outsider may also limit what is revealed to me. The employees may be guarded in their conversations. c) The study was to be conducted in a limited span of time (8 weeks) which also posed a limiting factor. d) Respondent error Whether the respondent has responded in full faith is revealing his issue. e) Some individuals tend to use extremes when responding to questions, while there are others who tend to respond more neutrally, which can be another issue, when it comes to the rating questions. f) I was able to cover only the 6th and 7th scale employees working in morning shift in HOCL. 1.8 Chapter Scheme This report is presented in six chapters.1. The first chapter introduces the study by highlighting the need for the study, the study objectives, methodology and scheme of reporting. 2. The second chapter on industry profile discuss about the International scenario, then about the national and state scenario. 3. Third chapter describes profile of Hindustan organic chemicals limited. 4. The fourth chapter describes the Literature Review. 5. The Fifth Chapter is about the Data Analysis and Interpretation. 6. The last chapter is on Findings, Suggestions and Conclusion.

19

CHAPTER II INDUSTRY PROFILE

2.1 History of Chemical Industry The chemical industry is regarded as a key industry in the industrial structure. It has a direct bearing on the economic development of the country. The most important features which characterize the chemical industries from other industries are that the former tear down and rebuild basic substances, where the latter change the size, shape, patterns and the features of raw materials without disturbing the molecular arrangements of substances. For example, chemical industry of the world change the petroleum in to rubber, coal and air in to artificial silk, coal tar in to dye stuffs, medicines or food flavoring. The advanced countries of the world chemical industry occupy the foremost position among the national industries. The first step in the development of chemical industry was taken in the year 1749when sulphuric acid was made in England, then in Germany, other European countries and USA.The present is an era of chemical discovery. Research chemist and chemical engineers have played a dominant role in building up chemical industries. Chemical research has become an essential component of modern industry. Chemical industry yields a large number of products such as industrial or heavy chemicals .Soil fertilizers, explosives, dye stuffs, plastics, drugs, medicines, fine laboratory Chemicals, soaps, essential oils, perfumes, biological rayon-nylon cosmetics, synthetic rubber and other chemical substances used in the manufacturing process. The raw materials used in the chemical industries are varied from industry to industry. Some of the substances are derived from organic matter. For instance the cellulose, hydrocarbons, carbohydrates, nitrates etc. are obtained from air, bromine, iodine, sodium salt and potassium from the earth. Based on the usage in the industrial production chemicals are grouped in to two: 1. Heavy chemicals 2. Fine chemicals

20

1. Heavy Chemicals A firms heavy chemicals are applied to substances such as common acids, alkalies, fertilizers. They are mainly used for processing raw materials of other industries such as textiles, soaps, paper, glass, leather, kerosenes, lubrication oils etc. The heavy chemicals are produced in enormous quantity and at low cost and are consumed in manufacturing and agricultural operations. 2. Fine Chemicals It comprisesphotographic materials, drugs and other pharmaceutical products, paints, varnishes, pigment, dye stuffs etc. They are manufactured in relatively small quantities. Their production requires great skill and is in each operation. 2.2 International Scenario The chemical industry has shown phenomenal growth for more than fifty years. It was in the manufacture of synthetic organic polymers used as plastics, fibers and elastomers where most of the growth originated. Synthetic polymers form 80% of the chemical industrys output worldwide. Historically and presently the chemical industry is still concentrated in three areas of the world, Western Europe, North America and Japan (the Triad). The European Community remains the largest producer area followed by the USA and Japan. The traditional dominance of chemical production by the Triad countries is being challenged by changes in feedstock availability and price, labour cost, utility cost, differential rates of economic growth and environmental pressures. Instrumental in the changing structure of the global chemical industry has been the growing participation of developing countries and regions such as the Middle East, South East Asia, Nigeria, Trinidad, Thailand, Brazil, Venezuela, and Indonesia. Chemical and Engineering News lists and monitors the performance of the global top 50 chemical companies since 1989. In their recent publication they reported that although sales for the top 50 companies were up, the average operating profit margins were down slightly from the previous years, strengthening the feeling that the industry is on the down side of its traditional cycle. The distribution of the sales of the top 50 companies is depicted in the chart below, it indicates that the total 21

sales of the distinguished companies was US$ 397 billion. The report further reinforces the dominance of the European based companies with their sales accounting for 54% of the total amongst the leaders. The chemical industry is the most globalized of all manufacturing industries and the globalization is still in progress. The driving factors for the trend are the need for improvement of profitability by reducing production costs and proximity to markets. Companies choose location for a specific operation based on the levels of trade between countries and high competition for markets. The recent increasing cost of feedstock (largely crude oil) and other factors increasing production costs has led to consolidation and merger of multinational companies. The increasing feedstock costs have led the industry to explore alternative sources like gas. Even with this move oil will remain the most favored feed stock because of large reserves, which guarantee sustainable supply for the future. 2.3 NationalScenario Chemical industry occupies an important place in the countrys economy. It nearly contributes about 7% of GDP and 17.6% of the manufacturing sector. However, India continued to be a net importer in from 2005 with imports of In the post WTO era, Indian

US$7.92 billion and exports at US$5.95 billion.

chemical industry is undergoing a massive expansion, brand building and increased global reach. The industry is expected to grow at a CAGR of over 10% for the next 3 years, in line with the growth of manufacturing industry. The wide and diverse spectrum of chemical products can be broken down into a number of categories inorganic and organic (commodity) chemicals, drugs and pharmaceuticals, plastics and petrochemicals, dyes and pigments, fine and specialty chemicals, pesticides and agrochemicals and fertilizers. India was late entrant in the field of chemicals. In the ace of most of the products, there was a lag of 20-25 years, between the introduction of the products in the international market and that of India. The chemical industries of 50s in India were entirely on ethanol. It manufactured low density polythene at Rishra in west Bengal using ethylene products from ethanol. Synthetic and chemical ltd produced styrene butadin rubber using ethanol at Barely in UP. Poly chem. Ltd. Manufactured

22

poly styrene from ethylene based on ethanol at Vishakhapatnam in AP. Chemical and plastic ltd manufactured poly vinyl chloride at Mettudam in Tamil Nadu, which was also based on ethanol. A committee was formed in 1956-66 and 1970-71. The committee recommended that steps to be taken for setting up for steam cracking unit should be established close to Refineries in Mumbai. The second near Barauni refinery, the third near a refinery proposed to set upin south India Against all these development and having built a strong conviction in this field.Govt finally took a decision to manufacture basic building blocks and intermediaries like ethylene , propylene, butadiene , benzene, xylene and ethyl terephthalate in the public sector, with a view to further processing building blocks to produce industrial products. The manufacture of consumer products then convert industrial products .Accordingly govt.

concentrated in developing two mother plants for manufacturing of building blocks .The inauguration of these downstream plants marked the successful culmination of the co-operation between Indian designs, engineering and the construction companies. Indian and foreign equipment and the construction companies. , Indian and foreign equipment manufactures various govt. and private research organizations the international process licensers. This also meant beginning of an era for the chemicals, thermoplastic elastomers, synthetic fibers, and organic intermediary for drugs, insecticides, pharmaceuticals and dyestuffs. Now the chemical industry in India is well established, the country has recorded a rapid growth in manufacture of chemical drugs during the last few years. Prominent among them are caustic soda, soda ash, carbon blocks, phenol, acetic acid, methanol and dyes. The production and availability of chemicals are largely sufficient and imports have been curtailed. However some of the inputs for the industry are in short supply. In the production of certain chemicals, existing capacity is not sufficient to meet the demand, for example; titanium di oxide, citric acid etc. The Indian chemical industry is the fastest growing industry of economy and represents 12% of manufacturing output and accounts for 10% of total exports. The sales turnover of chemical industry in India exceeds Rs750 billion and wide spectrum of products viz. pharmaceutical dyes, manmade fibers, plastics, fertilizers, cosmetics, paints and auxiliary chemicals. 23

India has achieved the credit in global chemical industry. India had account of for one by twelfth of world production of pharmaceuticals. In pesticides, India is the second largest producer next only to Japan. Till 1980-89, the country was not able to export chemicals in large quantity. However the Indian chemical industry has shown as impressive performance in the field of exports. There has a substantial increase in export of chemicals during last few years. 2.3.1 Liberalization The government has taken numerous steps to help the industry. Investment in the chemical sector has been encouraged through the liberalization policy. Except for a small list of hazardous chemicals. All chemicals and pharmaceuticals can be manufactured without any licensing control. The exports and imports of chemicals and petrochemicals have been made smooth through simplified products. Private participation is now permitted in virtually in all industries. Tax structure has been simplified and rates have been reduced. The liberalization policy have been created a continental environment for investors. 2.4 State Scenario Kerala's chemical industry improved its performance in the October-March period last fiscal by increasing production and sales by 20-25 per cent and 15-20 per cent respectively.Caustic Soda is one of the basic inorganic chemicals manufactured from common salt. There are four processes used in the manufacturing of caustic soda, chlorine and Hydrochloric acid which are the bye products obtained through these processes. In the state, only TCC is engaged in the production of caustic soda, chlorine and hydrochloric acid. TCC has an installed capacity to produce 175 TPD caustic soda and it is used in manufacturing of soaps, textiles, plastics etc. There are many small scale industries in the state which consumes caustic soda for the production of soaps, plastics, textiles. Though the average demand, at an average rate of 4% the capacity has been increased by nearly 7% in view of the high transportation cost and hazardous nature of chemicals transported. Also because of the high transportation cost, it is not possible to export caustic soda in large volume from the state. The chlorine industrial units are working properly. Chlorine is a basic material

24

required for water purification and without chlorine; the government waterworks will not be able to supply drinking water to the public. 2.5 Current Scenario Indian chemical industry that contribute about 7% of Indias GDP and play a significant role in earning valuable foreign exchange for the country. The Government had reduced customs duty of raw materials used in the chemical industry. The current state of R&D in chemical and process industry is not very encouraging. The reason for this is many. Increase in global competition faced by chemical industry and reducing tariff barriers have had their impact on the industry. Indian industry, especially in fine chemicals, pharmaceuticals, petrol chemical sector is going through a period of readjustment and consolidation. From these we can understand that, during these period, focus has been on survival rather than on growth .Several players in the fine chemical industries in India havepositioned themselves as efficient and economic out sourcing options for chemicals and intermediaries for global companies.The petroleum files stock prices in Indian are significantly higher as compared to major exporting countries moreover the capacity in the Indian industry is small compared to these competitors abroad ., which had resulted in high overhead cost for our country. 2.6 Future Prospectus In order to dumping and to reform the sector to enable it to meet the global competition , government will have to find the alternatives .The bottom line of chemical industry can be protected only through excellence in production and marketing effort . The industry should reorient its promotional activities and extensive work to meet the requirement of competitive approach in discipline and sharing of melt information for health competition and to stop unscrupulous imports. The industry hope that as a period of consolidation come to close , the India chemical industry will better approach and understand its inherent strength irreligion global company and define its strategy for future growth and new capital investment , this will fuel the future R&Din this era . 25

CHAPTER III COMPANY PROFILE

3.1 History and Growth of the Company HOCL, a govt. of India enterprise incorporated in December 12th 1960 under the Companies Act, 1956, with registered office at Rasayani, Raigad district in Maharashtra. It was set up with a view to serve as an indigenous source of supply of organic intermediaries required for different industries by using indigenously available raw materials like benzene, toluene, naphtha, hydrogen and caustic soda.HOCL produce organic chemicals which serve as raw materials for many vital industries. HOC is in commercial operation for about 25 years over these years the company gives care to maintain high level of production and profitability. HOCs products which are important substitutes provide support for the growth of downstream industries like dyes, rubber, chemicals, pesticides, and pharmaceuticals. The registered office of HOC is situated at Rasayani in Maharashtra. It has a second unit at Kochi and subsidiary unit at Hyderabad. Rasayani unit started its operation in 1970 to produce a wide range of products like Nitro benzene, Nitro toluene, Aniline formaldehyde, Sulphuric acid etc. The Kochi unit of HOC established in 1987for the production of phenol and acetone. HOC started its subsidiary unit HFL (Hindustan Fluro carbon Limited) in Hyderabad in the year 1983. 3.1.1 HOCL, Kochi Unit Kochi unit of HOC at Ambalamugal, 14 Km away from Kochi, commissioned in the year 1987for the manufacture of 40000 TPA phenol and 24640 TPA acetone. The raw material required for the production unit are LPG and benzene received from Cochin Refinery. New project for production of Hydrogen peroxide commissioned in the year 1997 with the industrial capacity of 5225 TPA (100%) i.e 10450 TPA at 50% concentration.Kochi unit is certified for ISO 9001: 2000 , Quality management from 1996, and ISO 14001, Environment management system in November 1999. since its inception, unit has begged excellent record in safety, production, pollution control.

26

3.2 Mission To play a dominant role in the domestic market and to be competitive. 3.3 Objectives 1. To maintain growth in turn over & to optimize return on investment 2. To maintain health of plant & equipments to realize all its objectives 3. To ensure upgradation of technology and innovations of value added products through R&D efforts 4. To maintain international quality standards & optimum level of efficiency 5. To practice customer friendly culture 6. To Continue Development of Human resource efforts 7. To adhere to safety, Health and environmental policy standards 8. Implementation of growth strategy. 3.4 Company Policies Its the policy of HOCL, Cochin unit marketing and selling phenol, acetone and hydrogen peroxide to operate the quality management system that will fully meet the requirement of ISO9001; 2000. The objective is to enhance the customer satisfaction by providing consistent quality products and to achieve continual improvement through business reviews and customer focus. 3.4a HRD Policy a. To attract and retain competent personnel by providing a productive environmental opportunity for growth and comparable to industry practices. b. To build nurture work culture that focus on work entries and commitment to productivity, cost of conscious and commercial orientation, team work and dedication and to take pride in the company. c. To provide welfare facilities and amenities that will ensure highest standard of quality of life both at work place and outside. d. To enclose high performance through performance management system and recognition of contribution.

27

3.4b Environmental Policy a. HOCL follows the philosophy of maintaining harmonious relationship with environment by adopting suitable technology in different areas of operations. b. HOCL committing them to minimizing waste and prevent pollution . promoting safety at work place for all employees and promote good housekeeping. And comply with relevant statutory and legal requirements. 3.4c Health and Safety Policy a. Safe healthy and accident free environment by adhering safety rules and regulations. b. All possible preventive steps, precautions and protective measure against any anticipated hazardous. c. All safety measures in operating and maintenance technology and all process technology changes.

3.5 Major Customers of HOCL 3.5a Phenol: Major Customers a. Larsen service and Trading co. Ltd. Mumbai. b. Aravind Industries, Calcutta. c. Alta Laboratories, Calcutta. 3.5b Acetone: Major Customers a. Solvents and chemicals, Cochin. b. Pioneer chemical industry, Mumbai. c. Dr Reddys Laboratories, Hyderabad 3.5c Hydrogen peroxide: Major Customers a. Hindustan News Print Ltd. Kottayam. b. Tamilnadu Newsprint Ltd. Tamilnadu c. Gem Enterprise, Madras.

28

3.6 Product Profile The product from HOCL, go in to products, that are part of everyday life. Following are some exclusive finished products and the waste products of HOCL. 3.6a Finished Products 1. Phenol It is also known as carbolic acid. It is corrosive, toxic and inflammable in nature. It causes severe damage to skin and eyes and also cause very rapid, severe, and poisoning. It is colourless solid with perceptible odour. It has a wide range of application in the manufacture of pharmaceuticals, dyes,PF resins, moulding resin, lamination and rubber chemicals. 3. Acetone It is a colourless liquid with perceptible odour, which is completely mixable with water. It is highly inflammable substances and can form explosive mixture with air in unclean receptacle. It is an important raw materials in the explosive and lacquer industry. It is also used in the manufacturing of surface coating, MMA, MIBA, diactone alcohol and pesticides. 3. HydrogenPeroxide It is a colorless liquid with sharp odour. It is very powerful oxidizing, corrosive material and non-toxic in nature. It is used as a bleaching agent mainly in textile for cotton fibers, natural fibers like wool, silk, and jute. It is also used in the paper and pulp industry. It can also be used for bleaching wood, wood pulp,chemical pulp, writing papers, cotton linkers. It is also used as raw material for manufacturing of synthetic detergents, pharmaceuticals, food processing, cosmetics. 3.6b By Products In the process of manufacture of cumene, phenol and acetone, some waste products are also obtained at different stages of manufacture.

29

1. HeavyEnd of Cumene Alkylation of benzene with propylene is the basic reaction taking place in the production process of cumene. Apart from and addition to main reaction some secondary reaction also possibly taken in to yield. These being heavy in nature, settle down bottom of cumene column, such waste products are known as heavy end of cymene. It may be used as a fuel for furnace since it has a very high caloric value. 2. DragBenzene The unreacted benzene in the alkalization process is recycled successively. Even after this some benzene may remain unreacted due to non-aromatic impurities present. Such benzene is not desirable in the cumene process is removed from the system is called drag benzene. 4. CumoxOil The bottom portion of acetone column consists of impurities. It is sent to tar cracking section for removal of tary wastes. This is called cumox oil. It is partially soluble in water. 3.6cApplications of the Products 1. Phenol: Pharmaceuticals, dye, PF resins, moulding resins, laminations, pesticides, bisphenol-A 2. Acetone: Surface coating, MMA, MIBK, diacetone alcohol, explosives, pesticides. 3. HydrogenPeroxide: Pulp and paper bleaching, textile, chemical industry, environmental protection, electronic industry, production of detergents, cosmetics. 3.7 Market Share HOC having the market share of more than 60%. The prominent users the products of HOC are the plastic industries, pharmaceuticals, paint industries, plywood industries, paper and leather industries.The outstanding overall performance of the company reflects the dedication, enthusiasm of people at all levels of HOC.

30

3.8Management &Organization A board of directors, managers of HOC are headed by a chairman and MD, who is also looking after the day to day affairs of the company. He will be assisted by a well experienced professionals in different areas. It is very proud to see that the company has sufficient qualified and experienced executives at all levels for the efficient and effective running of the business. 3.9 Achievements and Accomplishments HOC's products have always conformed to international standards. Its quality assurance system in its Kochi and Rasayani Units has been recognized with ISO 9001-2000 certificate by Bureau Veritas Quality International (BVQI).Our Kochi Unit has also received ISO 14001-1996 certification in Environmental Management System.HOC has received a multitude of accolades and awards. They include: Table No: 3.1 Achievements and Accomplishments Year 1979 Description First Prize for HOC's Annual Report (1978-79) in the 21st National Award for Excellence in Printing and Designing by DAVP, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. 1980-81 "Award in the Public Services Advertisement Category for HOC's Advertisement captioned Eye Appeal for its Community Vision Project, by DAVP. 1991-92 First Prize in the Chemical sector for Energy Conservation for the year 199192 by Government of India, Ministry of Energy, Department of Power. 2000 National Energy Conservation Award, 2000 First Prize in Chemical Sector by Government of India, Ministry of Power, New Delhi 2001 National Energy Conservation Award, 2001 Second Prize in Chemical Sector by Government of India, Ministry of Power, New Delhi
Source : http://www.hocl.gov.in

31

3.10 Future Plans 1. HOCL has signed the Gas transmission Agreement with M/s GAIL with the availability of Natural Gas from GAIL, the Company would change the feed stock of Hydrogen from Naphthato Natural Gas and also for boiler operation in place of furnace oil natural gas would be used. 2. Further, with the availability of natural gas, company also plans to put up Captive Power Plant based on Natural Gas to economize on the operation.

3.11 Financial Performance The financial performance of the Company for the year ended March 31, 2011 is summarized below: Table No: 3.2 Performance Indicators
2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-010 2010-11

Production (MTs) Equity Reserves & Surplus Net Worth Capital Employed Value of Production Sales (Net) Exports Operating Profit Profit before Tax

313460 67.27 81.02 -80.39 253.86 765.65 646.82 26.08 84.7 10.25

216224 67.27 80.64 -133.94 217.89 452.35 386.05 1.25 -0.41 -56.68

2071110 337.27 80.16 148.16 326.11 583.8 505.96 0.31 70.6 17.71

242013 337.27 79.74 172.25 275.39 555.48 571.43 0.17 60.67 15.67

245192 337.27 77.24 189.37 292.35 527.69 546.53

221249 337.27 64.78 63.56 253 476.51 478.63 0.12

23.16 -25.74

-34.56 -84.32

Source : Annual Report of HOCL, 2011

32

Table No: 3.3 Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2011

Particulars Sources Of Funds: 1.Shareholders Funds: A)Capital B)Reserves &Surplus 2.Loan Funds: A)Secured Loans B)Unsecured Loans 2048.21 0 158.88 0 669.05 0 48.92 0 211.55 0 1165.71 0 1554.44 0 3342 3342 3342 43042.8 3342 50417.68 3342 57912.61 3342 59913.2 3342 61387.63 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-010 2010-11

34407.68 42551.68

Total Application Of Funds: 1.Fixed Assets(Net) 2.Investments 3.Current Assets Loans & Advances A)Inventories B)Sundry Debtors C)Cash And Bank D)Accrued Income E)Loans &Advances Less: Current Liabilities And Provision Net Current Assets 4.Misc. Exp. Not Written Off5.Head Office Account TOTAL

39797.89 46052.56

47053.85

53808.6

61466.16

64420.91

66284.07

11905.46 10803.15

9871.24

9309.36

8522.19

7698.2

7195.27

3981.99 4063.52 88.6 260.83 1057.32

5554.01 4713.43 180.48 265.46 739.68

6248.51 2915.47 66.94 272.41 1717.47

4963.02 4855.9 948.09 269.95 1834.72

4223.53 5853.39 981.17 266.74 1669.44

5460.73 3515.46 329.8 271.09 2773.54

5864.9 4492.07 96.66 252.78 1696.42

9452.26 11453.06 4489.91 4732.69

11220.8 5428.06 31389.87 47053.85

12871.68 5919.95 37547.51 53808.6

12994.27 5306.24 45255.94 61466.16

12350.62 4178.35 48280.44 64420.91

12402.83 5078.11 51764.08 66284.07

22930.08 28529.04 39797.89 46052.56

Source : Annual Report of HOCL,2011

33

Fig No: 3.1 Organizational Structure of HOCL

34

3.12Departments of HOCL 1. Personnel & Administration HR is considered as one of the greatest and hidden asset of the company. Company has recognized the optimal use of these resources by training development program. 2. Production Department Production department keeps close watch on the production process and also look in to the problem that arises in the mechanical, electrical and instrumentation department. This department starts production in accordance with the work order. 3. Marketing Department The main functions of this department are a. Create customer satisfaction. b. Retain considerable market share. c. Stay ahead of competition d. Promotional activities are not being carried out because the products are industrial products 4. Materials Department This department divided in to two sections a. Purchase and store section b. Finished product section. Main raw materials are benzene, LPG and cumene. LPG is brought out through the direct pipe lines from KRL. 5. Quality Control Department This department observes the sharpness of production at various levels. A group of technical experts work under this department efficiently. Quality control system has put up two labs for phenol and acetone and one for hydrogen peroxide. and

35

6. Electrical Department This department mainly deals with acceptance, generation and distribution of power for the plant. They generate power for the phenol plant completely with the LSHS ( Low Sulpher High stock) and rest of the power got from KSEB. 7. Mechanical Department Activities of this department include a. Running maintenance b. Preventive maintenance c. Break down maintenance d. Shut down maintenance 8. Fire and Safety Department HOCL has taken all important steps to produce the safety measures to its employees and to reduce the number of accidents. HOC has assumed the possession of various safety work permits. 9. Technical Service / Environmental Safety Department Environment safety department commitment to safe and clean operations in line. Company already received the ISO certification for Quality management for all products in Rasayani and Kochi unit. And the company has also obtained the ISO 14001 certification in Kochi and Rasayani unit, for maintaining high environment standards. 10. Instrumentation Department Main function of this department is measuring, controlling and maintenance. Parameters that are used to measure are pressure, temperature, flow levels and analysis. This department controls the quality of the products. 11. Project Department The main function is to look after the technical services of the organization, plant and all other activities connected with the environment. They also do the paper works concerned with the projects and fuel consumption.

36

12. Civil Engineering Department This department mainly deals with the maintenance activity with repair works. They even look after the damages that own with passage of time complaints etc. 13. Management Service and System Department Two functions of this department are a. Industrial engineering b. Computers Company has an integrated software system and network followed in HOC is LAN. They do most of paper work. 14. FinanceDepartment Proper planning and control of firms financial resources is very necessary for the success of the business. Financial Management implies the procurement and effective utilization of funds. Finance department is divided in to sections like a. Purchase / store section b. Sales section c. Miscellaneous payments d. Establishment section e. PF section. f. Financial accounts, costing and budgeting Most of the sales in HOCL are done on credit basis. Credit period allowed for phenol and acetone are 45 days and 30 days. 15% interests are charged per month for delay in payments and 15 % discount provided for advance payments. HOCL renders its payment in cheque. An advance payment is done for purchase of LPG from BPCL. KR. Rest of the raw materials purchased on credit basis, with credit period varying for each materials. 3.13 Details of Personnel and Administration Department The Personnel and Administration Department deals with management of people within HOCL. There are a number of responsibilities that come with this title. First of all, the Department is responsible for hiring members of staff; this will 37

involve attracting employees, keeping them in their positions and ensuring that they perform to expectation. Besides, this department also clarifies and sets day to day goals for the company. It is responsible for organization of people in the entire Company and plans for future ventures and objectives involving people in HOCL

Chief P&A Manager

Manager P&A (1)

Manager P&A (2)

Dy. Manager P&A Dy. Manager Training Assistant Manager Coordination Asst. Officer Doc. & Library Medical Officer Assistant Officer Nursing

Senior Professional officer Asst. Hindi Officer Asst. Officer Commun ication

Assistant Administrative Officer

Fig No: 3.2 Department Structure of Personnel& Administration Chief Manager (P & A) followed by 2managers (P&A), I & II, heads Personnel and Administrative department each with different functional

responsibilities. Dy. Manager, Training & Personnel assistant Managers. There is an assistant manager Communication supporting the functions of the manager II. 4 assistant officers support day to day activities as well as overall functioning of the department. Each department has functions like Documentation, Official language implementation & Administrative work. 38

3.14 Functions & Job Allocation 1. Manager P&A (I) : a. Supervision of P&A department in the absence of CPAD. b. Industrial Relations. c. HR initiatives & interventions. d. Time office & other related functions. e. Enforcement of discipline. f. Grievance redressal. g. Insurance. h. Redesigning & implementation of Human Relation information System. i. Any other matter that may be assigned from time to time. 2. Manager P&A (I): a. Recruitment / Promotion. b. Establishment matters. c. Legal matters. d. Performance management. e. Statutory Compliance. f. Front office management. g. Any other matter that may be assigned from time to time. 3. Deputy Manager (Training): a. Training & Development including Apprentices Training / In-plant Training. b. ISO implementation. c. Any other work that may be assigned from time to time. 4. Deputy Manager (P&A): a. Township administration including guest house. b. Public Relation & Liaison with Govt. officials & social welfare etc. c. Security Management. d. Official language implementation. e. Any other work that may be assigned from time to time. 39

5. Assistant Manager (Co-ordination): a. Managing the office of CPAD. b. Co-ordination of works among officer of P&A. c. Handling of confidential correspondence. d. Local Transport arrangement. e. Travel & accommodation arrangements. f. Any other work that may be assigned from time to time. 6. Senior Personnel Officer: a. Estate Management including housekeeping & engagement of contract labor. b. Employee welfare. c. Any other work that may be assigned from time to time. 7. Assistant Officer (Documentation & Library) : a. Maintenance of library & documentation system. b. Record management. c. Any other work that may be assigned from time to time. 8. Assistant Administrative Officer : a. Attached to Manager P&A will carry out the following works under the guidance of Manager(P&A) & Dy. Manager(Training). b. Insurance matter. c. Compliance of provisions of Apprentices Act & rules there under. d. Engagement of apprentices & their training. e. Any other work that may be assigned from time to time. 9. Public Relation Assistant Officer (Communication) : a. Attached to Manager (P&A) and will carry out the work of front office management under the guidance of Manager (P&A). 10. Medical Officer : a. Management of medical centre & related statutory compliance.

40

11. Official Language Officer: a. Attached to Deputy Manager (P&A) and will carry out the work of official language implementation under the guidance of Deputy Manager (P&A). b. The official language in HOCL is Hindi. 3.15 Classification of Workers a. Permanent b. Temporary c. Probation d. Apprentices/ Trainees e. Substitutes 3.16 Conduct of Employees Every worker shall contribute his whole time & energy exclusively to the business and interest of the company. In particular a worker shall not directly or indirectly engage in any other trade, profession or business. Every worker shall hold himself readiness to perform any reasonable duties required for him by his supervisors, to the best of his ability. All workers should respect each other, their supervision & try to maintain a good relationship with the management. 3.17 Attendance All employees who are working within factory premises record their attendance by biometric punching process. Here employees are recognized by their finger print identity. The employees are supposed to punch 2 times in a day. It records the time spend by the employees in the plant & thus forms the basis for determination of the salary. 3.18 Leave In HOCL there are 3 kinds of leaves available: a. Casual Leave : 30 available in a year b. Earned Leave: 20 available in a year (first 10 issue in Jan. rest 10 issue in July). c. Half Pay Leave: 20 available in a year (first 10 issue in Jan. rest 10 issue in July). 41

d. Maternity Leave: 3 months maternity leave can be given to the ladies employees. 3.19 Recruitment Vacancies are advertised in major newspapers& companys website or notified to the employment exchange in accordance with the Govt. rules. Appointments are purely based on merit. 3.20 Selection Process The process consists of written test & interviews. Weight age in a scientific basis is given for educational qualifications, experience, aptitude, personality, communication skills and physical fitness. The final selection depends on :a. Candidate successfully clearing medical examination by a company approved physician or the companys medical officer. b. Candidate submitting documentary proof of the educational qualification. c. Candidate satisfying & executing the certified No Relation declaration. d. The initial appointment for permanent post is in a probation period of 6 months. 3.21 Training a. Education, Training & personal developments are all the parts of management development leading to an atmosphere of learning. HOCL believes that training is one of the most important instruments of HRD. b. The training & development activities are carried out in the organization in order to improve the skill for performing the job &self-development of employees, which will meet the anticipated needs of the organization in terms of productivity, environmental & organizational change & growth. c. Based on the organizational needs identified, employees are covered under various training program schedule for an extended span of 2 years. This schedule is audited & approved as per the ISO 9001 & ISO 14001 stipulations. d. HOCL have management expertise & resources to impart training in Management & in Technical areas.

42

e. The organization extends its facilitate & resources to the student of Management Institutes, Engineering & Professional Colleges & the other Institutions to undertake in plant training as part of the curriculum. It also guides the studentsto carry out the project work in both Management & Technical areas.HOCL provides training to fresher to undergo Apprenticeship training. The company engages training to: Graduate Apprentice Trade Apprentice Vocational Technician Apprentice

3.22 Training Interventions Based on skill inventory & training needs identified by HOD/ Section Supervisors, various training inputs are planned & implemented to achieve the training objective. Various schemes related to training in operation are :3.22a Employee Development Program a. Mazdoors, Messengers (Unskilled categories). b. Operational & Maintenance staffs like operator/ Technician/ Master Technician. c. Supervisory Development Program for supervisory staffs(Both from field & office). d. Development programs for office staff. 3.22b Executive Development Program a. Up to the level of Assistant Managers. b. Dy. Managers. c. Chief Managers & above. The training activities for this level are shown below :a. In-house training through internal/ external faculty. b. Outside specialized training courses. c. Employees are sponsored to various renowned training institutes/ organization in the country. 43

3.22c Management Development Program a. For senior level executives through IIMs & premier institutes in India. 3.23 Performance Appraisal Separate appraisal is made to officers & non officers. For both officers & non officers their immediate supervisor will appraise them. Generally performance appraisal is done annually & based on that they will give promotions & other incentives to the employees. The reporting officer must be generally at least one grade higher than the officer being assessed & they should have firsthand knowledge of him & his work. Performance appraisal should not be made based on previous years records. Generally HOCL makes performance appraisal on 15 performance qualities or traits & different weights are given to each quality. Marks shall be given depending upon degree of fulfillment of requirement of each trait. The qualities or traits on which performance appraisal is made are as follows:I. Knowledge a. Skill b. Decision making capacity c. Grasping & judgment ability II. Performance a. Practical ability b. Response to work assigned c. Hard working d. Fitness for job e. Cost conscious III. Personal Ability a. Initiative b. Behavior with superior & colleagues c. Honesty & reliability d. Devotion to duty

44

IV.

Conduct & Discipline a. Punctuality & time conscious b. Availability at work place c. Attendance & leaves

V.

Overall Assessment a. 85 to above b. 70 to 85 c. 54 to 69 d. 45 to 54 e. Less than 45 Outstanding Very good Good Satisfactory Poor

3.24 Welfare and Administration 1. Medical Centre :HOCL Kochi unit has a medical centre in the factory premises, which operates round the clock. 2. Medical Benefit Plan : a. Outdoor treatment: - Rs.6000/- to each employee every year & to their family members. b. Indoor treatment:- In & around Tripunithura/ Ernakulam medical bills will be reimbursed. c. Company trainees are covered under ESI scheme. 3. Group Personnel Accident Scheme: This scheme comes under workmens compensatory act. The group insurance is taken from UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. For getting the benefit the concerned worker must report to HOD & Dy. GM(P&A). The delayed communication may result in disqualification of benefits. 4. Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme: It is applicable to all members who come under PF scheme. The premium is paid by the company. 5. Family Planning : The company gives special increment to the employees as per rules in addition to special leave. 6. Employee Education : Fort the education of the employees the company grants incentive/ leave.

45

7. Schooling for Employees Children : Rs. 7500/- should be paid for donation of the school to the employee. And it is limited to max. 2 children. 8. Merit Scholarship: It is applicable only for permanent employees. It is available for +2, professional &nonprofessional courses described in the scheme. 9. Company Housing : Company provides houses for the employees. Company has its own township. 10. Canteen : Canteen facility is provided for all the employees @ Rs. 372 per month. Tiffin careers are provided for the workers in the plant. 11. Co-operate Credit Society: Society is managed by the Board of Directors, elected by the employees. Members can avail loan up to Rs.35000/- @15% interest. 12. Recreational Facility: Company provides library & communication hall for the employees. 13. HOCL also Provides : 1) Uniform, safety shoes, & helmet. 2) Long service awards. 3) Holiday home. 4) Bachelors hostel. 5) Employees suggestion scheme. 6) Advance. 3.25 Industrial Relations HOCL endorses good industrial relations. The manager uses all possible ways to maintain good industrial relations with in the organization. There is a grievance cell in the organization for handling the employees grievances. There are 3 trade unions in it. a. HOCL Workers Union(CITU) b. HOCL Staff & Workers Union(INTUC) c. HOCL Employees Union(BMS) Suggestion scheme is in existence in HOCL. All employees are eligible to participate in this scheme. Selected suggestions are implemented & best suggestion is awarded.

46

3.26 Company Discipline Company follows strict discipline. If any non-disciplinary action occurs, department HOD reports to the HR department. Discipline is ensured strictly ordering to standing orders. 3.26a HRP Policy a. To attract & retain competent personnel by providing a productive environment, opportunity for growth & compensation comparable to industry practices. b. To build & nurture work culture that focus on work entries & committed to productivity cost consciousness & commercial orientation team work & dedication & to take pride in the company. c. To ensure high performance through Performance Management System & recognition of contribution. d. To provide opportunities for competence development on a continuous basis by various HRD interventions such as job rotation, in house & external training program. 3.26b Social Responsibility The company has the consciousness regarding social responsibility. To fulfill them this, company is providing basic civic amenities to its neighbor villages, rendering assistance to the neighborhood in different from viz. financial assistance, providing building material, furniture computers, laboratory equipments to the neighboring schools, construction of nearby roads& toilet blocks, drinking water supply, medicines to village people etc. To encourage deserving students the company is giving scholarships.

47

CHAPTER IV REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Theoretical Framework 4.1 Change - An Ongoing Process According to an oft-quoted proverb, the only constant is change. This is certainly the case when it comes to organizations and workplaces, with change coming from advances in technology, products, and processes. Effectively managing change is one of the key drivers of team and organizational success. Change is the law of nature. It is necessary way of life in most organizations for their survival and growth. Man has to mould himself continuously to meet new demand and face new situations. Change is process of moving from the current state to the desired state (vision) of future. Making a change involves, moving the organizations people and culture in line with the strategies, structure, processes and systems to achieve desired state. Companies no longer have a choice, they must change to survive. Unfortunately, people tend to resist change. It is not easy to change an organization, let alone an individual. This puts increased pressure on management to learn the restraints of change.

4.2 The Notion of the Change in the Organization R.W. Griffin defines it as each significant modification of a part of the organization. In this definition, a change may refer to almost every aspect of the organization(Griffin, R.W. 2004).According to Z. Pietrasiski, a change is intentional introduction or design (by man) of cybernetic systems which are based onreplacing the current state of affairs by other states of affairs, evaluated in a positive in the terms of established criteria, and together creating progress (Pietrusiski, Z. 1971).R. Martin expresses change somewhat differently; to change is to take different actions than previously. To take different actions than previously means to make different choices. Different choices produce change. The same choices produce sameness, a reinforcement of the status quo (Martin, R. Beer, M. & Nitin N. 2000).

48

Change activities are involved in: a. defining and instilling new values, attitudes, norms, and behaviors within an organization that support new ways of doing work and overcome resistance to change, b. building consensus among customers and stakeholders on specific changes designed to better meet their needs, and c. planning, testing, and implementing all aspects of the transition from one organizational structure or business process to another. The notion of the change as a transitionof the whole company or its part from a certain initial state to another which is explicitlydifferent. This transition is brought about either by internal stimuli or by some external factors. A change is introduced to the company on purpose and it is assessed positivelyin the light of the criteria defined by the project originator of the change.Organizations need to change and transform in order to survive and become morecompetitive. Two basic objectives in the company could be distinguished. These are increasing adaptiveness and competitiveness of the organization with reference to the environment, and a change in the behavior patterns and the system of values of the organization members. 4.3 Types of Changes One of the important classifying factors of the change is the situation of the organization which causes a change. Changes introduced to the organization could be divided into : a) Creative Changes they are introduced to the organization when the company looks for new development paths, setting itself certain goals which the company tries toachieve. Priority goals connected with creative changes are the following: winning new markets, entering new areas of activity, or innovations in production technique and technology used in the organization. b) Anticipation Changes they are supported by previous detailed research. They refer to anticipating changes events in the environment. These changes also aim at searching for new development paths. As opposed to creative changes, however, they depend on present or anticipated events. If the predictions come true, the company has an opportunity to outstrip its competition and take position of the leader in a given industry or its branch. 49

c) Adaptive (Adjustment) Changes they are a reaction to current events. The speed and efficiency of introducing adaptive changes to the organization is crucial in achieving success by the organization. Quick and efficient adjustment changes enable the organization to maintain its current position on the market. It is the basic measure for preventing the degradation of the financial situation of the company and potential threats to its functioning. d) Improvement Changes they are introduced to the organization when the company is in a very difficult situation. This situation is caused by not adapting the company to ongoing changes and not introducing improvements in a sufficient way. In such cases an improvement change is an alternative to liquidation or bankruptcy of the company. The manner in which changes are introduced is a very important classifying factor. According to this factor, changes may be divided into: a) Evolutionary Changes also called gradual changes. They are implemented slowly, gently and gradually in the company. Gradual changes are always present in the functioning of the organization. They result from constant adjusting of different elements of the organization to one another and present reacting to small events taking place around. They are a constant element in the functioning of the organization, as individual elements of the organization are never perfectly fitted to one another. Gradual changes are aimed at correcting small deviations from the norm. b) Revolutionary Changes also called step changes, they occur as a result of sudden and radical changes taking place around. Usually they refer to the whole company undergoing deep transformations. Its character is

revolutionary, therefore, to a certain extent, it breaks with the past. Usually these are complex, multidimensional, undertakings which require a division into subprograms. The applied qualifier is also the nature of the change, depending on which, the following could be distinguished: a) Planned Changes: as changes which have been prepared and implemented in an organized way and according to a certain schedule, anticipating future events. It is an anticipated or creative change.

50

b) Adjustment Changes: can be defined as a reaction to circumstances at the moment they occur. It is a gradual rather than a total change. As a result of one-dimensional stance on the typology of changes introduced to the organization it is possible to divide them into particular groups on the basis of the intensity of a chosen feature. The result of that organization is a classification presented in the below table.

Table No: 4.1 One-Dimensional Classification of Changes Introduced to the Organization Classification Author Dowycki, 2003 criteria Situation of organization Creative Changes Type of change Anticipation changes Adaptive (adjustment) change Sapijaszka, 1996 Manner ofchange implementation Griffin, 2004 Nature of change
Source:http://www.ebrc.fi/kuvat/812-824_05.pdf

Improvement changes

Evolutionary changes

Revolutionary change

Planned change

Adjustment changes

4.4 Models of Change Managers are criticized for emphasizing short-term, quick-fix solutions to organizational problems. When applied to organizational change, this approach is doomed from the start. Quick-fix solutions do not really solve underlying problems and they have little staying power. Researchers and managers alike have thus tried to identify effective ways to manage the change process.

51

4.4.1 Lewin's Change Model Most theories of organizational change originated from the landmark work of social psychologist Kurt Lewin. Lewin developed a three-stage model of planned change which explained how to initiate, manage, and stabilize the change process. The three stages are unfreezing, changing, and refreezing. Before reviewing each stage, it is important to highlight the assumptions that underlie this model. 1. The change process involves learning something new, as well as discontinuing current attitudes, behaviors, or organizational practices. 2. Change will not occur unless there is motivation to change. This is often the most difficult part of the change process. 3. People are the hub of all organizational changes. Any change, whether in terms of structure, group process, reward systems, or job design, requires individuals to change. 4. Resistance to change is found even when the goals of change are highly desirable. 5. Effective change requires reinforcing new behaviors, attitudes, and organizational practices.

4.4.2 The Three Stage Model According to Lewins three step model, successful change in

organizations should follow three steps: 1. Unfreezing The focus of this stage is to create the motivation to change. In so doing, individuals are encouraged to replace old behaviors and attitudes with those desired by management. Managers can begin the unfreezing process by disconfirming the usefulness or appropriateness of employees' present behaviors or attitudes.

2. Changing Because change involves learning, this stage entails providing employees with new information, new behavioral models, or new ways of looking at things. The purpose is to help employees learn new concepts or points of view. Role

52

models, mentors, experts, benchmarking the company against world-class organizations, and training are useful mechanisms to facilitate change 3. Refreezing Change is stabilized during refreezing by helping employees integrate the changed behavior or attitude into their normal way of doing things. This is accomplished by first giving employees the chance to exhibit the new behaviors or attitudes. Once exhibited, positive reinforcement is used to reinforce t he desired. Additional coaching and modeling also are used at this point to reinfor ce the stability of the change. 4.4.3 Lewins Force Field Analysis Any change occurring at any point of time is a resultant in a field of opposing forces. That is, the status quo- whatever is happening right now- is the result of forces pushing in opposite directions Production level of a manufacturing plant as a resultant equilibrium pointin a field of forces, with some forces pushing toward higher levels of production and some forces pushing toward lower levels of production. Steps in Force Field Analysis 1. Define problem (current state) and target situation (target state). 2. List forces working for and against the desired changes. 3. Rate the strength of each force. 4. Draw diagram (length of line denotes strength of the force). 5. Indicate how important each force is. 6. How to strengthen each important supporting force. 7. How to weaken each important resisting force. 8. Identify resources needed. 9. Make action plan: timings, milestones, responsibilities.

53

Source:http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_lewin_force_field_analysis.html

Fig No:4.1Lewins Force Field Analysis

4.4.4 Burke-Litwin & Organizational Change Model Developed by Warner Burke & George Litwin. This model shows how to create first-order and second-order change also called as Transactional Change and Transformational Change. 4.4.4a First Order Change Some features of the organization change, but the fundamental nature of the organization remains the same. OD interventions directed towards structure, management practices and policies and procedures result in first-order change.

54

Source : http://nptel.iitm.ac.in Fig No: 4.2 Burke-Litwin First Order Change 4.4.4b Second Order Change The nature of the organization is fundamentally and substantially altered. The organization is transformed OD programmes emphasis on second-order

transformational change. Interventions directed towards mission and strategy, leadership and organization culture result in second-order change.

Source:http://nptel.iitm.ac.in Fig No:4.3Burke-Litwin Second order Change

55

4.4.5 Kotters Eight Stages Model Step1: Create a Sense of Urgency For the change to happen, it needs the whole organization behind it believing in it:
1.

Identify potential threats and develop potential scenarios showing what could happen in the future.

2. 3.

Examine the opportunities that should be exploited. Start discussions, giving people convincing reasons to start thinking and talking and thinking about the change.

4.

Rally support from your customers and outside investors to reinforce your argument.

Step 2: Form aChange Coalition To help convince people that change needs to happen, find and fuel effective leaders in your organization:
1. 2. 3.

Identify true leaders in your organization Ask for emotional commitment from these people Check your team for weaknesses and make sure you have a good mix of people from different areas and levels

Step 3: Create a Vision for Change We need a clear vision so people can understand the purpose of what youre asking them to do:
1. 2.

Determine the values that are central to the change Develop a short summary that captures what you see as the future of the organization

3. 4.

Create a strategy to execute the vision Practice your vision speech often

Step 4: Communicate the Vision What you do with your vision will determine whether you are successful or not and youll find many other run of the day company communications competing against yours:
1. 2.

At every opportunity, talk about your change vision Address peoples concerns and there will be concerns

56

3. 4.

Tie your vision to operations- training, reviews, hiring process Lead by example

Step 5: Remove Obstacles You need to remove obstacles to empower people to execute your vision:
1. 2. 3. 4.

Identify change leaders Recognize and reward people for making change happen Identify those resisting change and help them see the need Remove barriers human and other

Step 6: Create Short-Term Wins Success motivates give your team a taste for success:
1.

Pick a simple project you can implement with help from the die hard critics

2. 3.

Choose inexpensive projects where you can justify the spend Reward the people the help you meet the goals

Step 7: Build on the Change Real change runs deep keep looking for improvements:
1. 2.

After every win, analyze what went right and what went wrong Set goals to continue building on what youve achieved

Step 8: Anchor the Changes in Corporate Culture Reinforce the value of successful change via recruitment, promotion, new change leaders. Weave change into culture.

4.5Alternative Strategies of Change Change has been a matter of great interest to the Sociologists and Behavioural Scientists. A number of theories and models have been postulated. Olmosk has presented a comprehensive view of a number of Change strategies and called them Seven pure strategies of change. Each of these strategies have been briefly summarized and explained. 4.5.1 The Fellowship Strategy The assumption underlying this strategy seems to be, If we have good, warm inter-personal relations, all other problems will be minor. Emphasis is placed on getting to know one another and on developing friendships. Groups that use this model often sponsor discussions, dinners, card parties, and other 57

social events that bring people together. The fellowship strategy places strong emphasis on treating everyone equally; this often is interpreted as treating everyone the same way. All people must be accepted; no one is turned away. When the group is making decisions, all members are allowed to speak, and all opinions are weighed equally. No fact, feeling, opinion, or theory is considered inherently superior to any other. Arguments are few, because conflict generally is suppressed and avoided. 4.5.2 The Political Strategy Political Strategists tend to believe that If all the really influential people agree that something should be done, it will be done. They emphasize a power structure that usually includes not only formally recognized leaders but informal, unofficial leaders as well. Much of the work done under the political strategy is the result of the leaders informal relationships. The political strategy emphasizes the identification and influence of people who seem most able to make and implement decisions.It usually focuses on those who are respected and have the largest constituency in a given area.Ones level of influence is based on ones perceived power and ability to work with other influential people to reach goals that are valued by ones constituency. 4.5.3 The Economic Strategy Economic strategists believe that Money can buy anything or any change we want. They emphasize the acquisition of or at the very least, influence over all forms of material goods, such as money, land, stocks, bonds, and any other tradable commodity. This strategy is widely used in the United States and the Western world and is used most often by large corporations and by the very rich. Inclusion in a group that espouses this approach usually is based on possession or control of marketable resources. Influence within the group is based on perceived wealth. Most decisions are heavily, if not completely,

influenced by questions of profitability as measured by an increase in tangible assets. This approach is highly rational, based on the assumption that all people act more or less rationally from economic motives. As a result, such groups often have high needs for control and for rationality.

58

4.5.4 The Academic Strategy The academic strategy assumes that People are rational. If one presents enough facts to people, they will change. To this end, academic strategists undertake an unending series of studies and produce thousands of pages of reports each year. Inclusion in a group that plans to use the academic strategy to solve problems or to make changes is based primarily on ones expertise in a given area or on ones desire to acquire such knowledge. Leadership and influence within the group generally depends on the degree to which the person is perceived as an expert. Newcomers to the field are considered to have little to contribute, while those with advanced degrees or many years of specialized study receive a great deal of attention. 4.5.5 The Engineering Strategy Users of this strategy try to bring about behavioral change without dealing directly with the people involved. The underlying assumption is, If the environment or the surroundings change enough, people will be forced to change. Therefore, engineering strategists may spend a great deal of time studying physical layouts, patterns of interaction, and role descriptions in work places and classrooms without ever speaking to the employees or students.Groups that approach change in this way often recruit members based on their technical skills. Group needs often are defined in terms of technical skills, which are considered more important than interpersonal styles. 4.5.6 The Military Strategy The military-style approach to change is based on the use of physical force. The name military has been given to this approach because it conveys the appropriate connotation to most people, not because the military is the sole user of this approach. Police Departments, revolutionary student groups, and some teachers, for example, employ the military strategy. The basic assumption behind this approach is, People react to genuine threats. With enough physical force, people can be made to do anything. Therefore, considerable time is spent in learning to use weapons and to fight. Physical conditioning, strength, and agility are valued. Membership in military-strategy groups often is determined by ones physical power and by ones willingness to submit to discipline. Both within the

59

group and in its dealings with the external environment, influence is exerted primarily through the fear of authority and through the threat of punishment. Members of military-style groups need control, status, and security. They often tend to view most problems and relationships in terms of power, authority, threat and exploitation.

4.6 Resistance to Change Changing an organization is often essential for a company to remain competitive. Failure to change may influence the ability of a company to survive. Yet employees do not always welcome changes in methods. According to a 2007 survey conducted by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), employee resistance to change is one of the top reasons change efforts fail. In fact, reactions to organizational change may range from resistance to compliance to enthusiastic support of the change, with the latter being the exception rather than the norm. Zaltman & Duncan define resistance as "any conduct that serves to maintain the status quo in the face of pressure to alter the status quo. a)Sources residing in the human personality they result from fear of the unknown, anxiety of dealing with a new situation, the need to change ones profile (employees profile), the need to extend ones knowledge and abilities, and to change ones attitudes, getting rid of ones habits, the change from the routine to the creative attitude, andnegative experience connected with changes. b)Sources residing in the interaction of a social group they result from pressure from a formal or informal group of associates, anxiety that a change will disturb the interest of the group or one of its members, contradictions of changes with the current cultural values and norms of behavior, distrust of the management producing a change. c)Sources residing in the change itself they result from anxiety about decreasing the current level satisfying needs (anxiety about losing ones job, lowering salary, change of ones superior or cooperation group, change of ones job into a more difficult or less important and less interesting) and from a negative evaluation ofthe accepted solution. 60

d)Sources residing in the organization of the process of change they result from a negative evaluation of the implementation process, lack of proper participation of employees in the whole process of changes, lack of transferring the effects of the change to motivation mechanisms for those implementing changes, errors in the process of the transmission of information. 4.7 Overcoming Resistance to Change 1. Education and Communication : One way to reduce resistance is by communicating the rationale for the change decision to the employees. If employees are fully aware of the facts and their misconceptions are removed then resistance would be negligible. Change can be communicated through face to face discussions, memos, group presentations or reports. This would be of great help if the management and employees trust each other. 2. Participation: Resistance can be reduced by involving employees in the decision process who are against the change. If the participants are capable of making valued suggestions their involvement would reduce resistance, increase their loyalty and the change decision would be meaningful. However the disadvantage is that there is a tendency of making inappropriate decision and taking too much time. 3. Facilitation and Support: Change agents can provide assistance to employees in a number of ways to minimize resistance. When employees apprehension and tension are at a peak then the change agents can provide them with counseling and therapy, teaching them new skills and helping them develop new competencies or giving incentives like paid leave for absence may facilitate them. However the pitfall of this technique is that it takes a lot of time is expensive and success is not guaranteed. 4. Negotiation: Resistance can also be minimized if the change agent bargains or exchanges something of value with the employees who are the target of change. For instance a particular reward can be given to individuals who are resisting change and have a strong influence in the organization. The drawback is that it is very costly and the change agent might be threatened by other powerful individuals in the organization.

61

5. Manipulation and Co-option : Manipulation means to have influence through hidden means. Here the facts and figures are misrepresented and diverted from truth to make them more appealing also hiding additional information and creating false rumors so that employees welcome change, are all part of manipulation. While Cooptation is a combination of both manipulation and participation. It attempts to reduce resistance by giving an important role to the leaders of resistance in a change decision. Manipulation and co-optation are comparatively less expensive and convenient way to get the support of the people opposing the change. 6. Coercion: It means to directly threat or compel the people against the change to accept it. Coercion should only be practiced when all other techniques fail. Threats by management to close down a manufacturing plant, transferring employees who are resisting change, not giving promotions, and negative performance evaluations are all examples of coercion. 7. Creation of a Learning Organization: Finally the creation of a learning organization or the one that has the capacity, elasticity and flexibility to change is ideal. In learning organizations, employees share their views and make suggestions and participate willingly in change decisions. Learning organizations have following features. 4.8 Reducing Resistance to Change To reduce resistance to change in the key steps, few suggestions are discussed below: i) Initiation of Change Resistance will be low if the persons involved perceive the change project as their own, rather than imposed on them by others. Resistance will be low if the whole hearted support from Top Management is available. ii) Type of Change Resistance will be low if the involved persons are convinced that the difficulties experienced in their job would come down after implementation. Resistance will reduce if the change is likely to bring interesting and satisfying experience, to the concerned individuals. Resistance will be less if the change is

62

congruent and supports the values and ideals of the concerned individual. The perception that the power autonomy and security will not be adversely affected. iii) Process of Change If the persons likely to be affected have taken part in diagnosis, and have agreement on the basic change problems and felt its importance resistance will be less. Resistance will become low if the change makers (i) see the opponents viewpoints empathize with them and (ii) take steps to remove their perceived fears. Resistance will be reduced if feedback is taken from the affected persons and they are apprised of the steps to be taken. It should be noted that manipulation, acquisition, and secret and hidden coercion are ethically immoral. These are actions which in the case of manipulation and acquisition aim at twistingor distorting facts, spreading non-authentic information and data, concealing facts, bribing group leaders resistant to changes. Similarly to coercion (e.g. direct threat, putting pressure, threats of transfer, or refusal of promotions) certainly will not affect the atmosphere in the company and its organizational situation in a positive way .In the case, when these actions are revealed, those who performed such actions will be negatively, if not with hostility, evaluated by all members of the organization. The process of implementing changes may be questioned. Actions which are regarded in a positive way by members of the organization include actions related to trainings, communication, supporting, facilitating and negotiating. The disadvantages of these actions are that they are time-consuming, expensive and no guarantee of success. Members of the

organization motivated to learn will achieve better results. Intellectual progress and skills acquired at work are a source of new experience. A substantial part of knowledge and practice as well as skills of employees may be passed on to others. Trainings not only extend the range of qualifications but above all give an opportunity to systematize what is already familiar.The main source of development is experience gained at work. One could take a step further and move from traditional training to practice learned for the whole life, according to needs and knowledge used at work on a regular basis. There are suggestions of encouraging and engaging members of the organization in the work on changes at 63

the earliest stage possible in the process of changes (even at the stage of planning and preparing a project). The programs of extending and enriching work increase satisfaction of employees, reduce absence at work and fluctuation, increase accuracy and quality of work. This type of action motivates employees to taking responsibility and participating in the process of introducing changes. It ensures acceptance among employees with reference to changes and understanding the necessity of implementing these changes. Communication, understood as a process of transmitting messages, also produces positive effects. If communication functions properly, it stabilizes interpersonal relations. It also affects the adaptation of new norms and refusal of old rules. However, it should be noted that a mental change in employees of the whole organization is necessary to achieve desired effects. It is important to move from a commanding to a consulting management style. Actually it is said that, nothing is more important from the effectiveness of the organization than the ability to convey concise, precise and intelligible information to your members. All strong points of the organization (scale benefits, financial and technical resources, different talents, contracts) are not worth much without the right internal communication among individual members (Gellerman 1999, 261). Certain rules should be observed in the communication among members of the organization: a. Promoting ideas and values affecting the effectiveness of actions, b. Creating many platforms for communication, c. Conveying information about the organization, d. Creating favorable conditions for communication, e. Introducing clear rules for communication, f. Delegating responsibilities and rights, g. Using useful tools in the process of communication.

64

4.9 Literature Review The growing globalisation of business, increasing competition and technological advancement has led to an increasing need to change organisational policies and strategies (Hampel and Martinsons, 2009). In organisations, most problems and challenges are generated by competition, advanced technology, mergers, expansion, product quality maintenance, or enhancing employee efficiency on the one hand and rapid growth, new business ventures, exciting opportunities, innovations, and new leadership and management approaches on the other (Madsen et al., 2005, p. 213). Nowadays, the pace of challenges is increasing and thus organisational change is considered unavoidable (Drucker, 1999). To overcome these challenges, management and change agents are worried about implementing successful change programs so as to be competitive, and for future survival. Research has shown that employee attitudes and behaviours need to be developed for successful organisational change (Armenakis et al., 1993; Bernerth, 2004). Organisational change affects employee attitudes and behaviours because they are transferred from a situation that is known to one that is unknown, which can lead to uncertainty, strain and anxiety among employees. Domain researchers have focused on the fact that change may have a positive or negative impact on employee attitudes and productivity (Weber and Weber, 2001). Thus, before launching change programmes, management must know about employees' intentions towards change. The literature reveals individuals as the centre of analysis for the success of organisational change programs (Judge et al., 1999). In this regard there are many predictors, such as:
a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h.

knowledge and skills; social relations in the workplace; organisational culture; management leadership relationships; ability to cope with change; ability to solve job-related problems; social support; active versus passive job; 65

i. j. k. l. m.

job demands; self-efficacy; appropriateness; management support; and personal valence

The literature cited above reveals that relationships between employee and employer can be developed on the basis of the work environment, which can stimulate the individual to utilise his or her abilities, efforts, experiences and skills. The work environment may support employees to develop commitment to the organisation because employees see the possibility of accomplishing their desires, needs and future expectations. If employees achieve their desires and needs they may develop positive attitudes and behaviours towards organisational change. Previous research has largely neglected the direct link between employee readiness and supervisor and peer relations in organisational change. This study was conducted in a developing country, where work environment factors are more important than in other countries for developing employees' positive attitudes and behaviours (Alvi and Ahmed, 1987; Chang, 1999). The aim of this study was to identify employee attitudes and behaviours towards organisational change. The objectives of this study were to examine the supervisor and peer relations and employee demographic characteristics to determine employee attitudes and behaviours towards organisational change in a developing country. 4.9.1Readiness for Change Readiness for change has been conceptualized and defined a variety of ways. Bernerth (2004) explained that Readiness is more than understanding the change, readiness is more than believing in the change, readiness is a collection of thoughts and intentions toward the specific change effort (p. 40). Backer (1995) explained that Individual readiness for change is involved with people's beliefs, attitudes, and intentions regarding the extent to which changes are needed and their perception of individual and organizational capacity to successfully make those changes. Readiness is a state of mind about the need. It is the cognitive precursor to behaviors of either resistance or support readiness for change is not a fixed element of 66

individuals or system. It may vary due to changing external or internal circumstance, the type of change being introduced, or the characteristics of potential adopters and change agents. Thus, interventions to enhance readiness are possiblechange can occur under conditions of low readiness, of course, but behavioral science research indicates that the probability of success is reduced when low readiness leads to low motivation to change or to active resistance. (p. 22-24) Therefore, an individual is ready for change when he or she understands, believes, and intends to change because of a perceived need.Previous research has found relationships between readiness for change and a number of variables or constructs: individual contribution to the change effort, active-passive job, job change self-efficacy, job demands, and decision latitude (Cunningham et al., 2002); job satisfaction and effective job performance (McNabb & Sepic, 1995); and job knowledge and skills, social relations in the workplace, organizational culture, and management-leadership relationships (Hanpachern, Morgan, & Griego, 1998). Most of these constructs have only been explored in one or two studies while other possible influential factors have not yet been investigated. In the literature many predictor variables have been examined by many researchers to determine employee attitudes and behaviours in the domain of change management. By applying survey questionnaire in four profit-oriented companies from Northern Utah, Miller et al.(2006) focused on employees' readiness for change by examining three workplace factors management/leader relationships, job knowledge and skills, and job demands and found a significant influence on employees' readiness for change. Rafferty and Simons (2006) focused on the factors that create readiness for two types of change: corporate transformation and finetuning. A recent research study conducted by Holt et al. (2007) received 464 responses to a questionnaire survey from full-time employees in public and private companies in Northern Utah. Using a structured questionnaire and responses from 878 employees of a public sector organisation in Turkey, Erturk (2008) found through structural equation modelling that trust in supervisors mediates between managerial communication and openness to change, and also found a a partial relation between participation and openness to change via trust in supervisors. Readiness for change is influenced by employees' beliefs of self-efficacy, appropriateness, management support, and personal valence.

67

The above literature reveals that is has always been necessary to know the attitudes and behaviours of employees and management regarding organizational change. In the literature, workplace factors have largely been revealed in the form of active and passive jobs, change efficacy, flexible policies and procedures, job knowledge and skills, management leadership relationships, and social relationships in the workplace (Hanpachern et al., 1998; Eby et al., 2000; Cunningham et al. 2002; Madsen et al., 2005; Miller et al., 2006; Rafferty and Simons, 2006). Apart from the above predictor, demography may also play an important role in the domain of organisational behaviour. To develop individual attitudes and behaviours, this factor is to be counted as imperative for developing individuals' cognition. In the literature these factors are known as extra related or family situation factors and include different variables like age, gender, marital status, tenure in company, tenure in position, job status, spouse, number of children, and education (Mottaz, 1988; Madsen et al., 2005). In the organisational behaviour domain, this factor has shown a mixed effect on individual decisions. Aryee and Tan (1992) describe that family situations do not have any significant effect on attitudes and behaviours towards career commitment. But most researchers and practitioners claim that extra work related factors commonly affect attitudes and behaviours because of family dependency (Blau, 1985;Madsen et al., 2005). However, with increasing dependency and the associated need for psychological attachment, employees may actually become more positive towards organisational change (Madsen et al., 2005) Employee attitudes and behaviours can be influenced through workplace factors, according to our literature review. A conceptual approach is developed in this paper which encompasses a number of factors, namely supervisor and peer relations and six demographic characteristics (i.e. gender, age range, marital status, present employment status, highest educational level, number of dependent, years in present job and years with present employer). This study demonstrates the impact of these factors on readiness for organisational change. The results showed positively significant correlations between scales, which confirms that employees can develop their attitudes and behaviours on the basis of supervisor and peer relations. However,

68

from the demographic characteristics interesting results were found: the relationship between the employees' number of dependents and readiness for organisational change. In the literature, no such relationship (i.e. that the greater number of children the employee had, the greater their openness to organisational change) was found. Our study found that employees who had more dependents felt more open to and ready for organisational change. Other findings, including a relationship between present employment status and readiness for change and marital status and supervisor and peer relations, was confirmed in this study. These relations highlight the need to consider these factors within policy and strategy to promote employee openness to and readiness for organisational change. 4.9.2 Resistance to Change

It is usually repeated, in both academic and business world, that many of the change initiatives one way or another have produced poor results. The rate of fail in organizational formation has been fifty to seventy per cent (Hammer & Champy, 1993). Although this high percentage, which indicates the large number of organizations that are unable to realize their change plans, has attracted the attention of those who are interested in the topic i.e. researchers, consultants, academicians, managers, complex nature of the activity of transforming an organization makes it difficult to construct a perfect solution or a plan that can be valid in different contexts for achieving intended outcomes. One may list various causes for the failures experienced in implementation processes but resistance to change is more likely to be described as one of the most widespread ones. Even though the concept of resistance to change is not a new one, no consensus about its content and the ways it is experienced has existed among the researchers who have studied it. In the following section, we will review the concept of resistance to change from the perspectives of some influential researchers in this field. Although resistance has been usually conceived as an impediment to change, significant number of arguments which emphasize the positive role of resistance have been existed in literature. There have been a lot of books and scientific papers in the literature, and many of them have approached the issue from different perspectives. Therefore, to prevent repetition, we

69

find it appropriate to review authors who have contributed to literature by representing each of these different perspectives in terms of resistance to change.

4.9.2a Definition of the Term Since the core concept of this review section is resistance to change, it is necessary to look at existing definitions of resistance in the organizational context. According to Zander (1950), resistance is a behavior which is intended to protect an individual from the effects of real or imagined change (cited in Dent & Goldberg, 1999, p. 34). Folger and Skarlicki define resistance as employee behavior that seeks to challenge, disrupt, or invert prevailing assumptions, discourses, and power relations ( Folger & Skarlicki, 1999, p.36). Piderit (2000) has classified the existing definitions in the literature by considering three main dimensions. Firstly she looks at descriptions which see resistance as a behavior, similar to definitions made by Zander (1950), Folger and Skarlicki (1999). Resistance is defined as either taking action against change or being passive to respond it. Parallel to this, Ashforth and Mael (1998) define resistance as intentional acts of commission (defiance) or omission (cited in Piderit, 2000, p.785). Secondly, some researchers pay attention to emotional factors as sources of resistance. Coch and French (1948) associate resistance with the feelings of frustration and aggression. Based on their case study, they define resistance as a response to frustration and aggression caused by the change initiative (Piderit, 2000). Thirdly, cognition, which refers to beliefs and attitudes, has also been used in the literature as a way to describe resistance. Piderit (2000) illustrates this tendency with Watson (1982), who defines resistance simply as reluctance of employees. Alternatively, Bartlem and Locke (1981), who evaluates the study of Coch and French (1948), argue that, participation which was a key concept in this case study, plays a critical in providing employees with necessary motivation to adopt new ways of working. 4.9.2b Research on Resistance: Reasons and Solutions As one of the pioneers in development of the concept of resistance to change, Lewin (1951) had advanced a theory, called force-field theory, focusing on resistance during the process of organizational change. According to Lewin (1951), two different types of forces are embedded in an organization. While one group of them 70

works in favor of change, the other group opposes it. When these two groups of forces are balanced, the organization experience inertia, and in order to change this equilibrium, forces for change need to be strengthened and resisting forces should be weakened. The responsibility of managers who plan to implement change is to work towards diminishing the impact of resistance forces while on the other hand reinforcing the forces for change. One of the early empirical studies dealing with resistance to change had been conducted in U.S and had provided a fertile ground for academic discussions about the issue. Lester Coch and John R. P. French, J (1948) had studied resistance empirically in Harwood Manufacturing Company and try to answer two basic questions; firstly Why do people resist change so strongly? And secondly, What can be done to overcome this resistance? (Coch & French, 1948, p.512). Their initial theory for resistance to change had been based on that individuals are subject to frustration during the process and they need to respond it by relying on preestablished group forces. In order to understand impact of a change initiative and the responses from employees to it, Coch and French (1948) have composed four different groups which were having different levels of participation to the change process. While the first group was consciously kept away from the process in terms of why change was needed and how should it be, the last group was given a chance to participate in all activities from strategy formation, deep discussions about necessity and implementation to feedback sessions. Other two groups were also given chance to participate at certain levels but the first and the last groups which were treated completely different, were critical determinants of outcomes of the study. Not surprisingly, the first group, which was only given instructions about how they had to operate and their work under new system, performed poorly compared to pre-change period and even some of its members had quitted the job. On the other hand, last group, which was given the opportunity to participate change process, despite the initial decline in their performance; they increased their productivity in a very short period of time. Having conducted different empirical studies, Coch and French (1948) basically claimed that individuals and groups that are given the opportunity to

71

participate in creation and development of change activities are less likely to resist in implementation than those who are kept away from these processes. The efforts to manage resistance had taken various forms depending on ones own point of view. Lawrence (1954), evaluated findings of the study conducted by Coch and French (1948) in Harwood Manufacturing Company in a quite different way and claimed that resistance to change in the factory resulted from different treatment towards each group which eventually damaged social status quo in the factory rather than participation. According to Lawrence (1954), the main reason for employees to perform poor and to resist change was about the loss of social status within the organization and the ignorance of their skills in the previous setting. Drawing on the empirical studies and their implications, Lawrence (1954) argued that a change initiative has different dimension namely technological and social. Therefore the outcomes of a change need to be evaluated differently by considering these two dimensions. Lawrence (1954) identified key points to consider for managers those who have to manage a change process and to deal with resistance. a. Managers need to take the interests of employees into consideration during implementation. b. Managers should communicate with employees to make them understand the meaning of change. c. An alternative approach to resistance can be guiding because not all employees resist change in the same way, differences between staffs and department have to be considered. d. New job definition can facilitate generation and implementation of new ideas. e. Managers have to recognize their role in providing communication with the staff at different levels to achieve successful implementation.

Resistance to change has always been conceived as a significant obstacle for organization those need to shift their direction and it is usually tried to be handled by tactics that perceive issue of change and resistance from a managerial point of view. Contrary to this tendency, Flower (1962) argues that many change attempts fail because it is usually misunderstood by those managers who actually initiate change. In other words, managers fail in overcoming resistance because they think change

72

process as quite straight forward, like moving one situation to another. However, for successful transition it is important to understand how this attempt had been conceived by the employees. According to Flower (1962), when a change initiative is introduced, employees usually experience different problems which are not completely understood by managers. First one is about clarity of the idea of change. Unless employees grasp the meaning and the necessity of change they tend to resist. Second one is the rigidity, in terms of the way change intended to be implemented. If the manager insists on one single way of operation and tends to dictate, the possibility of resistance increases. Third one is about the changes in social status at the workplace. Employees may see change as a threat which can lead to loss of their social status at work. Finally the fourth one is about workload of an individual and if employees tend to associate change only with extra work, he or she is most likely to resist because of the belief that he or she already has a excessive of work. In addition to these views, Kegan and Lahey (2001), explain employee resistance to change by relying on individual psychologies. Although they recognize the resistance as a quintessential human response to protect status quo, they emphasize the importance of understanding sources of resistance to cope with it. The core concept of their study is competing commitments which refers to two opposing motivation embedded in the minds of people. According to Kegan and Lahey (2001), these commitments prevent individuals from achieving their goals. While employees usually seem to understand suggested change initiatives, the hidden beliefs that they have conflict with the idea of change and therefore hinder implementation. Kegan and Lahey (2001) compare the role of a manager to psychologists and expect managers to disclose the employees hidden beliefs to execute change efficiently.

4.10. Positive Approaches to Resistance

For many people, the term resistance has negative connotations and this attitude reflects itself in academic studies too in the form of solutions to prevent resistance. Parallel to this, resistance has been classically understood as a foundation cause of conflict that is undesirable and detrimental to organizational health.(Waddell & Sohal, 1998, p.543). Classical organizational theory has had a big impact on this general tendency to see resistance as a problem which needs to be 73

eliminated. The dominant idea in classical theory, perceives unity and coherence as the fundamental prerequisites for maximization of performance in production and development. Therefore, discrepancy and pluralism in terms of ideas and attitudes are considered to have a negative impact on organizational performance (Waddell & Sohal, 1998). However, significant amount of researchers whom will be explained in this section, starting from 1970s, have tended to evaluate resistance in a way that is completely contrasting with these pejorative interpretations. Rather than conceiving resistance solely as an obstacle, they have focused on understanding dynamics embedded in resistant behaviors and attitudes. Proponents of this positive approach have came up with the idea that describes resistance as a positive element in change process because it enables managers to revise bad aspects of a change initiative. The presumption that lies under this approach is that not every change idea is capable of producing valuable outcomes, and therefore resistance to such ideas can be used in a constructive way. Before looking at different arguments that define resistance as a valuable input into change process, it has to be stated that almost all researchers who advocate the constructive value of resistance, emphasize the necessity of understanding and controlling resistance in a proper way to benefit from it. Hultman (1979), argues that it is a fallacy to accept change as inherently good because its success depends on the outcome it bring about and to assess the performance of a change effort certain period of time is needed. According to him, because organizations are continuously subjected to internal and external forces to change, during this period, resistance may function as a stabilizer, and balance these internal and external demands. From this point of view resistance provides organization with, what Hultman called, a rhythm, that is crucial for survival of the organization. The meaning of resistance has varied depending on a researchers point of view and therefore explanations can lead quite different conclusions. Waddell and Sohal (1998) argue that people resist uncertainties rather than the idea of change. According to Waddell and Sohal (1998), what makes individuals hesitate about the change is possible negative outcomes that are inherited in the idea. The contribution of resistance to change process is not limited only to directing attention to possible defects of change strategy. From a psychological point of view, it has been usually

74

emphasized that dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs has been important source for growth and development (Waddell & Sohal, 1998). Resistance therefore is perceived as a valuable source providing change process with a momentum. Litterer (1973) addresses apathy and passivity as important obstacles for implementing change and argues that conflict and resistance can be desirable in terms of providing organization with energy and motivation during change process. However, it has to be noted that authors who have proposed these positive ideas about resistance, also pay attention to the amount of conflict and resistance. In other word they do not deny that too much conflict can lead to distraction of attention from the core of issue (Waddell & Sohal, 1998). Although many of the authors who perceive change as a constructive tool tend to base their arguments on the constructive value inherited in the approaches of resistant people, their reasons for reaching this conclusion differs. De Jager (2001) who defines change as the act of replacing old with the new (De Jager, 2001, p.25) opens up a new window in discussion of resistance with his emphasis on the distinction between the old and the new. First of all, De Jager (2001) reaffirms that not all change initiatives are necessarily good. Secondly for a successful change, different alternatives are necessary to choose the best one. According to De Jager (2001), resistance plays an important role in selecting the correct path of change by creating a discussion atmosphere. Therefore, managers need to focus on causes of resistance and, to consider concerns of employees to manage change efficiently. 4.11Why Employees Resist Change Resistance to change has been recognized one of the important factors that can influence the success of organizational changes, including new technology innovation, new policies, and new organizational structure. Maurer (1996) indicated that half to two-thirds of all major corporate change efforts fail, and resistance is the little-recognized but critically important contributor to that failure. Recent studies of resistance to change have focused on behavior reaction. Brower and Abolafia (1995) defined resistance as a particular kind of action or inaction, while Ashforth and Mael (1998) defined it as intentional acts of commission (defiance) or omission. Shapiro, Lewicki, and Devine (1995) noted that willingness to

75

deceive authorities constitutes resistance to change, while Sagie, Elizur, and Greenbaum (1985) used compliant behavior as evidence of reduced resistance. Block (1993) pointed out that resistance may occur when people distrust or have past resentments toward those leading the change and when they have different understandings or assessments of the situation. O'Toole (1995) reported that resistance to change is an effort to protect established social relations perceived to be threatened. Spector (1989) pointed out that resistance occurs because it threatens the status quo or increases the fear of and anxiety about real or imagined consequences (Morris and Raben, 1995). Bryant (2006) stated that change threatens personal security and confidence in an ability to perform. Moreover, change may also be resisted because it threatens the way people make sense of the world, calling into question their values and rationality and prompting some form of self-justification or defensive reasoning. Graham (1986) noted that some employee resistance to organizational actions is motivated by more than mere selfishness such as lack for future vision, short of capability, fear of relocation. Managers in charge of rolling out a change initiative often blame others for the failure of the initiative, rather than accepting their role in its failure. Employees are likely to do the same thing, assigning blame for failed change attempts to their managers, rather than themselves (Argyris, 1990). Dealing successfully with resistance depends on an ability to represent the change accurately, to describe the source of resistance in the individual, and to choose and implement strategies appropriate for addressing and overcoming that source. It is often assumed that everyone in an organization shares the same objective and homogeneous reality, but not all participants facing a change initiative encounter the same conditions. Differences in participant responses to change usually reflect either misunderstandings about the change or individual characteristics and attributes. Understanding the reasons for resistance to change can help managers prevent disaster and improve the changes chances for success. There are many reasons why employees may react negatively to change. Personal loss. Right or wrong, people are afraid they will lose something, particularly: a) Security - a concern about job loss through a reduction in force or automation.

76

b) Money a concern about loss of money through a reduction in salary, pay, benefits, or overtime or through increased expenses because of a move to another location that is farther from their home. c) Pride and satisfaction a concern about ending up with jobs that no longer require their abilities and skills, such as automation through computer-aided design in engineering departments. d) Friends and important contacts a concern that a move to another location will no longer allow contact with friends and important people, resulting in loss of visibility and daily contacts. e) Freedom a concern that a new boss will replace confidence and personal freedom with closer supervision that provides less opportunity for decisionmaking. f) Responsibility a concern that jobs will be reduced to menial tasks without responsibility. g) Authority a concern about a loss of power and authority over other people because of a reorganization takes place or a new boss who decides to withdraw authority. h) Good working conditions concern about being moved to a less desirable work location, e.g., from a large private office to a small one or from an office to a desk in a partitioned work area. i) Status concern about loss of job title, responsibility, or authority that will result in a loss of status and recognition from others, such as when another layer of management is inserted between a subordinate and his or her manager. j) Lack of respect. When people have a lack of respect and/or negative attitude toward the person or department responsible for making the change, there is a strong tendency to resent and resist the change because their feelings don't allow them to look at the change objectively. k) Poor communication. Sometimes change is ordered in such a way that the people resent and resist it, simply because they don't like being told what to do.

77

l) Negative attitude. People with a negative attitude toward the organization, the job, and/or the boss are very apt to resent or resist change, no matter what it is. This is one of the reasons why high morale is so important. m) No input. This kind of resistance occurs when people who feel they should have been asked were not asked for their ideas concerning the change. n) Perception of criticism. Whether or not the change is actually criticizing the things that were previously done or the way in which they were done, people may look upon the change as a personal criticism. o) Creation of burden. Some changes add more work and, with it, confusion, mistakes, and other negative results. The initial stages of automation and computerization for example, can result in additional problems at first. If the change will obviously require more effort with little accomplished as a result, people are apt to resent and even resist it, particularly if no rewards accompany the extra effort. p) Bad timing. The timing of a change is very important to its acceptance. If it comes at a time when people are already having problems, the change is usually resented and probably resisted by those who are supposed to implement it. Challenge to authority. Some people are testing their power and influence by simply refusing to implement a change. q) Secondhand information. Some people are very sensitive about the way they learn of the change. If they found out about it from a secondhand source, they might resist it until they hear it "from the horse's mouth." 4.12Why People Accept or Welcome Change While some people resent and/or resist change, others accept and welcome it. The degree to which these opposites occur depends on many factors. Ashford,

Rothbard, Piderit, & Dutton (1998) indicated that one reason is that employees accept change in order to get top management to pay attention to issues that employees believe must be addressed in order for the organization to maintain high performance. Porter and Lawler (1968) suggested that how much effort an individual will expend in accepting change is determined by expectations that an outcome may be attained and the degree of value placed on the outcome in the person's mind; thus, employees may accept or welcome change when they see a clear benefit to doing so. Therefore, a 78

person's attitude towards change comes from his or her perception of the outcomes of a change, compared with the individual's goals and values. Reasons for a positive reaction to change, then, include: a) Personal gain. When changes are made, some people may gain such things as new job titles, more responsibility, more money, and more authority. In short, they may stand to gain any of the things the loss of which would lead to change resistance. b) More security a perception of greater security in a job, perhaps because more of personal skills will be used, such as when there is a change in an engineering department to computer-aided design and an individual feels more effective working with computers than using a pen to design on a drafting board. c) More income a hope for a salary increase, more benefits, an incentive, or profit-sharing program, or more overtime. d) More authority a hope for promotion to a position of greater authority, or a new boss who allows more authority than was available under the previous boss. e) More status/prestige a hope for a new title, a new office, or a special assignment that carries with it status and prestige. f) More responsibility a hope for a job change that provides new

responsibility, or a new boss who assigned more responsibility than the previous one did. g) Better working conditions a hope for a new work schedule, new equipment, or other conditions that make the job easier or more enjoyable. h) Increased personal satisfaction a hope for a greater feeling of achievement because of a chance to use their abilities more to eliminate some of the obstacles that had stood in the way of personal performance. i) Better personal contacts an expectation of being moved to a place with greater opportunity for contact with and visibility to influential people. j) A new challenge the expectation of more rewarding work.

k) Less time and effort. Another reason why change may be welcome is if the change actually makes the job easier and requires less time and effort. For 79

example, work simplification programs carry the slogan "Work smarter, not harder," andchanges that can actually deliver on this promise are often welcomed. it can reduce the- physical effort required to do the job. l) Respect for the source. If people have a positive attitude toward the person or the department from which the change comes, they will be more likely to accept and even welcome the change. m) Effective communication. People who are asked to do things instead of told to do them may react very positively, as are those who perceive they have had some input into effecting the change. 4.13 References 1. Griffin, R.W. 2004. Podstawy zarzdzania organizacjami. Warszawa: PWN. 2. Pietrusiski, Z. 1971. Psychologia wprowadzania innowacji. Wektory. 3. Martin, R. [in:] Beer, M. & Nitin N. 2000. Breaking the Code of Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. 4. Hammer, M., & Champney J. (1993), Reengineering the Corporation: A manifesto for business Revolution, Harper Business, New York. 5. Dent ER, & Galloway-Goldberg S., (1999) Challenging 'resistance to change'. Journal of Applied Behavioural Science. 35,(1), 25-41. 6. Folger, R. & Skarlicki, D. (1999). Unfairness and resistance to change: hardship as mistreatment, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 3550. 7. Zander, A. F. (1950). Resistance to changeIts analysis and prevention. Advanced Management, 4(5), 9-11. 8. Folger, R. & Skarlicki, D. (1999). Unfairness and resistance to change: hardship as mistreatment, Journal of Organizational Change Management, 3550. 9. Piderit, S.K. (2000). Rethinking resistance and recognizing ambivalence: a multidimensional view of attitudes toward an organizational change. Academy of Management, November, pp- 783-794 10. Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. A. (1998), The power of resistance: Sustaining valued identities. In R. M. Kramer & M. A. Neale (Eds.), Power and influence in organizations: 89-120. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage 80

11. Coch, L.,&French, J.R.P., Jr. (1948).Overcoming resistance to change. Human Relations, 1(4), 512-532. 12. Bartlem, C. S., & Locke, E. A. (1981), The Coch and French study: A critique and reinterpretation. Human Relations, 34: 555-566 13. Lewin, K, (1951) Field Theory in Social Science, Harper and Row, New York 14. Lawrence, P. R. (1954). How to deal with resistance to change. Harvard Business Review, 32(3), 49-57. 15. Flower, O. D. (1962). Overcoming resistance to change [Film]. Beverly Hills, CA: Roundtable Productions 16. Strebel, P. (1996). Why do employees resist change? Harvard Business Review, May- Jun, 86-92 17. Cinite, I., Duxbury, L.E., Higgins, C. (2009), "Measurement of perceived organizational readiness for change in the public sector",British Journal of Management, Vol. 20 pp.265-77. 18. Cunningham, C.E., Woodward, C.A., Shannon, H.S., MacIntosh, J. (2002), "Readiness for organizational change: a longitudinal study of workplace, psychological and behavioural correlates", Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 75 pp.377-92. 19. Fullan, M., Pomfret, A. (1977), "Research on curriculum and instruction implementation", Review of Educational Research, Vol. 1 pp.335-97. 20. Gaertner, K.N., Nollen, S.D. (1989), "Career experiences, perceptions of employment practices, and psychological commitment to the

organization", Human Relations, Vol. 42 No.11, pp.975-91. 21. Gilbert, N. (2001), Researching Social Life, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, London, 22. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C. Jr, Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. (2006), Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th ed., Pearson Prentice-Hall,

Englewood Cliffs, NJ, .

81

CHAPTER V DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

The study used a structured pre-tested questionnaire containing 31 questions. The questionnaire was developed based on a discussion with the DGM of the Personnel and Administration department of HOCL. The questionnaire is divided into two parts, one part queried on the demographic details of the respondents as age, gender, etc,. and the other contained 25 statements to which the respondents were asked to rate on a five point scale starting from strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree and strongly disagree. This was done to identify the perception of employees with regard to level of job satisfaction and level of Resistance to Change. Systematic random sampling was used to select the samples and the respondents were contacted directly for administering the questionnaire. The filled questionnaires were coded, edited and analyzed using SPSS software. The responses for the classification questions are presented first to provide a clear picture about the respondents of this study. Q1 DistributionBased on Department of the Respondents Table No: 5.1: Department wise Frequency of the Employees in the Study

P&A TSS VIGILANCE MATERIALS MECHANICAL PRODUCTION FIRE & SAFETY ELECTRICAL Total

Frequency 6 1 1 2 6 11 5 8 40

Percent 15.0 2.5 2.5 5.0 15.0 27.5 12.5 20.0 100.0

Valid Percent 15.0 2.5 2.5 5.0 15.0 27.5 12.5 20.0 100.0

Cumulative Percent 15.0 17.5 20.0 25.0 40.0 67.5 80.0 100.0

Source: Survey data

From the above table

it can be noted that 27.5% respondents are from

Production Department,followed by Electrical department with 20%,Mechanical and Personnel and Administration department with 15%, Fire and Safety with 12.5%,Materials department with 5% and finally by TSS with 2.5%. 82

Q2 DistributionBased on Educational Qualification of the Respondents Table No: 5.2: Frequency of Educational Qualification of the Respondents

SSLC Diploma PDC ITI UG PG PhD Total

Frequency 5 14 5 5 5 5 1 40

Percent 12.5 35.0 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 2.5 100.0

Valid Percent 12.5 35.0 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 2.5 100.0

Cumulative Percent 12.5 47.5 60.0 72.5 85.0 97.5 100.0

Source: Survey data

The above table gives us the frequency of Educational Qualification of the Employees, most of the employees are diploma holders with 35% followed by SSLC,PDC,ITI,UG,PG with 12.5% and finally only 2.5% having a PhD. Therefore most of the employees are diploma holders in HOCL.

Q3 DistributionBased on Gender of the Respondents Table No: 5.3: Frequency Distribution of Gender of the Respondents

MALE FEMALE Total

Frequency 33 7 40

Percent 82.5 17.5 100.0

Valid Percent 82.5 17.5 100.0

Cumulative Percent 82.5 100.0

Source: Survey data

The percent of male respondents is 82.5% and that of females is 17.5%,which can be seen from the table above. Thus the ratio of male respondents is higher than that of the female respondents.

83

Q4 DistributionBased on Age of the Respondents Table No: 5.4: Age WiseDistribution of the Respondents

20-30 31-40 41 & above Total

Frequency 11 8 21 40

Percent 27.5
7.00

Valid Percent 27.5 20.0 52.5 100.0

Cumulative Percent 27.5 47.5 100.0

20.0 52.5

100.0

Source: Survey data

The above table shows that 52.5% of the respondents belong to 41and above years and 20.0% of the respondent between the age of 31-40 and 27.5% of the employees are in between the age of 20-30. Hence the majority of the respondents belongs to the age group 41 and above.

Q5 DistributionBased on Experience of the Respondents Table No: 5.5: Frequency of Experience of the Respondents

0-10 11-20 21-30 Total

Frequency 15 18 7 40

Percent 37.5 45.0 17.5 100.0

Valid Percent 37.5 45.0 17.5 100.0

Cumulative Percent 37.5 82.5 100.0

Source: Survey Data

The study thus covered employees with considerable experience in the same firm. The employees with 0-10 years experience covers 37.5%,11-20 years experience covers another 45% and 21-20 years of experience is finally covered by 17.5%. Hence the maximum respondents are having an experience of 11 20 years.

84

Q6 DistributionBased on Prior Training of the Respondents Table No: 5.6 Frequency of Prior Training given to the Respondents

yes no Total

Frequency 21 19 40

Percent 52.5 47.5 100.0

Valid Percent 52.5 47.5 100.0

Cumulative Percent 52.5 100.0

Source: Survey Data

It is found from the above table that the employees who have received prior training is 41.2% and for those who have not received prior training is 37.3%.Hence majority of the employees in HOCL have received a prior training. 5.1 Identification of Factors Determining Resistance to Change The major objective of the present study was to measure the willingness of employees at HOCL for change. Employees will readily agree programs and suggestions implemented by the management only when they are satisfied with their work, management and have high moral and motivation. Only a satisfied workforce cooperates with any initiatives of the management. So the study provided 25 closed ended questions to measure the employees satisfaction, cooperation and resistance to change. In order to study the factors contributing to the satisfaction level of employees at HOCL a factor analysis was attempted by using the employees responses to the 25 questions.Questions are framed in such a way that the answers reflect the ideas and thoughts of the respondents with regard to readiness to change and the various factors influencing it. Likert scaling techniques has been used for measuring the response. The scale used was 5. Strongly agree 4. Agree 3. Neutral 2. Disagree 1. Strongly disagree

85

Table No: 5.7Factor Analysis

a Rotated Component Matrix

1 change will affect job security likely to make more mistakes no need for change in HOCL technology cannot improve my performance recruitement affect career growth remuneration benefits extended work assignments working conditions technology upgradation make system more effective can manage the change successfully job enlargement redeploying personnel and technology upgradation maintain productivity need for expansion ready to work in different depts ready to work at different units willing to change working time working time interpersonal relationship flexible management technology upgradation way to VRS technology increase workload and reduce workforce ERP make job easy ready to undertake more responsibilties require training to use ERP .917 .869 .799 .650 .630 8.170E-02 .161 4.675E-02 -3.58E-03

Component 4

5 .119 7.062E-02 .169 .123 -.324

7.359E-02 5.511E-02 4.881E-02 1.001E-02 .279 -7.37E-02 .134 .871 .860 .792 .649 -.107 .102 .135 .203 7.681E-02 3.581E-02 .147 4.075E-02 .843 .772 .679 .611 .553 2.906E-03 .251 -.160 .232 8.302E-02 .242 .327 -.148 -.276 -5.42E-02 1.530E-03 .342 -.208 .116 .847 .783 .632 .131 .201 .342 -.139 .260 .139 .466 -.158

6.072E-02 5.407E-02 .129 8.367E-02

4.131E-02 8.458E-02 .183 3.124E-02 -.339 -.452

4.988E-02 -7.60E-02 5.288E-02 9.979E-02 1.242E-02 7.072E-02 .373 5.714E-03 -2.93E-02 .337 .190 -7.14E-02 -1.94E-02 -.200 .215 .164 .379 3.764E-02 .288 .268 .814 .719 .486 .143 .101 1.984E-02 .101 -.107 6.695E-02 .345

-1.91E-02 8.373E-02 .123 6.586E-02 .205 -.114 1.773E-02 .207 .294 .182 .115 9.228E-02 .246 .372 9.462E-02 -6.64E-02 2.326E-02 .189 -1.26E-02 .305 -.405 .205

7.530E-02 4.368E-02 .211 .261 .289 -.241 -.360 -6.79E-02 .101 -1.85E-02 -4.67E-02 .326

5.118E-02 8.777E-02 -5.65E-02 .286 .291 .352 3.485E-02 -5.86E-02 -6.63E-02 -3.45E-02 -6.87E-02 .148 .241 .190 .273 .568

4.391E-02 3.050E-02 .192 9.674E-02 -6.91E-02 2.324E-02 .678 .674 -.631 -.186 -2.10E-02 -.244 .736 .700

-8.32E-02 6.182E-02 .110 .302

-8.13E-02 1.458E-02 .176 -6.76E-02

Source : Survey Data

86

The columns under this heading are the rotated factors that have been extracted. As we can see that seven factors were extracted. As per the above table it can be identified that the statements can be divided into 7 Factors such as: Factor 1: a) Comfortable with present working time b) Satisfied with interpersonal relationship. All these factors can be related to the general working environment in the organization and hence has been profiled by the researcher as Work Environment Factor 2: a) Remuneration b) Benefits Extended c) Work assignments d) Working Conditions These factors given above were grouped and named as Equitable Remunerationas it is regarding the fair remuneration given to employees in HOCL. Factor 3: a) Technology upgradation can make system more effective b) Can manage the change successfully c) Job enlargement d) Redeploying personnel & technology upgradation maintain productivity e) Need for expansion f) ERP make job easy The factors above are related to the readiness to change in the mind of employees; hence these statements were grouped as Need for change. Factor 4: a) Ready to undertake more responsibilities b) Require training to use ERP The researcher has profiled the above statements as Willingness to learn because it shows how much willing are the employees to undergo a change in HOCL. Factor 5 : a) Ready to work in different units b) Ready to work in different departments c) Willing to change working time 87

The three statements shows how flexible are the employees with the management; therefore the factor was named as Flexibility Factor 6 : a) Technology upgradation is a way to Voluntary Retirement Scheme. b) Technology increase workload & reduce workforce The two given statements are relating to a resistance shown in technological upgradation hence we named these statements as Fear of Technological Change Factor 7: a) Change will affect job security b) Likely to make mistakes, if change is brought c) No need for change in HOCL d) Technology upgradation cannot improve my performance e) Recruitment will affect career growth The factors grouped above are named as Fear of Job Security because these statements depict a fear or resistance experience in their workplace.

It can be identified that two among the factors viz Readiness to change and Resistance to Change, queries on the Resistance of employees towards change, while the rest factors helps to identify the perception on general work environment prevailing in the organization. A study by Naimatullah Shah and Syed Ghulam Sarwar Shah has identified a direct relation between employee readiness to change and the researcher had quoted that The work environment may support employees to develop commitment to the organisation because employees see the possibility of accomplishing their desires, needs and future expectations. If employees achieve their desires and needs they may develop positive attitudes and behaviours towards organisational change in the study titled Relationships between employee readiness for organisational change, supervisor and peer relations and demography.Hence in the current study the researcher attempts to analyze the level of satisfaction of employees with regard to work environment, before going into resistance to change.

88

5.2 Overall Readiness to Change among Employees Table No: 5.8 Computation Based on the Tested Value of Overall Readiness to Change among Employees
One -Sam ple Statistics Std. Error Mean 1.5779

N OV ERA LL REA DINESS 40

Mean 87.4500

Std. Deviation 9.9793

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: Here we do the one sample test to know about the overall readiness to change among employees and it was found that the mean value is 87.45 with a standard deviation of 9.97. Table No: 5.9One Sample Test for Overall Readiness to Change among Employees
One -Sam ple Tes t Test Value = 51 95% Conf idence Interval of the Dif f erence Low er Upper 33.2585 39.6415

OVERALL READINESS

t 23.101

df 39

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

Mean Dif f erence 36.4500

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above analysis it is clear that the significance level is lesser than 0.05 hence the overall readiness among employees in HOCL is rated high.And the test value is 51,which is 60% of the maximum score given in the opinionThe differences in the tested value and the mean value of the respondents are statistically significant at 95% confidence level. So the respondents are having high opinion regarding Overall Readiness to Change. An attempt is made to test whether there is overall readiness to change with regard to all the respondents, so a one sample T-test is attempted. For testing this 89

mean value is compounded. The test value is set as 60% of the maximum i.e 85(60% of 85). 5.3 Factors Determining Overall Readiness of Employees Table No: 5.10 Factors Determining Overall Readiness of Employees
Des criptives READINESS 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 79.8654 89.1346 86.3581 92.8919 82.0919 89.4031 55.0955 71.9680 79.2515 90.7485 78.9881 84.3736

N 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 Total 40 40 40 40 40 200

Mean 84.5000 89.6250 85.7475 63.5317 85.0000 81.6808

Std. Deviation 14.4914 10.2148 11.4302 26.3785 17.9743 19.3112

Std. Error 2.2913 1.6151 1.8073 4.1708 2.8420 1.3655

Minimum 40.00 60.00 36.63 20.01 20.00 20.00

Max imum 100.00 100.00 99.90 100.05 100.00 100.05

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation The above table helps us to determine the factors overall readiness to change of employees in HOCL. Here 1 denotes Work Environment, 2 denotes Equitable Remuneration, 3 denotes Need for Change, 4 denotes Willingness to learn and finally 5 denotes Flexibility. And it is observed from the table that the factor Equitable Remuneration has the highest mean value 89.62 followed by Need for Change with mean value 85.74, Flexibility with 85.00 mean value, Work Environment with mean value 84.50 and finally Willingness to learn.

Table No. 5.11: Anova Test for Factors Determining Overall Readiness of Employees
ANOVA READINESS Sum of Squares Betw een Groups 17120.054 Within Groups 57091.841 Total 74211.896 df 4 195 199 Mean Square 4280.014 292.779 F 14.619 Sig. .000

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

90

Interpretation: The Anova table shows that there is a significant relationship between the Overall Readiness to Change and the factors affecting readiness to change. 5.4 Influence of Department that the Respondents Work on their Overall Readiness Table No: 5.12Influence of Department that the Respondents Work on their Overall Readiness
Des criptives OVERALL READINESS 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 82.2701 99.7299 . . . . 47.8814 124.1186 67.5835 105.7499 77.7740 86.4078 89.1812 103.6188 81.0390 95.2110 84.2585 90.6415

N P& A TSS VIGILANCE MATERIALS MECHANICAL PRODUCTION FIRE & SAFETY ELECTRICAL Total 6 1 1 2 6 11 5 8 40

Mean 91.0000 85.0000 85.0000 86.0000 86.6667 82.0909 96.4000 88.1250 87.4500

Std. Deviation 8.3187 . . 4.2426 18.1842 6.4258 5.8138 8.4758 9.9793

Std. Error 3.3961 . . 3.0000 7.4237 1.9375 2.6000 2.9966 1.5779

Minimum 83.00 85.00 85.00 83.00 53.00 71.00 90.00 73.00 53.00

Max imum 103.00 85.00 85.00 89.00 103.00 94.00 103.00 99.00 103.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The overall readiness to change is seen higher in Fire and Safety Department with a mean value 96.40 and the least readiness is shown in Production Department with a mean value of 82.09.

Table No: 5.13 Anova Table for Influence of Department that the Respondents Work on their Overall Readiness
ANOVA OVERALL READINESS Sum of Squares 815.583 3068.317 3883.900 df 7 32 39 Mean Square 116.512 95.885 F 1.215 Sig. .323

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

91

Interpretation: There is no significant relation between overall readiness and Department as the significance level is .323

5.5 Influence of the Gender of the Respondents on their Overall Readiness Table 5.14 Influence of the Gender of the Respondents on their Overall Readiness
Group Statis tics Std. Error Mean 1.7809 3.1580

OVERALL READINESS

GENDER MALE FEMALE

N 33 7

Mean 86.6667 91.1429

Std. Deviation 10.2307 8.3552

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The overall readiness to change is found to be higher in females with a mean value of 91.14 than the males with a mean value of 86.66

Table No: 5.15 Influence of the Gender of the Respondents on their Overall Readiness
Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Low er Upper -12.8649 -12.5299 3.9125 3.5775

F OVERALL READINESS Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed .000

Sig. .986

t -1.080 -1.235

df 38 10.229

Mean Sig. (2-tailed) Difference .287 .245 -4.4762 -4.4762

Std. Error Difference 4.1438 3.6255

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The overall readiness to change among employees is found to be not significant on gender as the significance level is greater than 0.05

92

5.6 Influence of Education on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Table No: 5.16 Influence of Education on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents
Des criptives OVERALL READINESS 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 84.5603 104.2397 80.6957 91.4472 83.0228 90.1772 58.3709 99.2291 79.3357 101.8643 80.6495 101.7505 . . 84.2585 90.6415

N SSLC Diploma PDC ITI UG PG PhD Total 5 14 5 5 5 5 1 40

Mean 94.4000 86.0714 86.6000 78.8000 90.6000 91.2000 85.0000 87.4500

Std. Deviation 7.9246 9.3106 2.8810 16.4530 9.0719 8.4971 . 9.9793

Std. Error 3.5440 2.4884 1.2884 7.3580 4.0571 3.8000 . 1.5779

Minimum 83.00 71.00 83.00 53.00 83.00 81.00 85.00 53.00

Maximum 103.00 103.00 91.00 94.00 101.00 103.00 85.00 103.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The overall readiness to change at HOCL is high for employees with educational qualification SSLC with a mean value of 94.40 and lowest for the employee with ITI with a mean value of 78.00

Table No: 5.17 Anova Table for Influence of Education on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents
ANOV A OV ERALL REA DINESS Sum of Squares 771.771 3112.129 3883.900 df 6 33 39 Mean Square 128.629 94.307 F 1.364 Sig. .258

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: There is no significant relation between overall readiness to change and the educational qualification.

93

5.7 Influence of Age on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Table No: 5.18 Influence of Age on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents
Des criptives OVERALL READINESS 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 79.8453 89.0638 69.2796 94.4704 87.6308 94.6549 84.2585 90.6415

N 20-30 31-40 41 & above Total 11 8 21 40

Mean 84.4545 81.8750 91.1429 87.4500

Std. Deviation 6.8610 15.0659 7.7155 9.9793

Std. Error 2.0687 5.3266 1.6837 1.5779

Minimum 71.00 53.00 81.00 53.00

Maximum 96.00 100.00 103.00 103.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The overall readiness based on age is seen to be higher among 41 and above with a mean value of 91.14 and seen to be lowest among the employees under the age group 31-40.

Table No: 5.19 Anova Test forInfluence of Age on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents
ANOVA OVERALL READINESS Sum of Squares 633.726 3250.174 3883.900 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 316.863 87.843 F 3.607 Sig. .037

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the analysis it is observed that there is a significant relation between the overall readiness and age of the employees.

94

5.8 Influence of Experience on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Table No: 5.20 Influence of Experience on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents
Des criptives OVERALL READINESS 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 79.1315 87.0018 83.2233 94.7767 85.8253 99.8890 84.2585 90.6415

N 0-10 11-20 21-30 Total 15 18 7 40

Mean 83.0667 89.0000 92.8571 87.4500

Std. Deviation 7.1060 11.6164 7.6033 9.9793

Std. Error 1.8348 2.7380 2.8738 1.5779

Minimum 71.00 53.00 83.00 53.00

Max imum 96.00 103.00 101.00 103.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The overall readiness is higher in employees having an experience of 21-30 years with mean value of 92.85 followed by employees with experience of11 20 years with a mean value of 89.00

Table No: 5.21Anova Table for Readiness of the Respondents

Influence of Experience on the Overall

ANOV A OV ERALL REA DINESS Sum of Squares 536.110 3347.790 3883.900 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 268.055 90.481 F 2.963 Sig. .064

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The overall readiness to change among employees in HOCL has no significant relation with the Experience of the employees as the significance level is more than 0.05

95

5.9 Influence of Prior Training on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents Table No: 5.22 Influence of Prior Training on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents
Des criptives OVERALL READINESS 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 86.0988 94.1869 79.4125 89.5348 84.2585 90.6415

N yes no Total 21 19 40

Mean 90.1429 84.4737 87.4500

Std. Deviation 8.8842 10.5006 9.9793

Std. Error 1.9387 2.4090 1.5779

Minimum 73.00 53.00 53.00

Maximum 103.00 100.00 103.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: It is clear from the above table that the readiness to change among employees who have received prior training is higher with a mean value of 90.14 compared to the employees who have not received any prior training with a mean value of 84.43. Table No: 5.23Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training on the Overall Readiness of the Respondents
ANOVA OVERALL READINESS Sum of Squares 320.592 3563.308 3883.900 df 1 38 39 Mean Square 320.592 93.771 F 3.419 Sig. .072

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The overall readiness to change has no significant relation with prior training given to employees as the significance level is 0.072

96

5.10 Work Environment Table No: 5.24 Computation Based on the Tested Value of Work Environment
One -Sam ple Statistics Std. Error Mean .2291

N WORK ENVIRONMENT 40

Mean 8.4500

Std. Dev iation 1.4491

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table of one sample T test the mean value for work environment is 8.45 and the standard deviation is 8.45. Table No: 5.25 One Sample Test for Work Environment
One -Sam ple Tes t Test Value = 6 95% Conf idence Interval of the Dif f erence Low er Upper 1.9865 2.9135

WORK ENV IRONMENT

t 10.693

df 39

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

Mean Dif f erence 2.4500

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The one sample t test for work environment was performed to know whether the employees are satisfied with the working environment in HOCL and the table shows that the employees are having a high opinion regarding the work environment of HOCL.

97

5.11 Influence of Department on the Satisfaction of Work of the Respondents Table No: 5.26 Influence of Department on the Satisfaction of Work of the Respondents
Des criptives WORK ENVIRONMENT 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 6.0389 10.9611 . . . . 2.1469 14.8531 7.3957 9.9376 7.2722 9.2733 8.4894 10.7106 6.8330 8.9170 7.9865 8.9135

N P& A TSS VIGILANCE MATERIALS MECHANICAL PRODUCTION FIRE & SAFETY ELECTRICAL Total 6 1 1 2 6 11 5 8 40

Mean 8.5000 8.0000 8.0000 8.5000 8.6667 8.2727 9.6000 7.8750 8.4500

Std. Deviation 2.3452 . . .7071 1.2111 1.4894 .8944 1.2464 1.4491

Std. Error .9574 . . .5000 .4944 .4491 .4000 .4407 .2291

Minimum 4.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 7.00 5.00 8.00 6.00 4.00

Max imum 10.00 8.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 9.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The above table of descriptives verifies that fire &safety department enjoys the work environment more than any other department with a mean of 9.6 followed by mechanical department with 8.6 and the work environment is enjoyedlower in the electrical department with a mean of 17.8. Table No: 5.27 Anova Table for Influence of Department on the Satisfaction of Work of the Respondents
ANOVA WORK ENVIRONMENT Sum of Squares 10.310 71.590 81.900 df 7 32 39 Mean Square 1.473 2.237 F .658 Sig. .705

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

98

Interpretation: The Work environment is not found to be significant on Department. This is because the fact that the workplace and the working conditions of each department is entirely different from the other. 5.12 Influence of Genderof the Respondents on Work Environment Table No: 5.28 Influence of Genderof the Respondents on Work Environment
Group Statis tics Std. Error Mean .2224 .8371

WORK ENVIRONMENT

GENDER MALE FEMALE

N 33 7

Mean 8.4848 8.2857

Std. Deviation 1.2777 2.2147

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The mean value of male respondents for Work Environment is 8.48 with a standard deviation of 1.27and for the females is 8.28 with a standard deviation of 2.21. Hence we can conclude that Work environment is enjoyed by males more than the females.

Table No: 5.29 Influence of Genderof the Respondents on Work Environment

Inde pe nde nt Samples Te st Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Low er Upper -1.0358 -1.8567 1.4341 2.2550

F WORK ENVIRONMENT Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed 3.388

Sig. .073

t .326 .230

df 38 6.871

Sig. (2-tailed) .746 .825

Mean Difference .1991 .1991

Std. Error Difference .6101 .8661

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The independent sample test table shows that the significance value of two tailed test is more than 0.05.there is no statistically significant difference between gender and work environment.

99

5.13 Influence of Education of the Respondents on Work Environment Table No: 5.30 Influence of Education of the Respondents on Work Environment
Des criptives WORK ENVIRONMENT 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 8.4894 10.7106 7.6602 9.3398 4.8797 10.3203 6.4793 9.5207 7.1811 10.4189 6.5811 9.8189 . . 7.9865 8.9135

N SSLC Diploma PDC ITI UG PG PhD Total 5 14 5 5 5 5 1 40

Mean 9.6000 8.5000 7.6000 8.0000 8.8000 8.2000 8.0000 8.4500

Std. Deviation .8944 1.4544 2.1909 1.2247 1.3038 1.3038 . 1.4491

Std. Error .4000 .3887 .9798 .5477 .5831 .5831 . .2291

Minimum 8.00 5.00 4.00 6.00 7.00 7.00 8.00 4.00

Max imum 10.00 10.00 10.00 9.00 10.00 10.00 8.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The employee with the educational qualification till SSLC enjoys the work environment greater than any other department with a mean value of 9.6 and the employees with the educational qualification of PDC enjoy the work environment lower with a mean value of 7.6.

Table No: 5.31Anova Table for Influence of Education of the Respondents on Work Environment
ANOVA WORK ENVIRONMENT Sum of Squares 12.400 69.500 81.900 df 6 33 39 Mean Square 2.067 2.106 F .981 Sig. .453

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

100

Interpretation: The significance value in the Anova table given above is found to be more than 0.05 and hence it shows that there is no significant relation of work environment on educational Qualification. 5.14 Influence of Age of the Respondents on Work Environment

Table No: 5.32 Influence of Age of the Respondents on Work Environment

Des criptives WORK ENVIRONMENT 95% Conf idence Interv al f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 7.5783 9.5127 7.1980 9.5520 7.7297 9.1274 7.9865 8.9135

N 20-30 31-40 41 & above Total 11 8 21 40

Mean 8.5455 8.3750 8.4286 8.4500

Std. Dev iation 1.4397 1.4079 1.5353 1.4491

Std. Error .4341 .4978 .3350 .2291

Minimum 5.00 6.00 4.00 4.00

Max imum 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The table of descriptives shows that the mean value for all the age groups is almost the same ,there is only a slight difference in mean, the highest mean is found to be among employees aged between 20 to 30 with mean value 8.54 and lowest among employees aged 31-40 years with a mean value of 8.37

Table No: 5.33Anova Table for Influence of Age of the Respondents on Work Environment
ANOVA WORK ENVIRONMENT Sum of Squares .155 81.745 81.900 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 7.744E-02 2.209 F .035 Sig. .966

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: Since the significance level is found to be more than 0.05,it can be proved that Work environment is not significant on age.

101

5.16 Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Work Environment Table No: 5.34 Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Work Environment
Des criptives WORK ENV IRONMENT 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 7.5317 9.1349 7.6225 9.2664 7.8346 9.5940 7.9865 8.9135

N 0-10 11-20 21-30 Total 15 18 7 40

Mean 8.3333 8.4444 8.7143 8.4500

Std. Deviation 1.4475 1.6529 .9512 1.4491

Std. Error .3737 .3896 .3595 .2291

Minimum 5.00 4.00 8.00 4.00

Max imum 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table it is noted that the mean value for work environment ishighest for the employees with an experience of 21-30 years with a mean value of 8.71 and lowest in 0-10 years with a mean value of 8.33.

Table No: 5.35 Anova Table for Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Work Environment
ANOVA WORK ENVIRONMENT Sum of Squares .694 81.206 81.900 df 2 37 39 Mean Square .347 2.195 F .158 Sig. .854

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The significance level is more than 0.05 and therefore we can say that there is no relation between work environment and years of experience.

102

5.17 Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Work Environment Table No: 5.36 Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Work Environment
Des criptives WORK ENVIRONMENT 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 7.7766 9.1758 7.7525 9.0896 7.9865 8.9135

N yes no Total 21 19 40

Mean 8.4762 8.4211 8.4500

Std. Deviation 1.5368 1.3871 1.4491

Std. Error .3354 .3182 .2291

Minimum 4.00 5.00 4.00

Max imum 10.00 10.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The mean value of Work environment for those who have received and not received prior training is almost the same by 8.47 and 8.42 Table No: 5.37 Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Work Environment
ANOVA WORK ENVIRONMENT Sum of Squares Betw een Groups 3.033E-02 Within Groups 81.870 Total 81.900 df 1 38 39 Mean Square 3.033E-02 2.154 F .014 Sig. .906

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table of Anova test it suggests that work environment and Prior training given to employees have no significant relationship.

103

5.18 Equitable Remuneration Table No: 5.38 Computation Based on the Tested Value of the Factor with Equitable Remuneration
One -Sam ple Statistics Std. Error Mean .3230

N EQUITA BLE REMUNERA TION 40

Mean 17.9250

Std. Dev iation 2.0430

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table of one sample T test the mean value for equitable remuneration is 17.92 and the standard deviation is 2.04 Table No: 5.39 One Sample Test for Equitable Remuneration
One -Sam ple Tes t Test Value = 12 95% Conf idence Interval of the Dif f erence Low er Upper 5.2716 6.5784

t EQUITABLE REMUNERATION 18.342

df 39

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

Mean Dif f erence 5.9250

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The one sample t test suggests that there the employees have a high opinion regarding equitable remuneration. Here the test value is 12, ie 60 % of the maximum opinion.

104

5.19 Influence of Department of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Table No: 5.40 Influence of Department of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
Des criptives EQUITABLE REMUNERATION 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 18.4765 20.1902 . . . . -7.4124 43.4124 16.0245 20.3088 15.0932 17.9977 16.9788 21.4212 16.7848 19.7152 17.2716 18.5784

N P& A TSS VIGILANCE MATERIALS MECHANICAL PRODUCTION FIRE & SAFETY ELECTRICAL Total 6 1 1 2 6 11 5 8 40

Mean 19.3333 16.0000 16.0000 18.0000 18.1667 16.5455 19.2000 18.2500 17.9250

Std. Deviation .8165 . . 2.8284 2.0412 2.1616 1.7889 1.7525 2.0430

Std. Error .3333 . . 2.0000 .8333 .6518 .8000 .6196 .3230

Minimum 18.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 12.00 16.00 16.00 12.00

Max imum 20.00 16.00 16.00 20.00 20.00 19.00 20.00 20.00 20.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The above table of descriptives shows that the highest mean value is 19.33 which is observed in Personnel and administration department and the lowest mean is observed in Production department with mean value 16.54.Almost all the department have a same mean value ,only a slight difference can be observed in the mean value of all departments.

Table No: 5.41 Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
ANOV A EQUITABLE REMUNERATION Sum of Squares 49.581 113.194 162.775 df 7 32 39 Mean Square 7.083 3.537 F 2.002 Sig. .086

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The above Anova table shows that there is no significant relation between Equitable Remuneration and Department because the significance level is .086 which is higher to 0.05

105

5.20 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Table No: 5.42 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
Group Statis tics Std. Error Mean .3628 .5774

EQUITABLE REMUNERATION

GENDER MALE FEMALE

N 33 7

Mean 17.6970 19.0000

Std. Deviation 2.0839 1.5275

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table it is found that the mean value of males is 17.69 and the mean value of females is 19.00 for Remuneration. Thus it is observed that females are more happier than males in the case of remuneration. Table No: 5.43 Influence of Gender of Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
Inde pe nde nt Samples Te st Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Low er Upper -2.9932 -2.7983 .3871 .1922

F EQUITABLE REMUNERATION Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed 1.813

Sig. .186

t -1.561 -1.911

df 38 11.341

Sig. (2-tailed) .127 .082

Mean Difference -1.3030 -1.3030

Std. Error Difference .8349 .6819

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above independent sample test it is clear that there is no significant relation between equitable remuneration and gender as the significance level shown is higher than 0.05

106

5.21 Influence of Education of Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Table No: 5.44 Influence of Education of Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
Des criptives EQUITABLE REMUNERATION 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 18.4894 20.7106 16.2239 18.7761 15.3444 19.8556 15.6797 21.1203 15.1083 21.2917 14.9796 19.8204 . . 17.2716 18.5784

N SSLC Diploma PDC ITI UG PG PhD Total 5 14 5 5 5 5 1 40

Mean 19.6000 17.5000 17.6000 18.4000 18.2000 17.4000 16.0000 17.9250

Std. Deviation .8944 2.2101 1.8166 2.1909 2.4900 1.9494 . 2.0430

Std. Error .4000 .5907 .8124 .9798 1.1136 .8718 . .3230

Minimum 18.00 12.00 16.00 16.00 15.00 16.00 16.00 12.00

Max imum 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 16.00 20.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The Equitable Remuneration shows a greater mean value in employees with educational qualification of SSLC i.e., 19.60 and the least mean value is found in PhD i.e.,16.00. This shows that the employee with highest educational qualification is not satisfied with the present Remuneration in HOCL.

Table No: 5.45 Anova Table for Influence of Education of Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
ANOVA EQUITABLE REMUNERATION Sum of Squares 23.675 139.100 162.775 df 6 33 39 Mean Square 3.946 4.215 F .936 Sig. .483

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation : Here it is found that there is no significant relation between Educational Qualification of Employees and the Equitable Remuneration of HOCL since the significance level obtained is 0.483.

107

5.22 Influence of Age of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Table No: 5.46 Influence of Age of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
Des criptives EQUITABLE REMUNERATION 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 16.2691 18.4582 15.0991 19.6509 17.5581 19.2991 17.2716 18.5784

N 20-30 31-40 41 & above Total 11 8 21 40

Mean 17.3636 17.3750 18.4286 17.9250

Std. Deviation 1.6293 2.7223 1.9124 2.0430

Std. Error .4912 .9625 .4173 .3230

Minimum 14.00 12.00 16.00 12.00

Maximum 19.00 20.00 20.00 20.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: Employees with age group 41 & above are having highest mean value with 18.42 and employees with age group 20-30 are having lowest mean value of 17.36.

Table No: 5.47 Anova Table for Influence of Age of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
ANOVA EQUITABLE REMUNERATION Sum of Squares 11.212 151.563 162.775 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 5.606 4.096 F 1.369 Sig. .267

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: It is found that the Anova test does not show any significant relation between Equitable Remuneration and Age group of the Respondents.

108

5.23 Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Table No: 5.48 Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
Des criptives EQUITABLE REMUNERATION 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 15.7084 17.8916 17.4525 19.3253 17.6875 20.5982 17.2716 18.5784

N 0-10 11-20 21-30 Total 15 18 7 40

Mean 16.8000 18.3889 19.1429 17.9250

Std. Deviation 1.9712 1.8830 1.5736 2.0430

Std. Error .5090 .4438 .5948 .3230

Minimum 12.00 16.00 16.00 12.00

Max imum 19.00 20.00 20.00 20.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The highest mean value is noted in employees with 21-30 years of experience with mean value of 19.14 and the lowest mean value is noted in employees with 0-10 years of experience with 16.80.

Table No: 5.49 Anova Table for Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
ANOVA EQUITABLE REMUNERATION Sum of Squares 33.240 129.535 162.775 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 16.620 3.501 F 4.747 Sig. .015

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: There is a significant relation between remuneration and experience as the significance level is less than 0.05.

109

5.24 Influence of Prior Trainingof the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration Table No: 5.50 Influence of Prior Trainingof the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
Des criptives EQUITABLE REMUNERATION 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 16.8673 18.8470 17.0632 18.9368 17.2716 18.5784

N yes no Total 21 19 40

Mean 17.8571 18.0000 17.9250

Std. Deviation 2.1745 1.9437 2.0430

Std. Error .4745 .4459 .3230

Minimum 12.00 14.00 12.00

Max imum 20.00 20.00 20.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation : The mean value of employees who have received prior training is 17.85 and the employees who have not received prior training is 18.00. Thus the employees who have undergone prior training shows less satisfied with Equitable Remuneration.

Table No: 5.51Anova Table for Influence of Prior Trainingof the Respondents on Equitable Remuneration
ANOVA remuneration Sum of Squares Betw een Groups 1.604E-02 Within Groups 19.584 Total 19.600 df 1 38 39 Mean Square 1.604E-02 .515 F .031 Sig. .861

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: It is observed that there is no relation between remuneration and prior training as the significance level is noted to be 0.861.

110

5.25 Need for Change Table 5.52 Computation Based on the Tested Value of the Factor with Need for Change
One -Sam ple Statistics Std. Error Mean .5427

N NEED FOR CHA NGE 40

Mean 25.7500

Std. Deviation 3.4325

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table of one sample t test the mean value for need for change is 25.75 and the standard deviation is 3.43 Table No: 5.53 One Sample Test for Need for Change
One -Sam ple Tes t Test Value = 18 95% Conf idence Interval of the Dif f erence Low er Upper 6.6522 8.8478

NEED FOR CHANGE

t 14.280

df 39

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

Mean Dif f erence 7.7500

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The one sample t test for need for change was performed to know whether the employees are need any change in HOCL and the table shows that the employees are having a high opinion regarding the need for change at HOCL.

111

5.26 Influence of Departmentof the Respondents on Need for Change Table No: 5.54 Influence of Department of the Respondents on Need for Change
Des criptives Need for c hange 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 23.2273 28.4394 . . . . -1.4124 49.4124 17.9226 32.7441 23.4990 27.4100 27.1611 29.2389 23.2144 27.2856 24.6522 26.8478

N P& A TSS VIGILANCE MATERIALS MECHANICAL PRODUCTION FIRE & SAFETY ELECTRICAL Total 6 1 1 2 6 11 5 8 40

Mean 25.8333 25.0000 27.0000 24.0000 25.3333 25.4545 28.2000 25.2500 25.7500

Std. Deviation 2.4833 . . 2.8284 7.0616 2.9108 .8367 2.4349 3.4325

Std. Error 1.0138 . . 2.0000 2.8829 .8776 .3742 .8609 .5427

Minimum 23.00 25.00 27.00 22.00 11.00 19.00 27.00 21.00 11.00

Max imum 29.00 25.00 27.00 26.00 29.00 30.00 29.00 28.00 30.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The mean for need for change based on department is almost the same with all the departments, but slightly higher in Fire & Safety department, this is because all the employees in this department have undergone prior training in the organization and the theory of resistance supports that educating or training helps to overcome the resistance to change. The need for change is felt minimum in the Materials department and the reason behind this is that most of the employees under this department are new to the organization; they do not have much experience.

Table No: 5.55 Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Need for Change
ANOVA Need f or c hange Sum of Squares 42.306 417.194 459.500 df 7 32 39 Mean Square 6.044 13.037 F .464 Sig. .853

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

112

Interpretation: The Anova table suggests that Need for change is not significant on Department because the significance level is more than 0.05

5.27 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Need for Change Table No: 5.55 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Need for Change
Group Statis tics Std. Error Mean .6208 1.1127

Need f or c hange

GENDER MA LE FEMALE

N 33 7

Mean 25.6970 26.0000

Std. Deviation 3.5662 2.9439

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The mean value of male respondents for need for change is 25.69 and for the females is 26.00. Hence we can conclude that need for change is observed higher in females than males.

Table No: 5.56 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Need for Change
Inde pe nde nt Sam ples Te st Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Low er Upper -3.2307 -3.1370 2.6246 2.5309

F Need for c hange Equal variances as sumed Equal variances not assumed .016

Sig. .900

t -.210 -.238

df 38 10.133

Sig. (2-tailed) .835 .817

Mean Difference -.3030 -.3030

Std. Error Difference 1.4462 1.2742

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The Independent Sample test table shows that the significance value of two tailed test is 0.835.There is no statistically significant difference between gender and need for change.

113

5.28 Influence of Education of the Respondents on Need for Change Table No: 5.57 Influence of Education of the Respondents on Need for Change
Des criptives Need f or c hange 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 24.2834 30.5166 24.0589 27.3697 24.7169 28.4831 13.7171 30.2829 23.2834 29.5166 23.7415 29.4585 . . 24.6522 26.8478

N SSLC Diploma PDC ITI UG PG PhD Total 5 14 5 5 5 5 1 40

Mean 27.4000 25.7143 26.6000 22.0000 26.4000 26.6000 25.0000 25.7500

Std. Deviation 2.5100 2.8670 1.5166 6.6708 2.5100 2.3022 . 3.4325

Std. Error 1.1225 .7662 .6782 2.9833 1.1225 1.0296 . .5427

Minimum 23.00 19.00 24.00 11.00 22.00 24.00 25.00 11.00

Max imum 29.00 30.00 28.00 28.00 28.00 29.00 25.00 30.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table of descriptives Need for change is high for those with the educational qualification SSLC and low for those with ITI qualification.

Table No: 5.58 Anova Table for Influence of Education of the Respondents on Need for Change
ANOVA Need f or c hange Sum of Squares 93.843 365.657 459.500 df 6 33 39 Mean Square 15.640 11.081 F 1.412 Sig. .240

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The significance level is more than 0.05 and hence it denotes that the need for change is not significant on educational qualification.

114

5.29 Influence of Age of the Respondents on Need for Change Table No: 5.59 Influence of Age of the Respondents on Need for Change
Des criptives Need for c hange 95% Confidence Interv al for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 25.0447 27.6826 17.9839 28.0161 25.4934 27.4590 24.6522 26.8478

N 20-30 31-40 41 & above Total 11 8 21 40

Mean 26.3636 23.0000 26.4762 25.7500

Std. Dev iation 1.9633 6.0000 2.1591 3.4325

Std. Error .5920 2.1213 .4712 .5427

Minimum 23.00 11.00 22.00 11.00

Max imum 30.00 29.00 29.00 30.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The table of descriptive statistics verifies that the need for change is seen highest among the employees under the age group 20-30 and 41 and above with a mean of 26.36 and 26.47 and found to be low under the age group 31-40 with a mean of 23.00.

Table No: 5.60 Anova Table for Influence of Age of the Respondents on Need for Change
ANOVA Need f or c hange Sum of Squares 75.716 383.784 459.500 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 37.858 10.373 F 3.650 Sig. .036

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the Anova test , (since the significance level is less than .05) we can say that there was a significant effect of age on the need for change.

115

5.30 Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Need for Change Table No: 5.61 Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Need for Change
Des criptives Need for c hange 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 23.9411 27.1256 23.6300 27.9256 24.2604 28.0253 24.6522 26.8478

N 0-10 11-20 21-30 Total 15 18 7 40

Mean 25.5333 25.7778 26.1429 25.7500

Std. Deviation 2.8752 4.3190 2.0354 3.4325

Std. Error .7424 1.0180 .7693 .5427

Minimum 19.00 11.00 23.00 11.00

Max imum 30.00 29.00 28.00 30.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The need for change is seen higher for employee with experience 21-30 with mean 26.14 and seen lowest for employees with experience between 0-10years with a mean value of 25.53.We get such a result because the questionnaire was not distributed in equally distributed among the employees with different years of experience.

Table No: 5.62Anova Table for Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Need for Change
ANOVA Need f or c hange Sum of Squares 1.798 457.702 459.500 df 2 37 39 Mean Square .899 12.370 F .073 Sig. .930

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above Anova table it is observed that the significance level is .930 hence need for change is not significant with experience.

116

5.31 Influence of Prior Trainingof the Respondents on Need for Change Table No: 5.63 Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Need for Change
Des criptives Need for change 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 24.8742 27.5068 23.3497 27.1766 24.6522 26.8478

N yes no Total 21 19 40

Mean 26.1905 25.2632 25.7500

Std. Deviation 2.8917 3.9699 3.4325

Std. Error .6310 .9108 .5427

Minimum 19.00 11.00 11.00

Maximum 30.00 29.00 30.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The above table of descriptives shows that the mean for Need for change for the employees with prior training is 26.19 and for those without prior training is 25.26. Thus the employees who have received a proper training have been communicated the need and importance of change.

Table No: 5.64 Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Need for Change
ANOVA Need for c hange Sum of Squares 8.578 450.922 459.500 df 1 38 39 Mean Square 8.578 11.866 F .723 Sig. .401

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The significance value is .401 and hence there is no significant relation between Need for change and the Prior training given to the employees.

117

5.32 Willingness to Learn Table No: 5.65Computation Based on the Tested Value of the Factor with Willingness To Learn
One -Sam ple Statis tics Std. Error Mean .2842

N WILLINGNESS TO LEARN 40

Mean 8.5000

Std. Deviation 1.7974

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table of one sample t test the mean value for willingness to learn is 8.5 and the standard deviation is 1.79 Table No: 5.66 One Sample Test forWillingness to Learn
One -Sam ple Tes t Test Value = 6 95% Conf idence Interval of the Dif f erence Low er Upper 1.9252 3.0748

t WILLINGNESS TO LEARN 8.797

df 39

Sig. (2-tailed) .000

Mean Dif f erence 2.5000

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The one sample t test for willingness to learn was performed to know whether the employees are willing to learn more in HOCL and the table shows that the employees are having a high opinion regarding the willingness to learn at HOCL.

118

5.33 Influence of Department of the Respondents on Willingness to Learn Table No: 5.67Influence of Department of the Respondents on Willingness to Learn
Des criptives Willingness to Learn 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 8.1349 10.1985 . . . . 2.1469 14.8531 7.2440 10.7560 6.6539 9.1643 3.6987 12.3013 7.5890 9.9110 7.9252 9.0748

N P& A TSS V IGILA NCE MA TERIALS MECHA NICA L PRODUCTION FIRE & SA FETY ELECTRICA L Total 6 1 1 2 6 11 5 8 40

Mean 9.1667 9.0000 8.0000 8.5000 9.0000 7.9091 8.0000 8.7500 8.5000

Std. Deviation .9832 . . .7071 1.6733 1.8684 3.4641 1.3887 1.7974

Std. Error .4014 . . .5000 .6831 .5633 1.5492 .4910 .2842

Minimum 8.00 9.00 8.00 8.00 6.00 5.00 2.00 6.00 2.00

Max imum 10.00 9.00 8.00 9.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: Willingness to learn is found to be high in P&A department with a mean of 9.16 and found to be low in Production department with mean value 7.9091.

Table No: 5.68 Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Willingness to Learn
ANOVA Willingness to Learn Sum of Squares 10.258 115.742 126.000 df 7 32 39 Mean Square 1.465 3.617 F .405 Sig. .892

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: There is no significant relation between Willingness to learn on Department since the significance level is more than 0.89

119

5.34 Influence of Genderof the Respondents on Willingness to Learn Table No: 5.69 Influence of Genderof the Respondents on Willingness to Learn
Group Statis tics Std. Error Mean .3309 .4041

Willingness to Learn

GENDER MALE FEMALE

N 33 7

Mean 8.3636 9.1429

Std. Deviation 1.9010 1.0690

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The mean value of male respondents for Willingness to learn is 8.36 and for the females is 9.14. Hence we can conclude that willingness to learn is seen higher in female employees compared to male employees.

Table No: 5.70 Influence of Genderof the Respondents on Willingness to Learn

Inde pe nde nt Samples Te st Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Low er Upper -2.2917 -1.8896 .7332 .3312

F Willingness to Learn Equal variances as sumed Equal variances not assumed 1.115

Sig. .298

t -1.043 -1.492

df 38 15.445

Sig. (2-tailed) .304 .156

Mean Difference -.7792 -.7792

Std. Error Difference .7471 .5223

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The Independent Sample test table shows that the significance value of two tailed test is 0.304.There is no statistically significant difference between gender and willingness to learn.

120

5.35 Influence of Educationof Respondents on Willingness to Learn Table No: 5.71Influence of Educationof Respondents on Willingness to Learn
Des criptives Willingness to Learn 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 3.5195 11.6805 7.3257 9.5314 7.8398 10.5602 5.7169 9.4831 7.4398 10.1602 8.7199 10.0801 . . 7.9252 9.0748

N SSLC Diploma PDC ITI UG PG PhD Total 5 14 5 5 5 5 1 40

Mean 7.6000 8.4286 9.2000 7.6000 8.8000 9.4000 9.0000 8.5000

Std. Deviation 3.2863 1.9101 1.0954 1.5166 1.0954 .5477 . 1.7974

Std. Error 1.4697 .5105 .4899 .6782 .4899 .2449 . .2842

Minimum 2.00 5.00 8.00 6.00 8.00 9.00 9.00 2.00

Max imum 10.00 10.00 10.00 9.00 10.00 10.00 9.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The above table shows that the willingness to learn is seen high for those employees with educational qualification PG with a mean of 9.40 and the lowest willingness is shown by people with educational qualification of SSLC.

Table No: 5.72 Anova Table for Influence of Educationof the Respondents on Willingness to Learn
ANOVA Willingness to Learn Sum of Squares 15.371 110.629 126.000 df 6 33 39 Mean Square 2.562 3.352 F .764 Sig. .603

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The significance level obtained from the Anova table is 0.603 which shows that the there is no significant relation of willingness to learn on Educational qualification.

121

5.36 Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Willingness to Learn Table No: 5.73Influenceof Experienceof the Respondents on Willingness to Learn
Des criptives Willingness to Learn 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 7.0527 9.0806 7.4613 9.4276 9.0771 10.0658 7.9252 9.0748

N 0-10 11-20 21-30 Total 15 18 7 40

Mean 8.0667 8.4444 9.5714 8.5000

Std. Deviation 1.8310 1.9770 .5345 1.7974

Std. Error .4727 .4660 .2020 .2842

Minimum 5.00 2.00 9.00 2.00

Max imum 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: Willingness to learn is found high for employees with experience 21-30 with the mean value 9.57 and is found less for employees with experience 0 10 years with a mean value of 8.06. Table No: 5.74 Anova Table for Influenceof Experienceof the Respondents on Willingness to Learn
ANOV A Willingness to Learn Sum of Squares 10.908 115.092 126.000 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 5.454 3.111 F 1.753 Sig. .187

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The significance level is more than 0.05, this shows that there is no significant relation between Willingness to learn and Experience. 5.37 Influence ofPrior Trainingof Respondents on Willingness to Learn Table No: 5.75Influence ofPrior Trainingof Respondents on Willingness to Learn
Des criptives Willingness to Learn 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 8.5781 9.6123 6.7976 8.8866 7.9252 9.0748

N yes no Total 21 19 40

Mean 9.0952 7.8421 8.5000

Std. Deviation 1.1360 2.1670 1.7974

Std. Error .2479 .4971 .2842

Minimum 6.00 2.00 2.00

Max imum 10.00 10.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

122

Interpretation: The mean value of willingness to learn for the employees who have undergone prior training is 9.09 and for those who have not undergone prior training is 7.84. thus it supports the theory of resistance by showing that training can increase the willingness to learn in employees. Table No: 5.76 Anova Table for Influence ofPrior Trainingof Respondents on Willingness to Learn
ANOVA Willingness to Learn Sum of Squares 15.664 110.336 126.000 df 1 38 39 Mean Square 15.664 2.904 F 5.395 Sig. .026

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table it is observed the Willingness to learn is significant on Prior training given to employees. So it can be proved that Proper training can create a positive attitude about change in the minds of employee.

5.39 Flexibility Table No: 5.77Computation Based on the Tested Value of the Factor with Flexibility
One -Sam ple Statistics Std. Error Mean .6253

N FLEXIBILITY 40

Mean 9.5250

Std. Deviation 3.9548

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table of one sample T test the mean value for flexibility is 9.5 and the standard deviation is 3.95

123

Table No: 5.78 One Sample Test for Flexibility

One -Sam ple Tes t Test V alue = 9 95% Conf idence Interval of the Dif f erence Low er Upper -.7398 1.7898

t FLEXIBILITY .840

df 39

Sig. (2-tailed) .406

Mean Dif f erence .5250

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The one sample t test for flexibility was performed to know whether the employees flexible to work in HOCL and the table show that the employees are having a low opinion regarding flexibility of HOCL. 5.40 Influence of Department of the Respondents on Flexibility Table No: 5.79Influence of Department of the Respondents on Flexibility
Des criptives Flex ibility 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 6.6663 15.0004 . . . . 5.1469 17.8531 2.7352 14.9315 4.3409 9.1137 10.2553 15.3447 8.5802 12.6698 8.2602 10.7898

N P& A TSS V IGILA NCE MA TERIALS MECHA NICA L PRODUCTION FIRE & SA FETY ELECTRICA L Total 6 1 1 2 6 11 5 8 40

Mean 10.8333 10.0000 7.0000 11.5000 8.8333 6.7273 12.8000 10.6250 9.5250

Std. Deviation 3.9707 . . .7071 5.8109 3.5522 2.0494 2.4458 3.9548

Std. Error 1.6210 . . .5000 2.3723 1.0710 .9165 .8647 .6253

Minimum 4.00 10.00 7.00 11.00 3.00 4.00 11.00 7.00 3.00

Max imum 15.00 10.00 7.00 12.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 14.00 15.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: It is seen that Fire & Safety department shows higher amount of flexibility with a mean of 12.80 and flexibility is low in Production department. Table No: 5.80 Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Flexibility
ANOV A Flex ibility Sum of Squares 176.952 433.023 609.975 df 7 32 39 Mean Square 25.279 13.532 F 1.868 Sig. .108

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

124

Interpretation: The Anova table suggests that there is no significant relation between Flexibility and Department since the significant level is more than .05. 5.42 Influence of Genderof the Respondents on Flexibility Table No: 5.81Influence of Genderof the Respondents on Flexibility
Group Statistics Std. Error Mean .6960 1.3801

Flex ibility

GENDER MALE FEMALE

N 33 7

Mean 9.2121 11.0000

Std. Deviation 3.9981 3.6515

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The mean value of male respondents for flexibility is 9.21 and for the females is 11.00. Hence we can conclude that flexibility is high for female employees than the male employees. Table No: 5.82 Influence of Genderof the Respondents on Flexibility
Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Low er Upper -5.1115 -5.2659 1.5357 1.6901

F Flexibility Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed 1.237

Sig. .273

t -1.089 -1.157

df 38 9.327

Sig. (2-tailed) .283 .276

Mean Difference -1.7879 -1.7879

Std. Error Difference 1.6418 1.5457

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above output of an independent samples T test,we compared the mean flexibility of male and female employees and the value of significance 2tailed is 0.283,therefore there is no statistically significant difference between gender and flexibility.

125

5.43 Influence of Educationof the Respondents on Flexibility Table No: 5.83Influence of Educationof the Respondents on Flexibility
Des criptives Flex ibility 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 9.1621 15.6379 6.1983 11.2303 1.0056 12.1944 5.0338 12.5662 6.1211 15.4789 7.1384 15.2616 . . 8.2602 10.7898

N SSLC Diploma PDC ITI UG PG PhD Total 5 14 5 5 5 5 1 40

Mean 12.4000 8.7143 6.6000 8.8000 10.8000 11.2000 10.0000 9.5250

Std. Deviation 2.6077 4.3576 4.5056 3.0332 3.7683 3.2711 . 3.9548

Std. Error 1.1662 1.1646 2.0149 1.3565 1.6852 1.4629 . .6253

Minimum 9.00 4.00 3.00 5.00 7.00 6.00 10.00 3.00

Max imum 15.00 15.00 12.00 13.00 15.00 15.00 10.00 15.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: It is observed from the above table that the flexibility is greater in employees who have an educational qualification till SSLC with the mean value of 12.40 and the flexibility is lower in PDC with a mean value of 6.60. Table No: 5.84Anova Table for Influence of Educational Qualificationof the Respondents on Flexibility
ANOV A Flex ibility Sum of Squares 118.318 491.657 609.975 df 6 33 39 Mean Square 19.720 14.899 F 1.324 Sig. .274

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The Anova table shows that there is no significant relation between Flexibility and education qualification as the significance level is more than 0.05. 5.44 Influence of Ageof the Respondents on Flexibility Table No: 5.85 Influence of Ageof the Respondents on Flexibility
Des criptives Flex ibility 95% Conf idence Interv al f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 4.0226 8.5229 6.4813 13.5187 9.5834 12.5119 8.2602 10.7898

N 20-30 31-40 41 & above Total 11 8 21 40

Mean 6.2727 10.0000 11.0476 9.5250

Std. Dev iation 3.3494 4.2088 3.2168 3.9548

Std. Error 1.0099 1.4880 .7020 .6253

Minimum 3.00 3.00 4.00 3.00

Max imum 14.00 15.00 15.00 15.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

126

Interpretation: The table above shows that the flexibility is high with the employees under the age group 41 and above with mean 11.04 and found to be low in age group between 20-30 with mean 6.27 Table No: 5.86 Anova Table for Flexibility
ANOVA Flex ibility Sum of Squares 166.841 443.134 609.975 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 83.420 11.977 F 6.965 Sig. .003

Influence of Ageof the Respondents on

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The Anova table shows that the flexibility is significant on the age as the significance level calculated is less than 0.05.

5.45 Influence of Experienceof the Respondents on Flexibility Table No: 5.87 Influence of Experienceof the Respondents on Flexibility
Des criptives Flex ibility 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 4.9394 9.3273 8.9214 12.3008 9.2180 14.4963 8.2602 10.7898

N 0-10 11-20 21-30 Total 15 18 7 40

Mean 7.1333 10.6111 11.8571 9.5250

Std. Deviation 3.9617 3.3979 2.8536 3.9548

Std. Error 1.0229 .8009 1.0785 .6253

Minimum 3.00 4.00 7.00 3.00

Max imum 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The above table shows that Flexibility has the highest mean value of 11.85 for employees of experience 21-30 and lowest mean value of 7.133 for employees 0-10 years of experience.

127

Table No: 5.88 Anova Table for Influence of Experienceof Respondents on Flexibility
ANOV A Flex ibility Sum of Squares 145.107 464.868 609.975 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 72.553 12.564 F 5.775 Sig. .007

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The significance level is observed to be 0.007 and hence this proves that both Flexibility and Experience has a significant relationship.

5.46 Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Flexibility Table No: 5.89Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Flexibility
Des criptives Flex ibility 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 9.0845 12.5346 6.3098 9.9008 8.2602 10.7898

N yes no Total 21 19 40

Mean 10.8095 8.1053 9.5250

Std. Deviation 3.7897 3.7252 3.9548

Std. Error .8270 .8546 .6253

Minimum 3.00 3.00 3.00

Max imum 15.00 14.00 15.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The above table of descriptives shows that the mean for Flexibility for the employees with prior training is 10.89 and for those without prior training is 8.10. Thus from the above table it is clear that Prior training increases the flexibility of employees to undergo more changes.

128

Table No: 5.90 Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of Respondents on Flexibility
ANOVA Flex ibility Sum of Squares 72.947 537.028 609.975 df 1 38 39 Mean Square 72.947 14.132 F 5.162 Sig. .029

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The significance level is 0.029 which states that flexibility is significant on Prior training given to the employees

5.47 Resistance to Change It has been proved that the overall satisfaction level with the work environment at the organization is good. Hence it can be concluded that there is readiness to change. Now the researcher goes into the second step, that is attempting to identify the resistance to change, using the rest two factors, which is directly queried on resistance to change of employees.

Table No: 5.91 Computation Based on the Tested Value of the Resistance to Change
One -Sam ple Statistics Std. Error Mean 1.1099

N RESIS 40

Mean 21.6000

Std. Deviation 7.0194

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table of one sample test the mean value for Resistance to change is 21.6 and the standard deviation is 7.01. This is done to determine whether the employees are resistant to change in HOCL.

129

Table No: 5.92 Resistance to Change

One -Sam ple Tes t Test Value = 21 95% Conf idence Interval of the Dif f erence Low er Upper -1.6449 2.8449

t RESIS .541

df 39

Sig. (2-tailed) .592

Mean Dif f erence .6000

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The test shows that there is the Resistance to change is not significant as the significance level is more than 0.05 hence it the employees show no resistance. 5.48 Factors Determining Resistance to Change Table No: 5.93 Factors Determining Resistance to Change
Group Statistics Std. Error Mean 3.4527 3.6357

N RESISTANCE TO CHANGE Fear of Technological Change Fear of Job Security 40 40

Mean 62.7500 61.3000

Std. Deviation 21.8371 22.9941

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The factors determining resistance to change are fear of technological change and fear of job security. Out of this there is no much difference in the mean value of both the factors as the mean value are 62.75 and 61.30. Table No: 5.94 Factors Determining Resistance to Change
Inde pe nde nt Samples Te st Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Low er Upper -8.5320 -8.5324 11.4320 11.4324

F RESISTANCE TO CHANGE Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed .141

Sig. .708

t .289 .289

df 78 77.793

Sig. (2-tailed) .773 .773

Mean Difference 1.4500 1.4500

Std. Error Difference 5.0139 5.0139

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

130

Interpretation: From the independent sample test it is clear that there is no significance for both the factors fear of technological change and fear of job security. 5.49 Influence of Department of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Table No: 5.95 Influence of Department of the Respondents on Resistance to Change
Des criptives RESIS 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 14.1024 27.8976 . . . . -52.2372 100.2372 9.9968 28.0032 15.5958 23.1314 25.0453 33.7547 15.4471 29.0529 19.3551 23.8449

N P& A TSS VIGILANCE MATERIALS MECHANICAL PRODUCTION FIRE & SAFETY ELECTRICAL Total 6 1 1 2 6 11 5 8 40

Mean 21.0000 17.0000 21.0000 24.0000 19.0000 19.3636 29.4000 22.2500 21.6000

Std. Deviation 6.5727 . . 8.4853 8.5790 5.6084 3.5071 8.1372 7.0194

Std. Error 2.6833 . . 6.0000 3.5024 1.6910 1.5684 2.8769 1.1099

Minimum 15.00 17.00 21.00 18.00 12.00 7.00 24.00 9.00 7.00

Max imum 29.00 17.00 21.00 30.00 31.00 27.00 33.00 32.00 33.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above table of descriptives it is observed that the department showing higher rate of resistance is Fire and Safety department with a mean value of 29.40 and the department showing a lower rate of resistance is the TSS department with a mean value 17.00 Table No: 5.96 Anova Table for Influence of Department of Respondents on Resistance to Change
ANOVA RESIS Sum of Squares 438.355 1483.245 1921.600 df 7 32 39 Mean Square 62.622 46.351 F 1.351 Sig. .260

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

131

Interpretation: From the above table of Anova it is seen that there is no significant relation between resistance to change and department. 5.50 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Table No: 5.97 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Resistance to Change
Group Statis tics Std. Error Mean 1.2444 2.0979

RESIS

GENDER MA LE FEMALE

N 33 7

Mean 22.3333 18.1429

Std. Deviation 7.1487 5.5506

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: According to the table above the male employees of HOCL are showing comparatively higher resistance to change with a mean value of 22.33 compared to the female employees working at HOCL. Table No: 5.98 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Resistance to Change
Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Low er Upper -1.6398 -1.1957 10.0207 9.5766

F RESIS Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed 1.876

Sig. .179

t 1.455 1.718

df 38 10.716

Sig. (2-tailed) .154 .115

Mean Difference 4.1905 4.1905

Std. Error Difference 2.8800 2.4393

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The table above shows that there is no significance level for resistance to change and hence it is not significant with gender

132

5.51 Influence of Educationof the Respondents on Resistance to Change Table No: 5.99Influence of Educationof the Respondents on Resistance to Change
Des criptives RESIS 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 21.5170 32.4830 15.7908 23.7807 8.4898 28.7102 16.0154 33.1846 12.9157 28.2843 12.6130 33.7870 . . 19.3551 23.8449

N SSLC Diploma PDC ITI UG PG PhD Total 5 14 5 5 5 5 1 40

Mean 27.0000 19.7857 18.6000 24.6000 20.6000 23.2000 17.0000 21.6000

Std. Deviation 4.4159 6.9191 8.1425 6.9138 6.1887 8.5264 . 7.0194

Std. Error 1.9748 1.8492 3.6414 3.0919 2.7677 3.8131 . 1.1099

Minimum 21.00 7.00 14.00 14.00 15.00 12.00 17.00 7.00

Max imum 31.00 29.00 33.00 32.00 31.00 30.00 17.00 33.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: Employees who have educational qualification upto SSLC are showing higher resistance to change with a mean value of 27.00 and the employees with PhD are showing lower resistance to change. Hence it supports the theory that resistance to change can be decreased to an extent by educating the employees.

Table No: 5.100 Anova Table for Influence of Educational Qualification of the Respondents on Resistance to Change
ANOVA RESIS Sum of Squares 320.843 1600.757 1921.600 df 6 33 39 Mean Square 53.474 48.508 F 1.102 Sig. .382

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The Resistance to change shows no significant relation with the Educational qualification of the employee.

133

5.52 Influence of Age of the Respondents on Resistance to Change Table No: 5.101Influence of Age of the Respondents on Resistance to Change
Des criptives RESIS 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 18.6554 24.9809 12.7539 21.9961 19.4313 26.7592 19.3551 23.8449

N 20-30 31-40 41 & above Total 11 8 21 40

Mean 21.8182 17.3750 23.0952 21.6000

Std. Deviation 4.7078 5.5275 8.0493 7.0194

Std. Error 1.4195 1.9543 1.7565 1.1099

Minimum 14.00 12.00 7.00 7.00

Maximum 29.00 27.00 33.00 33.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The resistance to change is seen higher among the employees under the age group of 41 and above with the mean value of 21.60 and the resistance to change is seen lower among the employees under the age group of 31 to 40 years with the mean value equal to 17.37 Table No: 5.102 Anova Table for Influence of Age of Respondents on Resistance to Change
ANOV A RESIS Sum of Squares 190.279 1731.321 1921.600 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 95.140 46.792 F 2.033 Sig. .145

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: It is noted that the resistance to change is not significant with age group as the significance level is higher than 0.05,it cannot be statistically proved.

134

5.53 Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Resistance to Chang Table No: 5.103 Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Resistance to Change
Des criptives RESIS 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 17.4822 22.6512 18.5028 26.7194 14.7398 29.8317 19.3551 23.8449

N 0-10 11-20 21-30 Total 15 18 7 40

Mean 20.0667 22.6111 22.2857 21.6000

Std. Deviation 4.6670 8.2615 8.1591 7.0194

Std. Error 1.2050 1.9472 3.0839 1.1099

Minimum 14.00 7.00 9.00 7.00

Max imum 27.00 33.00 31.00 33.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The table given above clearly shows that the resistance to change is higher among the employees with 11 to 20 years of experience in HOCL with the mean value as 22.61 and the resistance to change is lower among the employees with 0 to 10 years of experience in HOCL with the mean value as 20.06. Table No: 5.104 Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Resistance to Change
ANOV A RESIS Sum of Squares 56.960 1864.640 1921.600 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 28.480 50.396 F .565 Sig. .573

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: There is no significant relationship between resistance to change and years of experience because the significance level is more than 0.05.

135

5.54 Influence of Prior Training of Respondents on Resistance to Change Table No: 5.105 Influenceof Prior Training of Respondents on Resistance to Change
Des criptives RESIS 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 21.4886 27.5590 15.4622 21.2746 19.3551 23.8449

N yes no Total 21 19 40

Mean 24.5238 18.3684 21.6000

Std. Deviation 6.6680 6.0297 7.0194

Std. Error 1.4551 1.3833 1.1099

Minimum 12.00 7.00 7.00

Max imum 33.00 28.00 33.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The employees undergone a prior training in HOCL have a higher mean value 24.52 compared to the employees who have not undergone a prior training in HOCL which has a mean value of only 18.36 thus it supports the literature review that prior training can reduce the resistance level among employees of an organization. Table No: 5.106 Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of Respondents on Resistance to Change
ANOV A RESIS Sum of Squares 377.941 1543.659 1921.600 df 1 38 39 Mean Square 377.941 40.623 F 9.304 Sig. .004

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: A significant relationship between the resistance to change and prior training exists as the significance level is found to be less than 0.05.

136

5.55 Fear of Job Security Table No: 5.107 Computation Based on the Tested Value of Fear of Job Security
One -Sam ple Statistics Std. Error Mean .9089

N FEA R OF JOB SECURITY 40

Mean 15.3250

Std. Deviation 5.7485

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The mean value for Fear of Job Security is noted to be 15.32 and the standard deviation is 5.74. Table No: 5.108 One Sample Test for Fear of Job Security
One -Sam ple Tes t Test V alue = 15 95% Conf idence Interval of the Dif f erence Low er Upper -1.5135 2.1635

t FEA R OF JOB SECURITY .358

df 39

Sig. (2-tailed) .723

Mean Dif f erence .3250

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation:
One

sample t test is performed here to check whether the factor fear of job

security is significant. Fom the above table it is shown that the mean value of fear of job security is 15.32. Since the significance level obtained is above 0.05 we can say that fear of job security is not significant. The test value is taken as 15 here, which is 60 % opinion of the respondents and the mean value obtained is nearly the test value.

137

5.56 Influence of Department of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Table No: 5.109 Influence of Department of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security
Des criptives FEAR OF JOB SECURITY 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 9.9824 19.6843 . . . . -47.5310 79.5310 5.7041 20.6292 10.5206 16.5703 16.5365 28.2635 10.6598 20.8402 13.4865 17.1635

N P& A TSS VIGILANCE MATERIALS MECHANICAL PRODUCTION FIRE & SAFETY ELECTRICAL Total 6 1 1 2 6 11 5 8 40

Mean 14.8333 13.0000 13.0000 16.0000 13.1667 13.5455 22.4000 15.7500 15.3250

Std. Deviation 4.6224 . . 7.0711 7.1110 4.5025 4.7223 6.0886 5.7485

Std. Error 1.8871 . . 5.0000 2.9031 1.3576 2.1119 2.1527 .9089

Minimum 10.00 13.00 13.00 11.00 7.00 5.00 14.00 5.00 5.00

Max imum 21.00 13.00 13.00 21.00 23.00 19.00 25.00 24.00 25.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The above table shows that the fear of job security is mostly seen in Fire and Saferty department with a mean of 22.40 and shows least in TSS and Vigilance department with mean 13.00. Table No: 5.110 Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security
ANOV A FEA R OF JOB SECURITY Sum of Squares 327.681 961.094 1288.775 df 7 32 39 Mean Square 46.812 30.034 F 1.559 Sig. .184

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the Anova table it shows that the resistance to change is not significant on department. As it varies from department to department and also the number of respondents from each department is also different, their age,education, all varies with each department, thus a significant relation between resistance to age and department could not be found.

138

5.57 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Table No: 5.111Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security
Group Statis tics Std. Error Mean 1.0361 1.5231

FEA R OF JOB SECURITY

GENDER MA LE FEMALE

N 33 7

Mean 15.8788 12.7143

Std. Deviation 5.9517 4.0297

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the table it is observed that the mean value of male respondents is 15.87 and the mean value of female respondents is 12.71,thus the resistance to change is seen higher in males than females. Table No: 5.112 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security
Inde pe nde nt Sam ples Te st Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Low er Upper -1.6300 -.8367 7.9590 7.1657

F FEAR OF JOB SECURITY Equal variances as sumed Equal variances not assumed 2.881

Sig. .098

t 1.336 1.718

df 38 12.342

Sig. (2-tailed) .189 .111

Mean Difference 3.1645 3.1645

Std. Error Difference 2.3684 1.8420

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The Independent Sample test table shows that the significance value of two tailed test is 0.189(more than0.05).There is no statistically significant difference between gender and resistance to change.

139

5.58Influence of Educational Qualification of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Table No: 5.113Influence of Educational Qualificationof the Respondents on Fear of Job Security
Des criptives FEAR OF JOB SECURITY 95% Confidence Interval for Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 12.5919 27.0081 10.9117 16.9455 3.8818 21.3182 12.6194 23.7806 6.2458 21.7542 9.0752 23.7248 . . 13.4865 17.1635

N SSLC Diploma PDC ITI UG PG PhD Total 5 14 5 5 5 5 1 40

Mean 19.8000 13.9286 12.6000 18.2000 14.0000 16.4000 13.0000 15.3250

Std. Deviation 5.8052 5.2252 7.0214 4.4944 6.2450 5.8992 . 5.7485

Std. Error 2.5962 1.3965 3.1401 2.0100 2.7928 2.6382 . .9089

Minimum 13.00 5.00 7.00 12.00 10.00 9.00 13.00 5.00

Max imum 25.00 21.00 24.00 24.00 25.00 21.00 13.00 25.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The resistance to change is found to be high where the educational qualification is only SSLC with a mean of 19.80, and is low in the employees with a qualification of Diploma,PDC,and PhD. Table No: 5.114 Anova Table for Influence of Educationof the Respondents on Fear of Job Security
ANOVA FEAR OF JOB SECURITY Sum of Squares 225.846 1062.929 1288.775 df 6 33 39 Mean Square 37.641 32.210 F 1.169 Sig. .347

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above Anova table ,Resistance to Change is not significant on Education since the significance level is observed to be more than 0.05.

140

5.59 Influence of Ageof the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Table No: 5.115Influence of Ageof the Respondents on Fear of Job Security
Des criptives FEAR OF JOB SECURITY 95% Conf idence Interv al f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 11.9737 17.8444 8.7679 15.4821 13.7808 19.7430 13.4865 17.1635

N 20-30 31-40 41 & above Total 11 8 21 40

Mean 14.9091 12.1250 16.7619 15.3250

Std. Dev iation 4.3693 4.0156 6.5491 5.7485

Std. Error 1.3174 1.4197 1.4291 .9089

Minimum 7.00 7.00 5.00 5.00

Max imum 20.00 19.00 25.00 25.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The table of descriptive statistics verifies that the resistance to change is seen highest among the employees under the age group 41 & above with a mean of 16.76 and found to be low under the age group 31-40with a mean of 12.12. This shows that resistance to change increases with age. Employees under the age group 20-30 also tend to resist change more because as the resistance theories suggests that fear of unknown, also results in rsistance.

Table No: 5.116Anova Table for Influence of Ageof the Respondents on Fear of Job Security
ANOVA FEAR OF JOB SECURITY Sum of Squares 127.181 1161.594 1288.775 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 63.591 31.394 F 2.026 Sig. .146

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: And from the one way Anova test,(since the significance level is more than .05) we can say that there was no significant effect of age on the resistance to change

141

5.60 Influence of Experience of Respondents on Fear of Job Security Table No: 5.117Influence of Experience of Respondents on Fear of Job Security
Des criptives FEAR OF JOB SECURITY 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 11.3888 16.0779 13.3399 19.6601 9.3131 22.1154 13.4865 17.1635

N 0-10 11-20 21-30 Total 15 18 7 40

Mean 13.7333 16.5000 15.7143 15.3250

Std. Deviation 4.2337 6.3547 6.9213 5.7485

Std. Error 1.0931 1.4978 2.6160 .9089

Minimum 7.00 5.00 5.00 5.00

Max imum 19.00 25.00 25.00 25.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The table of descriptive statistics verifies that the resistance to change is seen highest for employees with an experience of 11-20years with a mean value of 16.50 and seen lowest for employees with experience between 0-10years

Table No: 5.118 Anova Table for Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security
ANOV A FEA R OF JOB SECURITY Sum of Squares 63.913 1224.862 1288.775 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 31.957 33.104 F .965 Sig. .390

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: Since the significance level is more than 0.05 the Anova table suggests that Resistance to change have no significant relation with Experience.

142

5.61 Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security Table No: 5.119Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security
Des criptives FEAR OF JOB SECURITY 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 15.0115 20.0361 10.4429 15.3466 13.4865 17.1635

N yes no Total 21 19 40

Mean 17.5238 12.8947 15.3250

Std. Deviation 5.5192 5.0870 5.7485

Std. Error 1.2044 1.1670 .9089

Minimum 7.00 5.00 5.00

Max imum 25.00 24.00 25.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The above table of descriptives shows that the mean for Resistance to change for the employees with prior training is 17.52 and for those without prior training is 12.89. thus the fear of job security is seen higher in employees who have receive prior training.

Table No: 5.120 Anova Table for Influence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Fear of Job Security
ANOVA FEAR OF JOB SECURITY Sum of Squares 213.747 1075.028 1288.775 df 1 38 39 Mean Square 213.747 28.290 F 7.556 Sig. .009

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The above table suggests that resistance to change is significant on prior training given to the employees.

143

5.62 Fear of Technological Change Table No: 5.121Computation Based on the Tested Value of Fear of Technological Change
One -Sam ple Statistics Std. Error Mean .3453

N FEAR OF TECHNLOGICAL CHANGE 40

Mean 6.2750

Std. Dev iation 2.1837

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The mean value of Fear of technological change is noted to be 6.27 with a standard deviation2.18. Table No: 5.122 Fear of Technological Change
One -Sam ple Tes t Test Value = 6 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Low er Upper -.4234 .9734

t FEAR OF TECHNLOGICAL CHANGE .796

df 39

Sig. (2-tailed) .431

Mean Difference .2750

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The test value of fear of technological change is 6,which is 60 % of the respondents opinion. The significance level obtained is .431 hence fear of technological change is not significant.

144

5.63 Influence of Department of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Table No: 5.123Influence of Department of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change
Des criptives FEA R OF TECHNLOGICAL CHA NGE 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 3.5606 8.7727 . . . . -4.7062 20.7062 3.0634 8.6033 4.5500 7.0864 3.9586 10.0414 4.5521 8.4479 5.5766 6.9734

N P& A TSS V IGILA NCE MA TERIALS MECHA NICA L PRODUCTION FIRE & SA FETY ELECTRICA L Total 6 1 1 2 6 11 5 8 40

Mean 6.1667 4.0000 8.0000 8.0000 5.8333 5.8182 7.0000 6.5000 6.2750

Std. Deviation 2.4833 . . 1.4142 2.6394 1.8878 2.4495 2.3299 2.1837

Std. Error 1.0138 . . 1.0000 1.0775 .5692 1.0954 .8238 .3453

Minimum 3.00 4.00 8.00 7.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 2.00

Max imum 9.00 4.00 8.00 9.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 8.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the table above,the department which is has the most fear in technological change is the vigilance and materials department with the mean of 8.00 and the least fear is found in TSS and Production department with mean of 4.00 and 5.81 Table No: 5.124 Anova Table for Influence of Department of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change
ANOVA FEAR OF TECHNLOGICAL CHANGE Sum of Squares 20.672 165.303 185.975 df 7 32 39 Mean Square 2.953 5.166 F .572 Sig. .773

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The Anova table shows that the there is no significant relation between the technology upgradation and department.

145

5.64 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Table No: 5.125Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change
Group Statis tics Std. Error Mean .3771 .8411

FEA R OF TECHNLOGICA L CHA NGE

GENDER MA LE FEMALE

N 33 7

Mean 6.4545 5.4286

Std. Deviation 2.1664 2.2254

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the table it is observed that the mean value of male respondents is 6.45 and the mean value of female respondents is 5.42, thus the resistance to change is seen higher in males than females.

Table No: 5.126 Influence of Gender of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change
Independent Samples Test Levene's Test for Equality of Variances

t-test for Equality of Means 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Low er Upper -.8069 -1.0746 2.8589 3.1265

F FEAR OF TECHNLOGICAL CHANGE Equal variances assumed Equal variances not assumed .059

Sig. .810

t 1.133 1.113

df 38 8.590

Sig. (2-tailed) .264 .296

Mean Difference 1.0260 1.0260

Std. Error Difference .9054 .9218

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The Independent Sample test table shows that the significance value of two tailed test is more than0.05.There is no statistically significant difference between gender and resistance to change.

146

5.65 Influence of Education of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Table No: 5.127Influence of Educationof the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change
Des criptives FEA R OF TECHNLOGICA L CHANGE 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 4.3686 10.0314 4.5590 7.1553 2.9586 9.0414 3.1621 9.6379 5.1843 8.0157 3.4683 10.1317 . . 5.5766 6.9734

N SSLC Diploma PDC ITI UG PG PhD Total 5 14 5 5 5 5 1 40

Mean 7.2000 5.8571 6.0000 6.4000 6.6000 6.8000 4.0000 6.2750

Std. Deviation 2.2804 2.2483 2.4495 2.6077 1.1402 2.6833 . 2.1837

Std. Error 1.0198 .6009 1.0954 1.1662 .5099 1.2000 . .3453

Minimum 4.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 4.00 2.00

Max imum 10.00 8.00 9.00 8.00 8.00 9.00 4.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The employees with an educational qualification of SSLC are showing more fear in the technology upgradation with a mean value of 7.20 and employees of PhD shows a lesser fear in technological upgradation with a mean value of 4.00. Table No: 5.128 Anova Table for Influence of Educationof the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change
ANOV A FEA R OF TECHNLOGICA L CHANGE Sum of Squares 14.261 171.714 185.975 df 6 33 39 Mean Square 2.377 5.203 F .457 Sig. .835

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above Anova table,it is observed that fear of technological change is not significant on Educational Qualification as the significance level is greater than 0.05.

147

5.66 Influence of Ageof Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Table No: 5.129Influence of Ageof Respondents on Fear of Technological Change
Des criptives FEAR OF TECHNLOGICAL CHANGE 95% Conf idence Interv al f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 5.8923 7.9259 3.3673 7.1327 5.2434 7.4233 5.5766 6.9734

N 20-30 31-40 41 & above Total 11 8 21 40

Mean 6.9091 5.2500 6.3333 6.2750

Std. Dev iation 1.5136 2.2520 2.3944 2.1837

Std. Error .4564 .7962 .5225 .3453

Minimum 4.00 2.00 2.00 2.00

Max imum 9.00 8.00 10.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: Employees of age group 20-30 are showing more fear towards technological change with a mean value of of 6.90 compared to the other age groups .Table No: 5.130 Anova Table for Influence of Ageof Respondents on Fear of Technological Change
ANOV A FEA R OF TECHNLOGICA L CHANGE Sum of Squares 12.899 173.076 185.975 df 2 37 39 Mean Square 6.450 4.678 F 1.379 Sig. .265

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: From the above Anova table, it is observed that Fear of Technological change is not significant on Age as the significance level obtained is 0.265.

148

5.67 Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Table No: 5.131Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change
Des criptives FEA R OF TECHNLOGICA L CHANGE 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 5.4536 7.2131 4.7371 7.4851 4.8950 8.2479 5.5766 6.9734

N 0-10 11-20 21-30 Total 15 18 7 40

Mean 6.3333 6.1111 6.5714 6.2750

Std. Deviation 1.5887 2.7630 1.8127 2.1837

Std. Error .4102 .6512 .6851 .3453

Minimum 4.00 2.00 4.00 2.00

Max imum 8.00 10.00 9.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The employees with 21-30 years are showing high fear for technological change with mean value 6.57 and the employees with 11-20 years are showing low fear towards technological change with a mean of 6.1. Eventhough there is no much difference among the different age groups.

Table No: 5.132 Anova Table for Influence of Experience of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change
ANOV A FEA R OF TECHNLOGICA L CHANGE Sum of Squares 1.150 184.825 185.975 df 2 37 39 Mean Square .575 4.995 F .115 Sig. .892

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The Anova test result shows that Technology upgradation is not significant on experience of employees because the significance level is more than .892.

149

5.68 Influence of Prior Training of Respondents on Fear of Technological Change Table No: 5.133Influence of Prior Training of Respondents on Fear of Technological Change
Des criptives FEAR OF TECHNLOGICAL CHANGE 95% Conf idence Interval f or Mean Low er Bound Upper Bound 6.1484 7.8516 4.3797 6.5677 5.5766 6.9734

N yes no Total 21 19 40

Mean 7.0000 5.4737 6.2750

Std. Deviation 1.8708 2.2698 2.1837

Std. Error .4082 .5207 .3453

Minimum 3.00 2.00 2.00

Max imum 9.00 10.00 10.00

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: Fear of technological change is observed to be greater among employees who have received a prior training with mean of 7.00 compared to those who have not received training which is having a mean of 5.4.

Table No: 5.134 Anova Table forInfluence of Prior Training of the Respondents on Fear of Technological Change

ANOVA FEAR OF TECHNLOGICAL CHANGE Sum of Squares 23.238 162.737 185.975 df 1 38 39 Mean Square 23.238 4.283 F 5.426 Sig. .025

Betw een Groups Within Groups Total

Source: Analysis of Survey Data

Interpretation: The Anova table suggests that there is a significant relation between Technology upgradation and Prior training given to employees because the significance level

150

CHAPTER VI FINDINGS, SUGGESTIONS AND CONCLUSION

6.1 Findings The present study at HOCL was fruitful and could bring out the following findings. 1. It was identified that the overall readiness to change among the employees is good. 2. The most important factor that determines readiness to change is Equitable Remuneration followed by Need for Change. The factor Willingness to learn is identified to be least influence in determining readiness of employees for change. 3. Perception of employees on the work environment at the organization is good and employees are of the opinion that the remuneration at the organization is equitable. 4. It was proved that Experience of employee influence the opinion regarding their perception about equitable remuneration, the employees having experience of more than 21 years felt that they are paid equitably. 5. Employees in general are of the opinion that change is needed. 6. A relationship between age and need for change was identified to be high, i.e.,20 to 30 and above 41 age group feel that need for change exists in HOCL. 7. The general willingness to learn among employees was identified to be high. 8. A relationship could be established between willingness to learn and prior training, i.e. employees who have attended training showed higher willingness to learn. 9. Flexibility of employees was identified to be influenced by experienceand employees of respondents with more than 21 years willingness for moreflexibility. 10. Employees who had undergone prior training are more flexible compared to the employees who have not undergone prior training. 11. It was also identified that overall resistance to change is not high among the employees.

151

6.2 Suggestions

1. Employee readiness was found to be high in the case of HOCL,thus the management should be able to initiate the desired changes in the firm. 2. It was found that the factor which is least contributing to the employee readiness in HOCL was Willingness to Learn ,hence measures to increase the willingness to learn i.e., providing training to them should be increased. 3. Though the general perception is that the resistance to change among the Govt employees is high, it is worth noting that resistance to change among the Employees at HOCL is not high, which is a creditable achievement by the management and it has to take all measures to maintain this by taking them into confidence and initiating change only after proper consultation. 4. The company should make sure that they provide constructive feedback and let the employees know they have someone who is willing to hear them. 5. The organization being a government undertaking,influence of trade union would be on the higher side making them positive about the process and gaining their support also will help smoothen the change process.

152

6.3 Conclusion

To effectively lead change, one must recognize that the "change" itself does not need managing as much as do the people involved with it. In order to successfully manage and lead people through any change, it is important to be aware of the different ways people prefer to deal with change; and implement it smoothly. The current study tried to analyse two dimensions, one being resistance itself and second being readiness to change, that has been identified on the basis of the satisfaction level of employees on the work environment. It was identified that the general perception on readiness to change is high, and the resistance to change also is manageable. Which is a positive outcome, particularly since this being a Govt Undertaking, but there are small issues identified focusing on which will make the transformation process smooth and hassle free.

153

APPENDIX

Resistance to Change among Employees of a Public Sector Undertaking With Special Reference to HINDUSTAN ORGANIC CHEMICALS LTD, AMBALAMUGAL QUESTIONNAIRE

Respected Sir/Madam, I am a second year PGDM student at Bhavans Royal Institute of Management, Thiruvankulam. In partial fulfillment of my studies, I have undertaken a project on Resistance to Change among Employees of a Public sector undertaking with special reference to HOCL . As a part of this, it is required to conduct a survey on the employee resistance to change in the company. I would be grateful if you would kindly make it convenient to spare a few minutes of your valuable time for filling up this questionnaire for me. I promise that the data collected through this questionnaire shall be kept confidential and will be used for academic purpose only.

With warm regards Sruthy UdayKumar

154

PLEASE TICK IN THE SATISFACTION LEVEL:

NUMBER OF THE BOX, WHICH BEST REPRESENTS YOUR

5=

STRONGLY AGREE

,4=

AGREE

,3=

NEUTRAL

,2=

DISAGREE

,1=

STRONGLY

DISAGREE.

Sl No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Statements I am satisfied with the working conditions prevailing in the HOCL. I am satisfied with the work assignments given to me. I am paid the right salary for my work. I am comfortable with the current working time. I am satisfied with the benefits extended by HOCL. In my opinion HOCL management is flexible and cooperative. The interpersonal relationship between the peer and the superior is quite satisfactory. There is a need for phenol plant expansion. The present output and productivity can be maintained with lesser cost by redeploying personnel and up gradation of technology. I feel there is a need for job enlargement. I feel that the technology up gradation can make our system more effective. I think that introduction of ERP in my job will make my task easier and bring in more standardization. I feel recruiting more people in HOCL will affect my career growth in HOCL. In my opinion technology up gradation is an excuse for reducing the workforce in future. Any upgradation in technology will result in

10 11 12

13 14 15

155

the reduction of manpower by way of VRS or CRS. 16 I am ready to do different jobs at different months at HOCL so that I can avoid doing the same work. I am ready to work at different units of HOCL. I am willing to undertake more responsibilities in my job. I require training to use many applications like ERP in systems. I am willing to change my working time as long as it is useful to the company. I have long years of work experience in my work, I am very comfortable and highly experience in my job. It may not be possible for technology to improve my performance. I fear that any change brought in HOCL will affect my job security. I think, I am likely to make more mistakes if any changes are brought in HOCL. I may not be comfortable initially when the changes are made, but I think I can manage this change successfully very soon. 25 I enjoy my work in HOCL, and I feel there is no need for any changes in technology or work conditions in HOCL.

17 18 19 20 21

22 23 24

Kindly fill in your personal details: 1) Department : 2) Gender 3) Education 4) Age : M / F : : 20 30 31 - 40 11 20 41&above 21 - 30

5) Years of Experience at HOCL : 0 10

6) Prior training in Organizational Development & Change Management : Y / N

156

BIBILIOGRAPHY
Books and Articles 1. Goldstein, J. (1988) A Far-from-Equilibrium Systems Approach to Resistance toChange, Organizational Dynamics, (Autumn), pp. 16-26. 2. Goodstein, L.D. and Burke, W.W. (1991) Creating Successful Organization Change, 3. Organizational Dynamics, 19 (4), pp. 5-17Robbins, S. P. (1989), Organizational Behaviour: Concepts, Controversies, and Applications, New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 4. K. Aswathappa, Human Resource Management, Tata McGraw-Hill, 2008, pp. 399401 5. P. Subba Rao, Essentials of Human Resource Management and Industrial Relations, Himalaya Publishing House, 2007, pp. 657-663. 6. C. R. Kothari (2001) Research Methodology of Wishwa Prakashan Publishing, Chennai 17, Edition 7. C. B. Mamoria and S. V. Gankar (2001), Personnel Management Text & Cases, Himalaya Publishing house Mumbai, XXI Edition. 8. L.M Prasad, Organizational Behaviour, Sultan Chand & Sons, 2008, pp. 225-228.

Websites:
[1]. http://http://www.ebrc.fi/kuvat/812-824_05.pdf [2]. http:// www.google.com [3]. http://www.citehr.com [4]. http://www.humanresources.com [5]. http://www.uv.es/~pardoman/resistencias.PDF [6]. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7109/is_12_3/ai_n28395663/pg_2/ [7]. http://www.mbaguys.net/t590/ [8]. http://qc.hbmeu.ae/

157