PART IGENERAL INFORMATION
1
CHAPTER 1
ABOUT THE INDUSTRY
2
1.1 HISTORY OF EDUCATION IN INDIA
What is Education
Education in its broadest, general sense is the means through which the aims
and habits of a group of people lives on from one generation to the next.
Generally, it occurs through any experience that has a formative effect on the
way one thinks, feels, or acts. In its narrow, technical sense, education is the formal
process by which society deliberately transmits its accumulated knowledge, skills,
customs and values from one generation to another.
1. Education in Ancient India
The history of education in ancient India is fascinating and is recorded and can
be tracked to the ancient era. Education in ancient India began around the 3rd century
B.C with elements of religious training and impart of traditional knowledge. Sages and
scholars imparted education orally .Palm leaves and barks of trees were used for
writing.
Gurukula System
• Education in ancient India was more identified with the Gurukula system .
• These ancient Hindu schools in India were residential in nature with the sishyas
or students living in the same house with the Guru or the teacher.
• The students lived together irrespective of their social standing.
Brahmacharyam
• Ancient Indians allotted a period of time for the boys exclusively for education.
• Through Upanyana, a student was initiated in to Brahmacharyam .During this
period he was under complete self discipline and self control .All sorts of luxuries
and pleasures were to be avoided
3
• This period was called as Brahmacharyam where the students concentrated on
learning various subjects.
Subjects taught
• In ancient India, during the Vedic period from about 1500 BC to 600 BC, most
education was based on the Veda and later Hindu texts and scriptures.
• Vedic education included: proper pronunciation and recitation of the Veda, the
rules of sacrifice, grammar, understanding the secrets of nature, reasoning
including logic, the sciences, and the skills necessary for an occupation.
• There is mention in the Veda of herbal medicines for various conditions or
diseases, including fever, cough, baldness, snake bite and others.
• The oldest of the Upanishads - another part of Hindu scriptures - date from
around 500 BC. These texts encouraged an exploratory learning process where
teachers and students were co-travellers in a search for truth.
• The teaching methods used reasoning and questioning.
• The teacher imparted knowledge of Philosophy, Literature, Warfare, Statecraft,
Medicine, Astrology and History.
• The corpus of Sanskrit literature encompasses a rich tradition of poetry and
drama as well as technical scientific, philosophical and generally Hindu religious
texts, though many central texts of Buddhism and Jainism have also been
composed in Sanskrit.
2. Education in the Medieval Period
The first millennium and the few centuries preceding it saw the flourishing
of higher education at Nalanda, Takshila, Ujjain, &Vikramshila Universities. Art,
Architecture, Painting, Logic, Grammar, Philosophy, Astronomy, Literature,
Buddhism, Hinduism, Arthashastra (Economics & Politics), Law, and Medicine.
Takshila specialized in the study of medicine, while Ujjain laid emphasis
on astronomy. Nalanda, being the biggest centre, handled all branches of
knowledge, and housed up to 10,000 students at its peak.
• Education in medieval India expressed a new perspective in the 11thcentury .
• The muslim established the elementary and secondary schools .
4
• This further let to the commencement of universities like Delhi, Lucknow and
Allahabad
• There was a fresh interaction between Indian and Islamic traditions in the fields
of knowledge like theology ,religion , philosophy ,fine arts ,painting ,architecture,
mathematics ,medicine and astronomy .
• Muslim rulers promoted urban education by building libraries and literary
societies .primary schools called maktabs were established and reading writing
and basic Islamic prayers were taught.
• Secondary schools called Madrasas taught advanced language skills .
• These were setup by sultans nobles and other influential ladies.
• A scholars from Madrasa would be eligible for civil service and to become a
judge.
3. Education in the post Independence era
Education in India falls under the control of both the Union Government
and the states, with some responsibilities lying with the Union and the states
having autonomy for others.
5
1.2 HIGHER EDUCATION OF INDIAThe higher education system in India includes both
1. Private and
2. Public universities.
Public universities are supported by the Government of India and
the state governments, while private universities are mostly supported by various
bodies and societies.
The types of universities include:
1. Central universities, or Union universities are established by an Act of Parliament
and are under the purview of the Department of Higher Education in the Union
Human Resource Development Ministry. The UGC lists 42 central universities.
2. State universities are run by the state government of each of the states and
territories of India, and are usually established by a local legislative assembly act.
As of 30 November 2011, the UGC lists 285 state universities. The oldest
establishment date listed by the UGC is 1857, shared by the University of Mumbai,
the University of Madras and the University of Calcutta. Note that most State
Universities are "affiliating universities" in that they administer a large number of
"affiliated colleges" (many located in very small towns) that typically offer a range of
undergraduate courses, but may also offer post-graduate courses. More established
colleges might even offer PhD programs in some departments with the approval of
the affiliating university.
3. Deemed university, or "Deemed to be University", is a status of autonomy granted
by the Department of Higher Education on the advice of the UGC, under Section 3
of the UGC Act. The UGC list from 23 June 2008 lists 130 deemed
universities. According to this list, the first institute to be granted deemed university
status was Indian Institute of Science which was granted this status on 12 May
1958. Note that in many cases, the same listing by the UGC covers several
institutes. For example, the listing for Homi Bhabha National Institute covers
the Institute of Mathematical Sciences, the Sam Higginbottom Institute of
Agriculture, Technology and Sciences and other institutes.
6
4. Private universities are approved by the UGC. They can grant degrees but they
are not allowed to have off-campus affiliated colleges. The UGC list of private
universities from 7 June 2012 lists 112 private universities.
As of 22 June 2012, the total number of universities in India is 567. There are
universities of some kind in each and every of the 28 states of India as well as three of
the union territories, Chandigarh, Delhi and Pondicherry. The state with the most
universities is Tamil Nadu with 55 universities. It is also the state with the most deemed
universities, numbering 29.Andhra Pradesh has the most state universities
(32), Rajasthan the most private universities (25), while Delhi and Uttar Pradesh have
four central universities each, the largest number of all the states and territories.
Apart from the above universities, other institutions are granted the permission to
autonomously award degrees. However, they do not affiliate colleges and are not
officially called "universities" but "autonomous organizations" or "autonomous institutes".
They fall under the administrative control of the Department of Higher Education. These
organizations include the Indian Institutes of Technology, the National Institutes of
Technology, the Indian Institutes of Science Education and Research, the Indian
Institutes of Management (though these award diplomas, not degrees) and other
autonomous institutes. These institutes are not listed below. Also not listed are institutes
which are under the control of the professional councils, without approval of the UGC,
State Central universities
State universities
Deemed universities
Private universities
Total
Andhra Pradesh 3 33 7 0 43Arunachal Pradesh 1 0 1 1 3Assam 2 4 0 2 8Bihar 1 15 2 0 18Chandigarh 0 1 1 0 2Chhattisgarh 1 10 0 4 15Delhi 4 5 11 0 20Goa 0 1 0 0 1Gujarat 1 18 2 11 32Haryana 1 10 5 6 22Himachal Pradesh 1 4 0 12 17Jammu and Kashmir 2 6 0 0 8Jharkhand 1 7 2 1 11Karnataka 1 22 15 2 40Kerala 1 11 2 0 14Madhya Pradesh 2 15 3 7 27Maharashtra 1 19 21 0 41
7
Manipur 2 0 0 0 2Meghalaya 1 0 1 8 10Mizoram 1 0 0 1 2Nagaland 1 0 0 2 3Odisha 1 12 2 3 18Puducherry 1 0 1 0 2Punjab 1 7 2 3 13Rajasthan 1 14 8 25 48Sikkim 1 0 0 4 5Tamil Nadu 2 24 29 0 55Tripura 1 0 0 1 2Uttar Pradesh 4 23 10 16 53Uttarakhand 1 9 4 10 24West Bengal 1 20 1 1 23Total 42 286 129 115 572
1.3 GROWTH OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN INDIA
The 21st century is the age of knowledge-based economy, and the center-stage
of change. Higher education has not escaped the impact and is in the process of
challenge, thereby challenging the traditional system of education. The disparity in
wealth and quality of life between the developed and developing world has been
attracting the attention of the world. The exponential growth of population in the
developing countries is matched by the exponential growth of knowledge in the
developed world1.
All developing countries the efforts are being made by the respective
Government to promote higher education. Central Government and state Governments
are trying to nurture talent through focusing on the number of Universities and Colleges
for expansion of higher educations. In the Year 1950-59 , there were 30 universities and
695 colleges. This number has increased to 564 Universities and 33023 colleges up to
December 2011. The following table reveals the growth of higher education in India.
8
Year No. of universities No. of colleges
1950-59 30 695
1960-69 55 1542
1970-79 103 3604
1980-89 133 4722
1990-99 190 7346
2000-2010 256 12806
2011 564 33023
year 1950-59
year 1960-69
year 1970-79
year 1980-89
year 1990-99
year 2000-2009
year 2010-2011
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
3055
103133
190
256
564
no of universities
no of universities
9
year 1950-59
year 1960-69
year 1970-79
year 1980-89
year 1990-99
year 2000-2009
year 2010-2011
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
6951542 3604 4722
7346
12806
33023
no of colleges
no of colleges
1.4 EXPENDITURE ON HIGHER EDUCATION IN INDIA
Year Expenditure % of GDP
2006-07 1.14
2007-08 1.09
2008-09 1.23
2009-10 1.25
Source: Economic Survey of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi
The above table indicates percentage of GDP in expenditure on higher education
in the year 2006-07 was 1.14 which increased to 1.25 in the year 2009-10. It means
there is increasing expenditure on higher education by the central Government. Due to
this increasing expenditure there is growth in the institutions which is providing higher
education to the masses. Though there is increasing expenditure by the central
Government in India but comparatively it is less than the developed countries.
10
1.5 HIGHER EDUCATION OF GUJARAT
Gujarat is a lovely place located on the western coast and it is one of the fastest growing states in the country. In Gujarat, there are about 29 universities located across the state. Students from different parts of the country opt for Universities in Gujarat for higher education and research programs.
Gujarat has both private and public universities, many of which are supported by
the Government of India and the state government . Apart from these there are private
universities supported by various bodies and societies and also there are many
research organizations in Gujarat.
In order to increase the knowledge of the students in their subject area the universities in Gujarat conducts events, seminars, conferences, symposium, and paper presentation. Some of the universities also arrange for campus interview and students can find a suitable job for them before getting the degree.
Gujarat also houses some of the best universities providing education on par with the international standard of education. Indian Institute of Management (IIM), Ahmadabad is one of the top colleges for the management studies. Some of the programs are fellow program in management, post graduate program in agribusiness management & public management and policy and one year post-graduate program in management for executives.
11
Universities in Gujarat
Central State Private Deemed Others
(autonomous university0
Research institute
State universitiesSr no. University Location1 Bhavnagar university Bhavnagar2 Centre for environmental and planning technology
university(CEPT)Ahmedabad
3 Dharamsinhdesai university Nadiad4 Dr. babasahebambedkar open university (BAOU) Ahmedabad5 Gujarat ayurved university Jamnagar6 Gujarat forensic science university (GFSU) Gandhinagar7 Gujarat national law university Gandhinagar8 Gujarat technological university Ahmedabad9 Gujarat university Ahmedabad10 Hemchandracharya north Gujarat university (NGU) Patan11 Krantigurushyamji Krishna vermakachchh university Bhuj12 Maharaja sayajirao university (MS) Vadodra13 Sardarpatel university Vallabhvidhyanagar14 Sardarkrushinagardantiwada agricultural university Palanpur15 Saurashtra university Rajkot16 Shree somnath Sanskrit university Veraval17 Veer narmad south Gujarat university Surat18 Children’s university Gujarat Gandhinagar19 Rakshasakti university Jamnagar20 Kamdhenu university21 Anand agricultural university Anand22 Navsari agricultural university Navsari23 Sardarkrushinagardantiwada agricultural university Dantiwada24 Junagadh agricultural university Junagadh
Private universitiesSr no University Location1 R.K. university Rajkot2 Ahmedabad university Ahmedabad3 Rai university Ahmedabad4 Auro university of hospitality and management Surat
5 Calrox teacher’s university Ahmedabad6 Charotar university of science and technology Changa
7 Dhirubhai ambani institute of information and communication technology (DA-IICT)
Gandhinagar
8 Ganpat university Mehsana9 Kadisarva vishwa vidyalaya Gandhinagar10 Indus university Ahmedabad11 Nirma university of science and technology Ahmedabad
12
12 Panditdeendayal petroleum university (PDPU) Gandhinagar
13 Navrachana university Vadodra
14 UKA tarsadia university Bardoli15 Institute of advanced research Gandhinagar
Deemed universitySr no University Location1 Gujarat vidyapith Ahmedabad2 Sardarvallabh national institute of technology, surat Surat3 Auro university Surat4 Sumandeep university Waghodilia,
vadodra
Sr no University Location1 Central university of Gujarat Gandhinagar
Autonomous instituteSr no University Location1 Auro university of hospitality and management Surat2 Academy for decision science Ahmedabad Ahmedabad3 Entrepreneurship development institute of India Gandhinagar4 Indian institute of management Ahmedabad5 Institute of rural management Anand6 National institute of design. Gandhnagar7 Bhaskaracharya institute for space applications and
geo-informatics.Gandhnagar
8 National institute of co-operative management Gandhnagar9 Sardar vallabhbhai national institute of technology Surat10 Indian institute of planning and management. Ahmedabad11 Indian institute of technology Gandhinagar
13
1.6 COMPANY OVERVIEW
Education in valsad district
Introduction
When Gujarat state was formed on 1st may 1960 Valsad district was part of Surat district on bifurcation of Surat district since 1st June 1964 Valsad district came into existence. However Valsad district was bifurcated into Valsad and Navsari districts on 2nd October 1997 from talukas viz. Umargam, Pardi, Dharampur and Valsad were included in Valsad district. Then on bifurcation of Dharampur taluka, Kaparada taluka came into existence thus, there are five talukas in Valsad district at present. District Panchayat Education Committee, Valsad manages all 993 primary schools situated in five talukas.
Valsad district is one of the 26 districts in the Western Indian state of Gujarat. It is bound by Navsari district to the north, Nashik district of Maharashtra state to the east, and Dadra and Nagar Haveli union territory and Thane district of Maharashtra to the south. The Arabian Sea lies west of the district. The coastal Daman enclave of Daman and Diu union territory is bounded by Valsad district on the north, east, and south. The district's administrative capital is Valsad. The district's largest city is Vapi.
The district covers 5,244 square kilometres and is divided into five talukas: Valsad, Pardi, Umargam, Kaparada and Dharampur. According to the 2001 India census,"Census of India 2001: Data from the 2001 Census, including cities, villages and towns (Provisional)". Census Commission of India. Archived from the original on 2004-06-16.Retrieved 2008-11-01. the total population of the district was 1,410,553, with 27.02% of its residents living in urban areas.
Divisions
Talukas – 6 (Valsad, Pardi, Vapi, Dharampur, Kaprada, Umbergaon)Major cities – 2 (Vapi, Valsad)
14
CHAPTER 2:- INTRODUCTION OF STUDY
15
2.1 INTRODUCTION TO TOPIC
Introduction
Human resource Human resource means employees in an organization who strive for increasing its profit
Development : Development is the acquisition of capabilities that are needed to execute the present job or the future expected job.
Climate: Climate is an overall feeling that is conveyed by the physical layout, the way employees interact and the way members of the organization conduct themselves with outsiders
DefinitionsHRD (Human Resources Development) has been defined by various scholars in
various ways. Some of the important definitions of HRD (Human Resources Development) are as follows:
According to Leonard Nadler, "Human resource development is a series of organized activities, conducted within a specialized time and designed to produce behavioral changes."
In the words of Prof. T.V. Rao, "HRD is a process by which the employees of an organization are helped in a continuous and planned way to (i) acquire or sharpen capabilities required to perform various functions associated with their present or expected future roles; (ii) develop their journal capabilities as individual and discover and exploit their own inner potential for their own and /or organizational development purposes; (iii) develop an organizational culture in which superior-subordinate relationship, team work and collaboration among sub-units are strong and contribute to the professional well being, motivation and pride of employees." .
16
According to M.M. Khan, "Human resource development is the across of increasing knowledge, capabilities and positive work attitudes of all people working at all levels in a business undertaking."
The concept of human resource development
Human resource development in the organization context is a process by which the employees of an organization are helped, in a continuous and planned way to:
1. Acquire or sharpen capabilities required to perform various functions associated with their present or expected future roles;
2. Develop their general capabilities as individuals and discover and exploit their own inner potentials for their own and/or organizational development purposes; and
3. Develop an organizational culture in which supervisor-subordinate relationships, teamwork and collaboration among sub-units are strong and contribute to the professional well being, motivation and pride of employees.
Developing HRD climate in an organization
1. Top to bottom efforts.An organization is considered to be a complete organization after including the
top authority to the bottom line of workers. And whenever we talk about development at organization level, effort is needed from top to bottom level. the top authority should not think that their task is to only take decisions, but they should also emphasize on proper implementation of the decisions by adopting various controlling techniques. bottom level workers should have loyal mind set towards their organization, should work with dedication, and should develop a sense of belongingness towards the organization.
2. Motivator role of manager and supervisor.To prepare a good HRD climate, the managers and the supervisors are the key
players. managers and supervisors have to develop the competencies of the employees by updating themselves and sharing their expertise and experiences with the employees.
3.Faith in employees.In the process of developing good HRD climate, the employer should have faith
in employees capabilities -amount invested should be bases on the development of
17
employees. top management should trust that the employees will work for the well being of the organization and society.
4. Free expression of feeling.Clear communication from the top management to the employees and vice versa
should exist in the organization. clear communication helps to establish a good HRD climate.
5. Feedback.Regular feedback is a must to know the drawbacks in the system. this also helps
to gain the confidences of the employees who develop trust in the management and express their opinion freely. feedback will remove weaknesses and establishes a good HRD climate.
6. Helpful nature of employees.Employees should help the management and their colleagues. They should
always to be ready to help the customers too.
7. Supportive personnel management.Personnel policies of the organization should motivate employees to contribute
more on their part. top managements philosophy should be clear towards human resource and its well being to encourage the employees.
8. Motivating employees. Employees should be motivated to take decisions. this concept is risky but gradually brings expertise in the employees to handle similar situation in future. it also develops confidence in the employees. the organization can utilize and develop employees more by assigning risky task.
9. Discouraging stereotypes and favoritism. The management need to avoid those practices which lead to favoritism . management and managers need to give equal importance to all. those who perform well need to be appreciated and those who do not perform well need to be guided. any kind of partiality does not aid in the establishment of good HRD climate.
10. Team spirit. There must be a feeling of belongingness among the employees, and also willingness to work as a team.
Components
The organizational climate consist of following components.
18
1. Organizational structureAn organization structure is actually a snapshot of a work process frozen in times
so that it can be viewed. the structure enables the peoples energy to be focused towards process and goal achievement. an employee must have a clear definition of not only the work structure but also his role in organizing the work. ambiguity in the structure and role does not help in establishing a good HRD climate.
2. Organizational culture.Organization culture is a pattern of belief, knowledge, attitude, and customs that
exist within an organization. organizational culture may result in part from senior management beliefs or form the beliefs of employees.
Organizational culture can be supportive or unsupportive, positive or negative. It can affect the ability or willingness of employees to adopt or perform well within the organization.
3. HR processes The HR system of an organization should be comprehensive enough to take care
of employees from the time they join till the time they leave. there demand must not be ignored, but a feeling of belongingness should be created. the process should be very clear and impartial so that employees have faith in the organization. from recruitment to retirement, the whole process should be according to employees expectations and ability of the employer.
Goals
The goals of HRD system are to develop are as follows.
1. The capabilities of each employee as an individual.
2. The capabilities of each individual in relation to his/her present role.
3. The capabilities of each employee i relation to his/her expected future roles.
4. The dyadic relationship between each employee and his/her supervisor.
5. The team spirit and functioning in every organizational unit.
6. Collaboration among different units of the organization.
7. The organizational overall health and self renewing capabilities which in turn increase the enabling capabilities of individuals, dyads, teams and the entire organization.
19
Benefits.
1. HRD makes people more competent, HRD develops new skill, knowledge and attitude of the people in the concerned organization.
2. With appropriate HRD programmed people become more committed to their jobs. people are assessed on the basis of their performance by having an acceptable performance appraisal system.
3. An environment of trust and respect can be created with the help of HRD.
4. Acceptability towards the change can be created with the help of HRD, employees found themselves better equipped with problem solving capabilities.
5. It improves the all round growth of employees and improves team spirit in the organization. they become more open in the organization, thus new values can be generated.
6. It also help to create the efficiency culture in the organization. it leads to greater organizational effectiveness. resources are properly utilized and goals are achieved in better way.
7. It improves the participation of workers in the organization. it improves the role of workers and workers feel a sense of pride and achievement while performing their jobs.
8. It also helps to collect useful and objective data on employees programmed and policy which further facilitate better human resource planning.
9. Hence it can be conducted that HRD provides a lot of benefits in every organization.
10. So, that importance of concept of HRD should be recognized and given a place of eminence, to face the present and future challenges in the organization.
20
2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW
1. 1978Shaikh T.S (1978) in his Ph.D. Thesis “Personnel Policies and Administration in
Urban Banks” reported that for getting good personnel to Banks all vacancies should be advertised, selection committee should add with expert in it, all interviews must be formally arranged, and proper induction program should be arranged for new employees. He further stated that there should be a separate Human Resource department, planned training programs, clarified promotion criteria known to all, scientific performance appraisal system.
2. 1986Rao and Abraham found that general HRD climate in the organizations appears
to be at a general level.
3. 1987.Kolekar B.D. (1987) in his PhD thesis “A Study Of HRD In Selected Public
Sector Undertakings In Maharashtra And Goa” suggested to imparting long term training, appointing a director (T&D) as concrete step towards H.R.D., valid and reliable performance evaluation system, and issuing appreciation letters to outstanding employees. Researcher had considered only recruitment, selection, training and development and performance appraisal. He focuses on employee counseling etc. and use of computer in functioning of HRD effectively.
4.1992 Dashawant B.R. (1992) in his M.Phil Dissertation “Workers Participation in
Management with Special Reference to a Cooperative Sugar Factory” reported that, management should create an atmosphere conductive for industrial democracy in the factory, workers should be made shareholders of the factory, management should formulate different shop councils and a joint management council and worker’s director should be elected from among the employees. Workers Participation in Management is one of the activities of Human Resource Development.
21
5. 1997krishna and Rao carried out a comprehensive empirical study in BHEL,
Hyderabad and found that the HRD climate in the organization encouraged middle and senior managers.
6. 1998Nair R.N. (1998) in his Ph.D. Thesis “A study Of Effectiveness Of Executive
Development Programs In Urban Co-Operative Banks With Reference To Konkan Region, Maharashtra” studied existing executive training and development program of 33Banks and evaluated newly developed system to confirm it’s utility. He advised Banks that, training need should be properly identified, training should be time bound and restructured as per the need, the schedule of training and infrastructure should be prepared, pre and post training appraisal program should be conducted and cost benefit favorableness of training program should be prepared.
7. 2000Alphonsa V.K. (2000) has published his study conducted in a large private
hospital in Hyderabad under the title “HRD Climate in a Private Hospital in Hyderabad An Empirical Study” This study has attempted to analyze HRD climate, as perceived by the supervisors, and suggest that top management of the hospital may further advance the hospital policy in enhancing the physical, mental and emotional capabilities of the individuals, in order to create and maintain a productive HRD climate.
8. 2000Suresh Kumar,Rongala (2000) in his Ph.D.Thesis “Management And Executive
Training Programs And Their Impact On Productivity In Selected Industrial Units In Maharashtra” reported that improvement need to be made in training methods, organizations training courses and in training skills. He expressed need for accurate and systematic record system of training and performance appraisal results. Researcher had covered only training, performance appraisal and career planning sub systems of HRD.
9. 2002Mishra Padmakali Ramakrishna and BharadwajGopa (2002), had given an
account under the title “HRD Climate: An Empirical Study among Private Sector Managers” and the study results revealed that the overall HRD climate in the organization covered under study was good. Significant differences were also observed among three levels of management with respect to different dimensions of HRD climate as well as overall HRD climate.
10. 2005
22
Sampath and kalpana conducted a study and found that too a large extend organization where knowledge workers work, enjoy a good HRD climate. the strength of the HRD climate emerged from the organizations belief that the human factors is a critical factor and needs commitment to development, team spirit, helpfulness and providing trainings on skills and knowledge. results indicated the presence of psychological climate conducive for development.
11. 2006 Mufeed examined the HRD climate in major hospitals. The result indicated
existence of poor HRD climate in hospitals.12. 2007
Srimannarayana conducted a survey in local bank of Dubai and found that good HRD climate was prevalent in the organization. he found out the differences in the perception of employees regarding the HRD climate on the basis of demographic variables.
13. 2008Purang Pooja (2008) in the article titled as “Dimensions of HRD Climate
Enhancing Organizational Commitment in Indian Organizations” measures the HRD climate in terms of various dimensions like participation, succession planning, training, performance appraisal and job enrichment and its relationship between the ten dimensions of HRD climate and organizational commitment. The study propounds that the positive perception which further enhances the performance of manage.
14. 2009Mr. S. Sundararajam (2009), in “Emerging Trends of HRD Practices in
Cooperative Sector- Perspective Approach” has observed on the basis of survey of employees working in a few cooperative organizations located in the south west part of Tamilnadu, that overall HRD climate in the cooperative sector organizations appeared to be neither good nor bad. The senior employees perceived that the HRD climate should be improved in the present competitive environment. In general, the employees showed unfavorable attitude towards, HRD policies and practices. The author gives overall conclusion of his study that the development of human is a specialized operative function of personnel department. Lastly he says that we cannot prepare the future for the next generation, but we can prepare the next generation for the future.
2.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY.
The study includes following objectives.
1. To study the HRD climate of under graduate and post graduate institutes.
2. To study the differences in the perception of faculties on the basis of "Gender".
23
3. To study the differences in the perception of faculties on the basis of "Age".
4. To study the differences in the perception of faculties on the basis of "Experience".
5. To study the differences in the perception of faculties on the basis of "Qualification".
6. To study the differences in the perception of faculties on the basis of "endorsement of concerned university”.
7. To study the factor analysis regarding perception of faculties towards Human Resource Development Climate.
2.4 HYPOTHESIS
hypothesis 1h0: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is independent of gender.
h1: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is dependent of gender.
hypothesis 2:h0: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is independent of Age.
h1: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is dependent of Age.
hypothesis 3:h0: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is independent of Qualification.
h1: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is dependent of Qualification.
hypothesis 4:h0: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is independent of Experience.
h1: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is dependent of Experience.
hypothesis 5:h0: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is independent of their endorsement of concerned university.
h1: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is dependent of their endorsement of concerned university.
24
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
25
Research design Descriptive
Source of data Primary:- survey
Secondary
Articles, journals.
Websites.
Data collection method. Survey method and approach is through
personal
Data collection instrument/tool Questionnaire
Type of questionnaire Structured
Type of questions closed ended
likert 5 point scale(not at all true, rarely
true, sometimes true, mostly true and
always true. where 1.0 indicates extremely
poor HRD climate and 5.0 indicates
extraordinarily good HRD climate)
Population size and sample size Colleges in valsad district (25)
Sample size 213
Sampling method Convenience
Data analysis tool Chi square and factor analysis.
26
CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
27
DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE RESPONDENTS
GENDER OF RESPONDENTSNumber of respondents
Male 116Female 97Total 213
AGE OF RESPONDENTS21-25 5426-30 9331-35 3636-40 2841 & above 2Total 213
EXPERIENCE OF THE RESPONDENTS“Less than 1 & equal to 1” 26“More than 1 less than & equal to 3” 65“More than 3 less than & equal to 6” 66“More than 6 less than & equal to 10” 41“More than 10 less than & equal to 15” 1115 & above 4Total 213
QUALIFICATION OF THE REPONDENTSGraduates 22Post graduates 171ph.D 20Total 213
ENDORSEMENT BY CONCERNED UNIVERSITY.Yes 110No 103Total 213
28
Sr no. Not at all true
Rarely true
Sometimes true
Mostly true
Almost true
Total
1 14 28 63 55 53 2132 2 32 50 78 51 2133 2 0 10 201 0 2134 5 15 45 70 78 2135 9 24 59 68 53 2136 10 25 33 90 55 2137 8 8 39 73 85 2138 28 15 53 45 72 2139 22 32 48 57 54 21310 15 21 48 63 66 21311 21 27 52 57 56 21312 26 37 50 46 54 21313 6 26 53 52 76 21314 3 14 47 84 65 21315 11 14 62 63 63 21316 2 21 43 102 45 21317 5 10 39 84 75 21318 7 31 31 81 63 21319 28 35 46 50 54 213
Sr no. Factors Average mean1 Nature of work 3.759392 Organization climate 3.6694843 Performance management 3.6281694 Employee development 3.716432
29
HYPOTHESIS 1
h0: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is independent of gender.
h1: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is dependent of gender.
Sub hypothesis 1
ho:- the perception of faculties towards nature of the work of an institute is independent of gender.
h1:- the perception of faculties towards nature of the work of an institute is dependent of gender.
1. Support * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.619a 4 .460
Likelihood Ratio 3.643 4 .456
Linear-by-Linear Association .315 1 .575
N of Valid Cases 160
2. Encourage * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 9.243a 4 .055
Likelihood Ratio 9.406 4 .052
Linear-by-Linear Association .635 1 .425
N of Valid Cases 160
30
3. Resources * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 6.797a 4 .147
Likelihood Ratio 7.246 4 .123
Linear-by-Linear Association .110 1 .740
N of Valid Cases 160
4. New methods * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.754a 4 .440
Likelihood Ratio 3.904 4 .419
Linear-by-Linear Association .093 1 .760
N of Valid Cases 160
Interpretation Nature of work
1 0.460 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
2 0.055 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
3 0.147 >0.05 H0 is rejected
4 0.440 >0.05 H0 is rejected
31
Sub hypothesis 2.
ho:- the perception of faculties towards organizational climate of an institute is independent of gender.
h1:- the perception of faculties towards organizational climate of an institute is dependent of gender.
5. Climate * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.920a 4 .571
Likelihood Ratio 2.941 4 .568
Linear-by-Linear Association .021 1 .885
N of Valid Cases 160
6. Trustees * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.313a 4 .507
Likelihood Ratio 3.323 4 .505
Linear-by-Linear Association .747 1 .387
N of Valid Cases 160
32
7. Senior * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.127a 4 .389
Likelihood Ratio 4.189 4 .381
Linear-by-Linear Association .696 1 .404
N of Valid Cases 160
8. Hesitate * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.223a 4 .377
Likelihood Ratio 4.251 4 .373
Linear-by-Linear Association .989 1 .320
N of Valid Cases 160
9. Problem * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 6.920a 4 .140
Likelihood Ratio 7.087 4 .131
Linear-by-Linear Association .008 1 .930
N of Valid Cases 160
33
Interpretation
Sub hypothesis 3.
ho:- the perception of faculties towards performance management of an institute is independent of gender.
h1:- the perception of faculties towards organizational climate of an institute is dependent of gender.
10.Appreciate * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.933a 4 .204
Likelihood Ratio 6.000 4 .199
Linear-by-Linear Association .570 1 .450
N of Valid Cases 160
11. Promotion * gender
34
Organizational climate
5 0.571 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
6 0.507 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
7 0.389 >0.05 H0 is rejected
8 0.377 >0.05 H0 is rejected
9 0.140 >0.05 H0 is rejected
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.026a 4 .285
Likelihood Ratio 5.124 4 .275
Linear-by-Linear Association .857 1 .355
N of Valid Cases 160
12. Rewards * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 6.354a 4 .174
Likelihood Ratio 6.521 4 .163
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.746 1 .186
N of Valid Cases 160
13. Feedback gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 2.208a 4 .698
Likelihood Ratio 2.228 4 .694
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.217 1 .270
N of Valid Cases 160
14. Performance * gender
35
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.033a 4 .284
Likelihood Ratio 6.189 4 .185
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.826 1 .093
N of Valid Cases 160
Performance management
10 0.204 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
11 0.285 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
12 0.174 >0.05 H0 is rejected
13 0.698 >0.05 H0 is rejected
14 0.284 >0.05 H0 is rejected
Interpretation:
Performance management
10 0.204 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
11 0.285 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
12 0.174 >0.05 H0 is rejected
13 0.698 >0.05 H0 is rejected
14 0.284 >0.05 H0 is rejected
36
Sub hypothesis 4
ho:- the perception of faculties towards employee development of an institute is independent of gender.
h1:- the perception of faculties towards employee development of an institute is dependent of gender.
15. Opportunities * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.065a 4 .397
Likelihood Ratio 4.210 4 .378
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.644 1 .200
N of Valid Cases 160
16. Sponsored * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 7.339a 4 .119
Likelihood Ratio 8.193 4 .085
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.947 1 .163
N of Valid Cases 160
37
17. Training program * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 14.728a 4 .005
Likelihood Ratio 17.193 4 .002
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.403 1 .065
N of Valid Cases 160
18. Career opportunity * gender
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.310a 4 .366
Likelihood Ratio 4.446 4 .349
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.039 1 .081
N of Valid Cases 160
19. Personnel policies * gender
38
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 1.661a 4 .798
Likelihood Ratio 1.680 4 .794
Linear-by-Linear Association .030 1 .863
N of Valid Cases 160
Interpretation:Employee development
15 0.397 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
16 0.119 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
17 0.005 >0.05 H0 is accepted
18 0.366 >0.05 H0 is rejected
19 0.798 >0.05 H0 is rejected
hypothesis 2:
h0: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is independent of Age.
h1: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is dependent of Age.
Sub hypothesis 1 :-
h0: the perception of faculties towards nature of work of an institute is independent of Age.
h1: the perception of faculties towards nature of work of an institute is dependent of Age.
1. Support * age
39
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 32.406a 16 .009
Likelihood Ratio 34.433 16 .005
Linear-by-Linear Association 17.081 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 213
2. Encourage * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 19.483a 16 .244
Likelihood Ratio 20.052 16 .218
Linear-by-Linear Association .123 1 .725
N of Valid Cases 213
3. Resources * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 30.529a 16 .015
Likelihood Ratio 33.200 16 .007
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.112 1 .078
N of Valid Cases 213
40
4. New methods * age
Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 14.512a 16 .561
Likelihood Ratio 17.924 16 .328
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.842 1 .050
N of Valid Cases 213
Interpretation Nature of work
1 0.009 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
2 0.244 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
3 0.015 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
4 0.561 >0.05 H0 is rejected
Sub hypothesis 2 :-
h0: the perception of faculties towards organizational climate of an institute is independent of Age.
h1: the perception of faculties towards organizational climate of an institute is dependent of Age.
5. Climate * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 31.771a 16 .011
Likelihood Ratio 37.954 16 .002
Linear-by-Linear Association .964 1 .326
N of Valid Cases 213
41
6. Trustees * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 20.562a 16 .196
Likelihood Ratio 22.605 16 .125
Linear-by-Linear Association .753 1 .385
N of Valid Cases 213
7. Senior * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 13.349a 16 .647
Likelihood Ratio 13.695 16 .621
Linear-by-Linear Association .014 1 .907
N of Valid Cases 213
8. Hesitate * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 39.826a 16 .001
Likelihood Ratio 42.116 16 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 8.980 1 .003
N of Valid Cases 213
42
9. Problem * age
Value DfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 21.100a 16 .175
Likelihood Ratio 20.863 16 .184
Linear-by-Linear Association .199 1 .656
N of Valid Cases 213
Interpretation Organizational climate
5 0.011 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
6 0.196 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
7 0.647 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
8 0.001 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
9 0.175 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
Sub hypothesis3 :- h0: the perception of faculties towards performance management of an institute is independent of Age.
h1: the perception of faculties towards performance management of an institute is dependent of Age
10. Appreciate * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 17.675a 16 .343
Likelihood Ratio 18.011 16 .323
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.962 1 .085
N of Valid Cases 213
43
11. Promotion * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 31.314a 16 .012
Likelihood Ratio 32.252 16 .009
Linear-by-Linear Association .876 1 .349
N of Valid Cases 213
12. Rewards * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 28.217a 16 .030
Likelihood Ratio 27.776 16 .034
Linear-by-Linear Association 5.937 1 .015
N of Valid Cases 213
13. Feedback * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 25.920a 16 .055
Likelihood Ratio 27.413 16 .037
Linear-by-Linear Association .642 1 .423
N of Valid Cases 213
44
14. Performance * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 21.097a 16 .175
Likelihood Ratio 23.732 16 .096
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.892 1 .169
N of Valid Cases 213
Interpretation Performance management
10 0.343 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
11 0.012 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
12 0.030 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
13 0.055 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
14 0.175 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
Sub hypothesis 4h0: the perception of faculties towards employee development of an institute is independent of Age.
h1: the perception of faculties towards employee development of an institute is dependent of Age
15. Opportunities * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 30.465a 16 .016
Likelihood Ratio 31.738 16 .011
Linear-by-Linear Association .074 1 .786
N of Valid Cases 213
45
16. Sponsored * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 27.818a 16 .033
Likelihood Ratio 24.314 16 .083
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.825 1 .093
N of Valid Cases 213
17. Training program * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 21.431a 16 .163
Likelihood Ratio 23.622 16 .098
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.469 1 .063
N of Valid Cases 213
18. Career opportunity * age
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 23.469a 16 .102
Likelihood Ratio 23.959 16 .090
Linear-by-Linear Association .077 1 .782
N of Valid Cases 213
19. Personnel policies * age
46
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 12.332a 16 .721
Likelihood Ratio 13.110 16 .665
Linear-by-Linear Association .360 1 .549
N of Valid Cases 213
Interpretation: Employee development
15 0.016 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
16 0.033 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
17 0.163> 0.05 H0 is rejected
18 0.102 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
19 0.721 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
HYPOTHESIS 3:h0: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is independent of Experience.
h1: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is dependent of Experience
sub hypothesis1:
h0: the perception of faculties towards nature of work of an institute is independent of experience.
h1: the perception of faculties towards nature of work of an institute is dependent of experience
1. Support * experience
47
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 46.072a 20 .001
Likelihood Ratio 48.360 20 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 11.189 1 .001
N of Valid Cases 213
2. Encourage * experience
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 21.710a 20 .356
Likelihood Ratio 24.591 20 .218
Linear-by-Linear Association .794 1 .373
N of Valid Cases 213
3. Resources * experience
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 43.026a 20 .002
Likelihood Ratio 48.299 20 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.383 1 .066
N of Valid Cases 213
48
4. New methods * experience
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 33.116a 20 .033
Likelihood Ratio 33.622 20 .029
Linear-by-Linear Association 4.203 1 .040
N of Valid Cases 213
Interpretation Nature of work
1 0.001 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
2 0.356 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
3 0.002< 0.05 H0 is accepted
4 0.033 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
sub hypothesis2 :h0: the perception of faculties towards organization climate of an institute is independent of experience.
h1: the perception of faculties towards organization climate of an institute is dependent of experience
5. Climate * experience
49
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 26.902a 20 .138
Likelihood Ratio 30.022 20 .069
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.806 1 .094
N of Valid Cases 213
6. Trustees * experience
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 22.058a 20 .337
Likelihood Ratio 25.764 20 .174
Linear-by-Linear Association .885 1 .347
N of Valid Cases 213
7. Senior * experience.
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 22.058a 20 .337
Likelihood Ratio 25.764 20 .174
Linear-by-Linear Association .885 1 .347
N of Valid Cases 213
8. Hesitate * experience
50
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 39.071a 20 .007
Likelihood Ratio 39.179 20 .006
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.010 1 .083
N of Valid Cases 213
9. Problem * experience
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 54.481a 20 .000
Likelihood Ratio 58.656 20 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association .728 1 .394
N of Valid Cases 213
Interpretation:-Organization climate
5 0.138 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
6 0.337 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
7 0.508> 0.05 H0 is rejected
8 0.007 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
9 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
sub hypothesis 3:h0: the perception of faculties towards performance management of an institute is independent of experience.
51
h1: the perception of faculties towards performance management of an institute is dependent of experience
10. Appreciate * experience
Value DfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 36.444a 20 .014
Likelihood Ratio 38.345 20 .008
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.688 1 .194
N of Valid Cases 213
11. Promotion * experience
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 61.996a 20 .000
Likelihood Ratio 64.250 20 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.443 1 .230
N of Valid Cases 213
52
12. Rewards * experience
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 61.996a 20 .000
Likelihood Ratio 64.250 20 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.443 1 .230
N of Valid Cases 213
13. Feedback * experience
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 25.252a 20 .192
Likelihood Ratio 25.379 20 .187
Linear-by-Linear Association .029 1 .865
N of Valid Cases 213
14. Performance * experience
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 35.848a 20 .016
Likelihood Ratio 39.782 20 .005
Linear-by-Linear Association .129 1 .720
N of Valid Cases 213
53
Interpretation:-Performance management
10 0.014 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
11 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
12 0.000< 0.05 H0 is accepted
13 0.192 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
14 0.016 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
sub hypothesis 4:
h0: the perception of faculties towards employee development of an institute is independent of experience.
h1: the perception of faculties towards employee development of an institute is dependent of experience
15. Opportunities * experience
54
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 38.622a 20 .007
Likelihood Ratio 39.741 20 .005
Linear-by-Linear Association .147 1 .701
N of Valid Cases 213
16. Sponsored * experience
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 31.575a 20 .048
Likelihood Ratio 31.086 20 .054
Linear-by-Linear Association .333 1 .564
N of Valid Cases 213
17. Training program * experience
55
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 51.801a 20 .000
Likelihood Ratio 51.646 20 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association .067 1 .796
N of Valid Cases 213
18. Career opportunity * experience
Value DfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 25.572a 20 .180
Likelihood Ratio 24.478 20 .222
Linear-by-Linear Association .625 1 .429
N of Valid Cases 213
19. Personnel policies * experience
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 41.872a 20 .003
Likelihood Ratio 43.906 20 .002
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.034 1 .309
N of Valid Cases 213
Interpretation:-
56
Employee development
15 0.007 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
16 0.048 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
17 0.000< 0.05 H0 is accepted
18 0.180 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
19 0.003 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
HYPOTHESIS 4:h0: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is independent of Qualification.
h1: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is dependent of Qualification
sub hypothesis 1:
h0: the perception of faculties towards nature of work of an institute is independent of Qualification.
h1: the perception of faculties towards nature of work of an institute is dependent of Qualification
1. Support * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 28.101a 8 .000
Likelihood Ratio 25.258 8 .001
Linear-by-Linear Association 19.492 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 213
2. Encourage * qualification
57
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 12.963a 8 .113
Likelihood Ratio 13.274 8 .103
Linear-by-Linear Association 6.768 1 .009
N of Valid Cases 213
3. Resources * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 13.075a 8 .109
Likelihood Ratio 11.963 8 .153
Linear-by-Linear Association 6.442 1 .011
N of Valid Cases 213
4. New methods * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 7.686a 8 .465
Likelihood Ratio 9.650 8 .290
Linear-by-Linear Association 6.335 1 .012
N of Valid Cases 213
58
Interpretation:-Nature of work
1 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
2 0.113 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
3 0.109> 0.05 H0 is rejected
4 0.465 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
sub hypothesis2 :h0: the perception of faculties towards organizational climate of an institute is independent of Qualification.
h1: the perception of faculties towards organizational climate of an institute is dependent of Qualification
5. Climate * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 6.917a 8 .546
Likelihood Ratio 9.121 8 .332
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.930 1 .087
N of Valid Cases 213
6. Trustees * qualification
Value DfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 9.004a 8 .342
Likelihood Ratio 12.511 8 .130
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.377 1 .241
N of Valid Cases 213
59
7. Senior * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 12.664a 8 .124
Likelihood Ratio 13.914 8 .084
Linear-by-Linear Association 3.778 1 .052
N of Valid Cases 213
8. Hesitate * qualification
Value DfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 10.049a 8 .262
Likelihood Ratio 13.856 8 .086
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.252 1 .263
N of Valid Cases 213
9. Problem * qualification
Value DfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 17.491a 8 .025
Likelihood Ratio 19.935 8 .011
Linear-by-Linear Association .114 1 .735
N of Valid Cases 213
60
Interpretation:-Organization climate
5 0.546 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
6 0.342 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
7 0.124> 0.05 H0 is rejected
8 0.262 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
9 0.025< 0.05 H0 is accepted
sub hypothesis 3:h0: the perception of faculties towards performance management of an institute is independent of Qualification.
h1: the perception of faculties towards performance management of an institute is dependent of Qualification
10. Appreciate * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 5.865a 8 .662
Likelihood Ratio 7.505 8 .483
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.898 1 .089
N of Valid Cases 213
11. Promotion * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 6.045a 8 .642
Likelihood Ratio 5.922 8 .656
Linear-by-Linear Association .357 1 .550
N of Valid Cases 213
61
12. Rewards * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 19.270a 8 .013
Likelihood Ratio 20.037 8 .010
Linear-by-Linear Association 6.738 1 .009
N of Valid Cases 213
13. Feedback * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 4.740a 8 .785
Likelihood Ratio 5.808 8 .669
Linear-by-Linear Association .109 1 .742
N of Valid Cases 213
14. Performance * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 9.949a 8 .269
Likelihood Ratio 10.418 8 .237
Linear-by-Linear Association .124 1 .725
N of Valid Cases 213
62
Interpretation:-Performance management
10 0.662 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
11 0.642 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
12 0.013< 0.05 H0 is accepted
13 0.785 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
14 0.269> 0.05 H0 is rejected
sub hypothesis4:
h0: the perception of faculties towards employee development of an institute is independent of Qualification.
h1: the perception of faculties towards employee development of an institute is dependent of Qualification
15. Opportunities * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 8.554a 8 .381
Likelihood Ratio 9.896 8 .272
Linear-by-Linear Association 2.091 1 .148
N of Valid Cases 213
63
16. Sponsored * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 11.276a 8 .187
Likelihood Ratio 13.066 8 .110
Linear-by-Linear Association .357 1 .550
N of Valid Cases 213
17. Training program * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 12.718a 8 .122
Likelihood Ratio 14.674 8 .066
Linear-by-Linear Association .230 1 .632
N of Valid Cases 213
18. Career opportunity * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 10.042a 8 .262
Likelihood Ratio 12.729 8 .122
Linear-by-Linear Association .043 1 .835
N of Valid Cases 213
64
19. Personnel policies * qualification
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 8.652a 8 .373
Likelihood Ratio 8.901 8 .351
Linear-by-Linear Association .246 1 .620
N of Valid Cases 213
Interpretation:-Employee development
15 0.381 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
16 0.187 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
17 0.122> 0.05 H0 is rejected
18 0.262> 0.05 H0 is rejected
19 0.373> 0.05 H0 is rejected
65
HYPOTHESIS 5:h0: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is independent of their endorsement by a concerned university
h1: the perception of faculties towards HRD climate of an institute is dependent of their endorsement by a concerned university
sub hypothesis1:
h0: the perception of faculties towards nature of work of an institute is independent of their endorsement by a concerned university
h1: the perception of faculties towards nature of work of an institute is dependent of their endorsement by a concerned university
1. Support * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 40.549a 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 44.747 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 29.140 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 213
2. Encourage * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 21.278a 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 22.460 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 15.580 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 213
66
3. Resources * endorsed university
Value DfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 32.718a 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 39.345 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 28.516 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 213
4. New methods * endorsed university
Value DfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 24.868a 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 25.649 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 10.265 1 .001
N of Valid Cases 213
Interpretation:-Nature of work
1 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
2 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
3 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
4 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
67
sub hypothesis 2 :
h0: the perception of faculties towards organization climate of an institute is independent of their endorsement by a concerned university
h1: the perception of faculties towards organization climate of an institute is dependent of their endorsement by a concerned university
5. Climate * endorsed university
Value DfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 20.251a 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 21.652 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 12.831 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 213
6. Trustees * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 11.423a 4 .022
Likelihood Ratio 12.414 4 .015
Linear-by-Linear Association 6.051 1 .014
N of Valid Cases 213
68
7. Senior * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 11.182a 4 .025
Likelihood Ratio 11.305 4 .023
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.715 1 .190
N of Valid Cases 213
8. Hesitate * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 7.470a 4 .113
Likelihood Ratio 7.615 4 .107
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.022 1 .312
N of Valid Cases 213
9. Problem * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 26.624a 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 28.238 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 12.977 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 213
69
Interpretation:-Organization climate
5 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
6 0.022 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
7 0.025 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
8 0.113 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
9 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
sub hypothesis3 :
h0: the perception of faculties towards performance management of an institute is independent of their endorsement by a concerned university
h1: the perception of faculties towards performance management of an institute is dependent of their endorsement by a concerned university
10. Appreciate * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 25.101a 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 26.211 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 23.320 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 213
70
11. Promotion * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 31.648a 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 34.283 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 30.465 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 213
12. Rewards * endorsed university
Value DfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 41.147a 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 43.602 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 36.740 1 .000
N of Valid Cases 213
13. Feedback * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 7.493a 4 .112
Likelihood Ratio 7.773 4 .100
Linear-by-Linear Association 6.520 1 .011
N of Valid Cases 213
71
14. Performance * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 6.164a 4 .187
Likelihood Ratio 6.280 4 .179
Linear-by-Linear Association 5.155 1 .023
N of Valid Cases 213
Interpretation:-Performance management
10 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
11 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
12 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
13 0.112 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
14 0.187 > 0.05 H0 is rejected
72
sub hypothesis4:
h0: the perception of faculties towards employee development of an institute is independent of their endorsement by a concerned university
h1: the perception of faculties towards employee development of an institute is dependent of their endorsement by a concerned university
15. Opportunities * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 14.479a 4 .006
Likelihood Ratio 15.618 4 .004
Linear-by-Linear Association 7.322 1 .007
N of Valid Cases 213
16. Sponsored * endorsed university
Value DfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 6.378a 4 .173
Likelihood Ratio 7.198 4 .126
Linear-by-Linear Association .501 1 .479
N of Valid Cases 213
73
17. Training program * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 17.700a 4 .001
Likelihood Ratio 18.824 4 .001
Linear-by-Linear Association 4.201 1 .040
N of Valid Cases 213
18. Career opportunity * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 21.676a 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 23.115 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 11.082 1 .001
N of Valid Cases 213
19. Personnel policies * endorsed university
Value dfAsymp. Sig. (2-
sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 26.006a 4 .000
Likelihood Ratio 26.816 4 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association 7.634 1 .006
N of Valid Cases 213
74
Interpretation:-Employee development
15 0.006 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
16 0.173>0.05 H0 is rejected
17 0.001 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
18 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
19 0.000 < 0.05 H0 is accepted
75
FACTOR ANALYSIS
KMO and Bartlett's Test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.
.918
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity
Approx. Chi-Square 2.811E3
Df 171
Sig. .000
76
71.032 indicates that components in the rotated matrix are more important and having
weight age of 71.032% while rest of the other i.e. 29% indicates least important
components.
77
78
From the rotated component matrix our new factors of HRD climate are as follows.
SrNo.
Parameters Not atAll
True
RarelyTrue
SomeTimesTrue
MostlyTrue
AlmostAlways
TrueFavorable organizational climate1. Management Totally supports
their Faculties to make their work more Enjoyable
2. Delegation of authority to encourage faculties to develop handling higher Responsibility is common in institute
3. All the necessary resources and Facilities are provided by your institute to make your job more effective.
4. Faculties are encouraged to experiment with new methods and creative ideas
5. Institute climate is favorable to the faculties for developing new skills and knowledge.
6. Trustees of your institute give importance to HR and treats humanly.
7. When faculties do good work the superiors take special care to appreciate it.
8. If you are qualified and experienced for the promotion to the next level then are you getting it.
9. Rewards are given to faculties for their better performance and contribution.
10. Faculties are properly communicated their feedback given by students, superiors, colleagues etc.
Co-operation among faculties and personnel policies11. Faculties do not hesitate to
discuss their problems with their superiors.
12. When problems arise, people
79
discuss their problem trying to solve them rather than accusing each other at the back.
13. Senior faculties in the organization point out career opportunities to junior.
14. The personnel policies of the institute facilitate faculties’ development.
Feedback and training15. When performance feedback
is given to faculties, they take it seriously using it for their development.
16. Faculties try to learn and implement new things from training programs attended.
Seniors role in development of juniors17. Seniors help juniors to learn
their jobs.
FINDINGS
80
1.Context of gender.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception of “nature of work, organizational climate, performance management and
employee development” of the education institution have relationship with the gender of
the employees. This indicates that the HRD climate has a influence with the gender in
the education institutes.
2. context of age.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding nature of work of the education institute “support system
and resources provided” has no relationship with the age, while “delegation of
authority and encouragement to experiment with new ideas” has relationship with
age.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding organizational climate of the education institute “developing
new skills & knowledge and hesitation to discuss problem with superiors “ has no
relationship with age, while” trustees to treat humanly, seniors help juniors and
solving problems rather than accusing” has relationship with age.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding performance management of the education institute
“promotion and reward “has no relation with age, while “appreciation,
communication of feedback and performance feedback for development” has
relationship with age.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding employee development of the education institute “FDPs and
training” has no relationship with age, while “implementing new things, career
opportunities and personnel policies” has relationship with age.
3. context of experience
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding nature of work of the education institute “management
support, resources and encouraged to experiment new ideas & methods” has no
81
relationship with experience. while, “delegation of authority” has relationship with
experience.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding organization climate of the education institute “hesitate to
discuss problems and discussing problems rather than accusing” has no
relationship with experience. While “climate for developing new skills, trustees to
treat humanly and seniors help juniors to learn their jobs” has relationship with
experience.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding performance management of the education institute
”appreciation, promotion, rewards and performance feedback for development”
has no relationship with experience. While, “feedback of communication” has
relationship with experience.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding employee development of the education institute “FDPs,
training, learning new things and personnel policies” has no relationship with
experience. While,” seniors point out career opportunities to junior “ has
relationship with experience.
4. context of qualification.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding nature of work of the education institute “management
supports” has no relationship with qualification. While “delegation of authority ,
resources and experiments with new methods /ideas” has relationship with
qualification.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding organizational climate of the education institute “discussing
problems rather than accusing” has no relationship with qualification. While,
“climate for developing skills/ knowledge, trustees to treat humanly, =seniors
help juniors and hesitation to discuss problem with superiors” has relationship
with qualification.
82
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding performance management of the education institute
“rewards for better performances and contribution” has no relationship with
qualification. While, “appreciation, promotion, communication of feedback,
performance of feedback for development” has relationship with qualification.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding employee development of the education institute has
relationship with qualification
5. Context of endorsement by concerned university.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding nature of work of the education institute has no relationship
with endorsement by concerned university.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding organization climate of the education institute “institute
climate for developing skills/knowledge, trustees treats humanly, seniors help
juniors, discussing problems rather than accusing” has no relationship with
endorsement by concerned university. While, “hesitation to discuss problems
with superiors” has relationship with endorsement by concerned university.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding performance management of the education institute
“appreciation, promotion, rewards” has no relationship with endorsement by
concerned university. While “communication of feedback and performance
feedback for development” has relationship with endorsement by concerned
university.
From the data analysis, it has being found that HRD climate in context with
perception regarding employee development of the education institute “FDPs,
learning/ implementing new things, seniors faculties pointing out career
opportunities, personnel policies” has no relationship with endorsement by
concerned university. While “seriousness of training” has relationship with
endorsement by concerned university.
83
6. Through factor analysis there are 4 factors which contribute to our study in
perception of faculties towards Human Resource Development. Factor name are as
follows Favorable organizational climate Co-operation among faculties and personnel policies Feedback and training Seniors role in development of juniors
84
SUGGESTIONS
More rigid and transparent HR policies should be introduced. HR policies should
be designed keeping in view the common benefits of employees and institutes to
make it easily acceptable. There should be scope to upgrade the policy as the
dynamic work environment demands.
HR policies should aim at employee development. the polices designed should
aim at supplying trained, upgraded motivated and engaged work force to the
institute. For this they should focus on the developmental aspects of employees.
Employees with endorsed university should get the added advantage as
compared to who has not been endorsed by concern university.
Management should encourage performance based rewards.
Need based nominations of faculty towards faculty development programs
(FDPs) should be encouraged. Institutes should aim at developing competent
employees. For this, they should focus on competencies of every faculty and
thus nominate them for faculty development programs in their domains, rather
then for generalized developmental programs
85
LIMITATIONS OF STUDY
1. There is every chance that the respondents may have been biased towards their organization.
2. The sample respondents do not represent every institute of Valsad district.
3. Due to busy work schedule of respondents so they were delaying to respond.
86
CONCLUSION
HRD climate plays a very important role in the success of any organization because it
directly or indirectly affects the performances of employees. If HRD climate is healthy
and favorable, employees contribute their best towards the achievement of their
organizational goals. The present study shows that HRD climate in the institute in
context of nature of work organizational climate, performance management and
employee development is above average so there is some of scope for improvement in
the HRD climate.
87
ANNEXURE
88
QUESTIONNAIRE
“Perception Of Faculties Towards Human Resource Development Climate”
1. Gender Male Female
2. Age______________________________
3. Experience ________________________
4. Qualification Postgraduate Ph.D Others(Specify)________
5. Have you been endorsed by an concerned university Yes No
SrNo.
Parameters Not atAll
True
RarelyTrue
SomeTimesTrue
MostlyTrue
AlmostAlways
TrueNature of the work1. Management Totally supports their
Faculties to make their work more Enjoyable
2. Delegation of authority to encourage faculties to develop handling higher Responsibility is common in institute
3. All the necessary resources and Facilities are provided by your institute to make your job more effective.
4. Faculties are encouraged to experiment with new methods and creative ideas
Organization Climate
5. Institute climate is favorable to the faculties for developing new skills and knowledge.
6. Trustees of your institute give importance to HR and treats humanly.
7. Seniors help junior to learn their Jobs.
8. Faculties do not hesitate to discuss their problems with their superiors.
9. When problems arise, people
89
discuss their problem trying to solve them rather than accusing each other at the back.
Performance Management
10 When faculties do good work the superiors take special care to appreciate it.
11. If you are qualified and experienced for the promotion to the next level then are you getting it.
12. Rewards are given to faculties for their better performance and contribution.
13. Faculties are properly communicated their feedback given by students, superiors, colleaguesetc.
14. When performance feedback is given to faculties, they take it seriously using it for their development.
Employee Development
15. Faculties are given opportunities to undergo FDP’s (Faculties Development program) on the basis of genuine training need.
16. When faculties are sponsored for training they take it seriously.
17. Faculties try to learn and implement new things from training programs attended.
18. Senior faculties in the organization point out career opportunities to junior.
19. The personnel policies of the institute facilitate faculties’ development.
90
91
92
93
94
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Websites
http://www.districtsofindia.com/gujarat/valsad/education/index.aspx http://mycollege.in/type/Gujarat/Valsad.php http://valsaddp.gujarat.gov.in/valsad/english/shakhao/education-branch/
introduction.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valsad_district
http://www.pratiyogi.com/india/colleges/cities/valsad/144 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_universities_in_India http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/4326/9/09_chapter%202.pdf http://humanresources.about.com/od/glossaryh/f/hr_development.htm http://www.whatishumanresource.com/human-resource-development
2. Journal
The IUP journal of management research vol.X No. 4 page no. 44
Rao Tv and Abraham E (1986), “Human Resource Development Climate in Indian organization), in Rao Tv and Pereira D F (Eds.), recent experiences in Human resource Development, pg no. 70-98
Krishna P M and rao P S(1997), “organizational and HRD climate in BHEL : empirical study” , the journal of public administration, volume. 43, page no.209-216.
Alphonsa V K (Sr. ) (2000), “HRD climate in private hospital in Hyderabad: an emeperical study” IJTD , volume no 30, page no. 4
Mishra P and Bharatwaj G (2000) “ HRD climate an empirical study among private sector manager”, Indian journal of industrial relations, volume n0. 38, page n0. 1-66
95