Articles 

123oye.com

Home

 

This is the section where we feature some of the articles and views sent in to us by our visitors. So go ahead and find out what they have to say!! If you want to contribute an article (share your views, experiences and thoughts),  write in to us at info@123oye.com send us your jobs / career related articles. We promise to give you a chance to put your thoughts across to our visitors. Please see Article Guidelines

Latest News | Jobs & Vacancies | Employers - Free Job Posting

A STUDY ON PERCEPTION OF QUALITY OF WORK LIFE AMONG TEXTILE MANUFACTURING WORKERS IN TIRUNELVELI

A STUDY ON PERCEPTION OF QUALITY OF WORK LIFE AMONG TEXTILE MANUFACTURING WORKERS IN TIRUNELVELI

Abstract
Quality of Life is the extent of relationships between individuals and organizational factors that existing in the working environment. Quality of work life is the extent to which workers can satisfy important personal needs through their experiences in the organization. It is focusing strongly on providing a work environment conducive to satisfy individual needs. It is assumed that if employees have more positive attitudes about the organization and their productivity increases, everything else being equal, the organization should be more effective. The present study was conducted to examine the work related factors and demographic factors have any relationship with the perception of quality of work life and to explore the relationship between quality of work and quality of life in textile industries located at Tirunelveli. The work related factors are combined in six categories: working environment, welfare measures, safety measures, supervision, participation in decision making and intercommunication. The results hold that demographic factors and work related factors have significant relationship with perception of quality of work life.

A STUDY ON PERCEPTION OF QUALITY OF WORK LIFE AMONG TEXTILE MANUFACTURING WORKERS IN TIRUNELVELI


Introduction Post liberalization environment give rise to number of industries which brings competitive business war in India. Industries in India have to think how to face them and survive. Every organization is facing unique problems, some organizations may have old technology, some may lag in financial strength and some may pause be having obsolete products, some may not have providing good working environment, and some may not have job security but any of which may affect the quality of work life. However many Indian Textile industries are not exceptional one to face the same. Any attempt at improving the performance of the organization can be successful only if the organization is able to develop a strong quality work life.

The term quality of work life refers to the favorableness or unfavourableness of a total job environment for people (Davis and Newstrom 1985). The basic purpose is to develop jobs and working conditions that are excellent for people as well as for the economic health of the organization. The elements in QWL program include-open communication, equitable reward systems a concern for employee job security and satisfying careers and participation in decision making.

Mrs L. Kanagalakshmi, Lecturer, Department of Management Studies, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli

Miss Nirmala Devei .B, Researh Scholar, Department of Management Studies, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli

QWL programs usually emphasize development of employee skills, the reduction of occupational stress and development of labor management relations. Several researches have been conducted in this field. Sayeed and Sinha (1981) examined the relationship between QWL, job stress and performance. The results indicate that higher QWL leads to greater job satisfaction. Rahman (1984) in his study on the industrial workers of India found that subjects having low educational background and lower income had better perception of QWL than those having higher education and higher income. Haque (1992) in his study found that QWL is positively related to performance and negatively correlated to absenteeism. But he found no relationship between perceived QWL and workers’ age, education and job experience. Wadud (1996) in a study found that QWL was significantly higher among the private sector women employees than their counterparts among the private sector women employees than their counterparts in the public sector. It also showed that younger group and higher experienced groups had significantly higher perception of QWL than the older and the lower experienced groups.

Objectives
No work so far has been conducted on QWL and work related factors of textile industries at Tirunelveli. Thus there is a need to conduct research on QWL and job related factors in these industries. The present study was designed with a view to achieving the following objectives

1. To determine how work related factors enhance better quality of life
2. To assess the contribution of demographic variables

Hypothesis:

H0: Work related factors do not lead to better quality of work Life.
H1: Work related factors leads to better quality of work life.
H0: Demographic factor does not influence the perceived level of quality of work life.
H1: Demographic factor influence the perceived level of quality of work of life.

Methodology

Sample The present study was conducted on a sample of 210 workers taken from five textile manufacturing workers at Tirunelveli. The respondents were selected on stratified random sampling basis.

Measuring Instruments used The major instruments used in the present study were Sinha and Sayeed‘s inventory for measuring quality of working life was followed. An open-end questions contains 55 question was used to measure the perception of workers. Likert five point continuum was used to prepare the scale to measure the work related attitude of respondents. Personnel data were also collected to measure the demographic variables

Present study The present study attempts to measure the level of perceived Quality of work life of the workers of textile mills. Attempt is also made to find out if quality of work life has any significant relationship with job related variables and with demographic variables. The present study suffered from some limitations like small sample size and limited area of investigation which might not be true representative of the whole population of the textile industries. So, before generalization, there is a need to conduct an in-depth study covering larger sample size and broader areas of investigation.

Present scenario of study area
The study grasps the following sections that deals with the present circumstances existing at the study area to bring the complete picture under what situation the respondents are working and what condition is prevailing then in the textile industries in Tirunelveli.

Work Related Factors: Working environment

Environmental factors determine the type of supervisors behavior required as a complement if worker outcomes to be maximized. While personal characteristics of the workers determine how the environment and supervisor behavior are interpreted. It is observed that the climate of the textile industries in Tirunelveli is comply with statutory measures and it may suits to work comfortable for present employees.

Welfare Measures

Welfare measures are likely to promote good employee health and safety which may result in greater worker efficiency and productivity. It may also boost the employee morale and loyalty. Welfare measures of textile industries shows that they are in need of some provisions like sittings, suitable restrooms, transport facilities are found to be not adequate, but the making adjustments for late attendance, weekly holidays, rest hours, canteen facilities, recreation facilities are found to be satisfied by the respondents.

Safety measures
Safety is the freedom from the occurrence of risk, injury or loss. The management should provide proper equipments, and tools and training for using the tools. Top management in the textile industries has made provisions for the worker and some of the workers found to be unaware of it.

Supervision

Supportive supervision may leads higher employee performance and satisfaction when workers are performing structured tasks. It was expected that the supervisors would assume the role of change agent in enhancing the self image of workers and to develop them. The study area shows that supervisors’ role in work done from the employees found to be critical and they very supportive and assertive to complete the task assignment

Participation in decision making
Participation in decision making, particularly workers in deciding important matters influence the workers to feel sense of workmanship and creativity. It is directly concerned with an individuals working and has an important bearing on his satisfaction. Only autocratic power of attorney is prevailed and supervisors are paying much attention to the proposal whispered by the employees

Communication
Communication enhances the capacity to convey information. Through upward communication, employees can share their views, grievances and how to overcome these, and getting suggestions for improving work performance. Communication is held through notice board and circulars to all the employees. Informal communication is also plays a vital role in the textile industries.

Analysis of data:

The core of study being quality of work life measure the dependent variables with the tools of statistical analysis consisted of absolute numbers of summery statistics and comparison of mean scores are made with the help of chi-square test. In addition, the dependent variables are analyzed with the help of Analysis of Variance to find out the level of significance of the difference in mean squares. SPSS 10 VERSION was used to analyze the data.

TableNo:1

Factor

Calculated

Chi-square

Degrees of freedom

 

Table value

 

Remarks

Age

14.727

4.00

13.277

1% level significance

Educational status

26.731

6.00

16.812

1% level of significance

Experience

7.910

4.00

9.488

Not significance

Income

24.520

4.00

13.277

Significant at 1% level

Family size

5.197

4.00

9.488

Not significant

Wealth position

7.533

4.00

9.488

Not significant

DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES AND LEVEL OF PERCEPTION OF QWL - CHI-SQUARE TEST

TableNo: 2

WORK RELATED FACTORS –TEST OFANOVA

WORKING ENVIRONMENT AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

 

Sources of variance

Sum of squares

DOF

Mean Square

F- Value

Table Value

Remarks

Between

Groups

Within Groups

64.450

           

899.07            

2

 

207

32.225

 

4.34

7.42

 

 

3.00

Significant

Total

963.524

209

 

 

 

 

TableNo:3

WELFARE MEASURES AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

 

Sources of variance

Sum of squares

DOF

Mean Square

F- Value

Table Value

Remarks

Between

Groups

Within Groups

194.815

           

768.708            

2

 

207

97.408

 

3.714

26.23

 

 

3.00

Significant

Total

963.524

209

 

 

 

 

TableNo:4

SAFETY MEASURES AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

 

Sources of variance

Sum of squares

DOF

Mean Square

F- Value

Table Value

Remarks

Betwe̡n

Groups

Within Groups

335.72

           

627.804            

2

 

207

167.86

 

3.033

55.347

3.00

Significant

Total

963.524

209

 

 

 

 

TableNo:5

SUPERVISION AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

 

Sources of variance

Sum of squares

DOF

Mean Square

F- Value

Table Value

Remarks

Between

Groups

Within Groups

132.657

           

830.867            

2

 

207

66.328

 

4.014

16.525

 

 

3.00

Significant

Total

963.524

209

 

 

 

 

TableNo:6

PARTICIPATION IN DECISION MAKING AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

Sources of variance

Sum of squares

DOF

Mean Square

F- Value

Table Value

Remarks

Between

Groups

Within Groups

87.211

           

980.412            

2

 

207

43.606

 

4.736

9.207

 

 

3.00

Significant

Total

1067

209

 

 

 

 

TableNo:7

INTER COMMUNICATION AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

 

Sources of variance

Sum of squares

DOF

Mean Square

F- Value

Table Value

Remarks

Between

Groups

Within Groups

114.718

           

625.896    

2

 

207

57.359

 

3.024

18.97

 

 

3.00

Significant

Total

963.524

209

 

 

 

 

Analysis

Results It is noted from the table No:1 the demographic factors of Age ,Education and Income of the calculated chi-square value is less than the table value at 1% level of significance. This infers that the age of the respondents, education and income and the level of perception on QWL are associated “holds good”.

The results further shows that Demographic factors of Experience, Family size and Wealth position of the calculated chi-square value is more than the table value at 1% level of significance. This shows that there is no close relationship between the variables of experience, family size and wealth position and the level of perception on QWL

From the table no 2,3,4,5,6,7 shows that the workers of the manufacturing industries have significant relationship with the work related factors of working environment, welfare measures, safety measures, supervision measures, participation in decision making and intercommunication.
It is known that the factors influencing the working conditions and welfare measures such as work place does not affect the quality of work life in these industries. The implications of these findings is that the supervisor who creates condition under which his workers can satisfy important needs and allowing them to participate in decision making is likely to motivate his workers successfully to better work performance. However, sometimes informally it is observed that the feedback about decision making particularly in implementing interventions (specifically-techno structural intervention) found to be dissatisfied. Even though the management provide good quality of work life, the workers does not have any scope for job confirmation. 20 % of the workers have highest experience of 8 years service and there is no job gradation

Discussion

The present study attempted to assess whether the workers in textile industries perceived quality of work life. Attempt was also made to find out if quality of work life had any relationship with work related factors and with demographic factors. It appears from the results that textile workers perceive significantly according to the demographic factors of age, income, and education. This finding supports the earlier findings by Haque (1992), Hossain (1999), Rahman (1984), Hoque and Rahman (1999) but against the factors of experience, wealth and family size. Hoque and Rahman found that demographic factors of (age, education, experience and income) private sector worker perceived significantly higher QWL than their counter parts in the public sector. Wadud (1996) and Modway (1981) also expressed the same.
QWL was found to have significant relationship with work related factors. This result is consistent with the findings of Haque (1992), Hossain (1999) and Sayeed Sinha (1981).

CONCLUSION
It is observed that quality of work is not equals to that of quality of life. The study suggests the management to take the necessary steps to arrest the drift of deteriorating quality of work life in certain human factors like experience, wealth position, family size which are the basic factors to express the workers desire. Insecurity of job leads to discouragement, anxiety and even bitterness for negative perception of quality of work life. Providing sittings, suitable restrooms, transport facilities to all the employees may encourage them to work continuously in the same industry. Allowing employees to participate in decision making make them to work enthusiastically and give recognition to them in their work. Providing training in using safety measures may build loyalty in their work. If the management provides permanent job, will definitely leads to good quality of work life.

References:
1. Haque, ABMZ (1992), “QWL & Job satisfaction of industrial workers in relation to size of the organization”, Bangladesh journal of psychological studies, 2,1, 43-45
2. Hossain, J.A. (1997), “QWL of Industrial workers in Bangladesh: A case study”, Monograph, Dept of Management, Islamic University, Bangladesh
3. Rahman A. (1984), “QWL as perceived by the Industrial shift workers”, Thesis, Osmania University, Hyderabad
4. Wadud N. (1996), “Job stress & QWL among working women”, Bangladesh Psychological Studies, 6, 31-37
5. Sinha P. & Sayeed O. B. (1980), “Measuring QWL in relation to job satisfaction & performance in two organization, “Managerial Psychology, 2, 15-30
6. M.E. Hoque & A. Rahman (1999), Quality of working life & Job behaviour of workers in Bangladesh: a comparative study of private and public sectors, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 35, 3, Oct 1999
7. Md. M Hossain & Md T. Islam, “QWL & Job satisfaction of GVT hospital nurses in Bangladesh, Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 35, 3, Oct 1999
8. LM Prasad , “Organzational Behaviour”, Sultan Chand & Sons, ed 2003.

Appendix: List of Tables
Demographic factors –Chi Square Analysis
Table No: 1 Age and Perception of quality of work life

Age No. of Respondents % Average Range S.D.
Min Max
Below 20 years 50 23.8 185.54 56 280 69.8
20-25 years 92 43.8 224.66 82 280 61.08
Above 25 years 68 32.4 208.01 56 280 69.77
Total 210 100

Table No: 2 Level of perception Two-way table

Age Level of Perception Total
Low Medium High
Below 20 years 10 (20) 9 (18) 31(62) 50
20-25 years 8 (8.7) 6 (6.5) 78(84.8) 92
Above 25 years 8(11.8) 16(23.5) 44(64.7) 68
26 31 153 210

Table No: 3 Age and level of perception of quality of work life
(Chi-square Test)
Factor Calculated chi-square Degrees of freedom Table value Remarks
Age 14.727 4 13.277 Significant at 1% level

Table No: 4 Education and Perception of quality of work life

Educational
Status No. of Respondents % Average Range S.D.
Min Max
Below 8th std 105 50 224.24 84 280 60.87
SSLC 64 30.5 188.52 56 280 69.07
12th std 26 12.4 223.19 56 280 75.66
Diploma or ITI 15 7.1 178.53 100 280 62.77
210 100

Table No: 5 Level of perception Two-way table

Education Level of Perception Total
Low Medium High
Below 8th std 11(10.5) 7 (6.7) 87(82.9) 105
SSLC 11 (17.2) 12(18.8) 41(64.1) 64
12th std 3(11.5) 4(15.4) 19(73.1) 26
Diploma or ITI 1(6.7) 8(53.3) 6(40) 15
26 31 153 210

Table No: 6 Education and level of perception of quality of work life
(Chi-square Test)

Factor Calculated chi-square Degrees of freedom Table value Remarks
Educational status 26.731 6 16.812 Significant at 1% level

Table No: 7 Experience and Perception of quality of work life

Experience No. of Respondents % Average Range S.D.
Min Max
Below 5 Years 56 26.7 185.7 56 280 68.04
5-10Years 33 15.7 228.91 56 280 60.55
Above 10 years 121 57.6 216.02 56 280 66.65
Total 210 100

Table No: 8 Level of perception Two-way table

Experience Level of Perception Total
Low Medium High
Below 5 Years 11(19.6) 11(19.6) 34(60.7) 56
5-10Years 1(3) 4(12.1) 28(84.8) 33
Above 10 years 14(11.6) 16(13.2) 91(75.2) 121
Total2631153210 Table No: 9 Experience and level of perception of quality of work life
(Chi-square Test)

Factor Calculated chi-square Degrees of freedom Table value Remarks
Experience 7.910 4 9.488 Not Significant

Table No: 10 Income and Perception of quality of work life

Income No. of Respondents % Average Range S.D.
Min Max
Below 1500 100 47.6 210.81 56 280 68.67
1500-2000 61 29 221.49 56 280 62.25
Above 2000 49 23.4 193.86 87 280 69.83
Total 210 100

Table No:11 Level of perception Two-way table

Income Level of Perception Total
Low Medium High
Below 1500 12(12) 15(15) 73(73) 100
1500-2000 7(11) 0 54(88.5) 61
Above 2000 7(14.3) 16(32.7) 26(53.1) 49
Total 26 31 153 210

Table No: 12 Income and level of perception of quality of work life
(Chi-square Test)

Factor Calculated chi-square Degrees of freedom Table value Remarks
Income 24.52 13.277 4 Significant at 1% level

Table No: 13 Family Status and Perception of quality of work life

Family Members No. of Respondents % Average Range S.D.
Min Max
Less than 3 34 16.2 190.79 56 280 62.87
4-5 149 71 210.95 56 280 66.69
Above 5 27 12.8 228.63 56 280 74.35
Total 210 100

Table No:14 Level of perception Two-way table

Family Status Level of Perception Total
Low Medium High
Less than 3 4(11.8) 9(26.5) 12(61.8) 34
4-5 18(12.1) 20(13.4) 111(74.5) 149
Above 5 4(14.8) 2(7.4) 21(77.8) 27
Total 26 31 153 210

Table No: 15 Family Status and level of perception of quality of work life
(Chi-square Test)

Factor Calculated chi-square Degrees of freedom Table value Remarks
Family Status 5.197 4 9.488 Not Significant
Table No: 16 Wealth and Perception of quality of work life

Wealth position No. of Respondent % Average Range S.D.
Min Max
Below 10,000 156 74.3 213.25 56 280 66.32
10,000-15,000 35 16.7 208.34 87 280 70.26
Above 15000 19 9 185.89 100 280 71.5
Total 210 100

Table No:17 Level of perception Two-way table

Wealth position Level of Perception Total
Low Medium High
Below 10,000 17(10.9) 20(12.8) 119(76.3) 156
10,000-15,000 5(14.3) 5(14.3) 25(71.4) 35
Above 15000 4(21.1) 6(31.6) 9(47.4) 19
Total 26 31 153 210

Table No: 18 Family Status and level of perception of quality of work life
(Chi-square Test)

Factor Calculated chi-square Degrees of freedom Table value Remarks
Wealth Position 7.533 4 9.488 Not Significant
WORK RELATED FACTORS –Descriptive Statistics and TEST OFANOVA

Table No: 19 Working Environment and perception of quality of work life

Factors No. of Respondent s Mean Range S.D.
Min Max
Comfortable 165 22.23 14 24 2.1267
Comfortless 24 21.125 13 23 2.34
Disconcert 21 20.667 18 22 1.2383
Total 210 21.95 13 24 2.147

TableNo: 20 WORKING ENVIRONMENT AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

Sources of variance Sum of squares DOF Mean Square F- Value Table Value Remarks
Between
Groups
Within Groups 64.450

899.07 2

207 32.225

4.34 7.42

3.00 Significant
Total 963.524 209

Table No: 21 Welfare Measures and perception of quality of work life

Factors No. of Respondents Mean Range S.D.
Min Max
Ideal 168 22.386 15 24 1.8569
Adequate 21 21.1429 17 23 1.7113
Inadequate 21 19..2857 13 22 2.5912
Total 210 21.95 13 24 2.147

TableNo:3 WELFARE MEASURES AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

Sources of variance Sum of squares DOF Mean Square F- Value Table Value Remarks
Between
Groups
Within Groups 194.815

768.708 2

207 97.408

3.714 26.23

3.00 Significant
Total 963.524 209

Table No: 23 Safety Measures and Perception of quality of work life
Factors No. of Respondent Mean Range S.D.
Min Max
Increasing 168 22.386 14 24 1.6878
Stable 21 20.619 17 23 1.909
Decreasing 21 18..5714 13 22 1.9893
Total 210 21.95 13 24 2.147

Table No:24 SAFETY MEASURES AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

Sources of variance Sum of squares DOF Mean Square F- Value Table Value Remarks
Between
Groups
Within Groups 335.72

627.804 2

207 167.86

3.033 55.347 3.00 Significant
Total 963.524 209

Table No: 25 Supervision and Perception of quality of work life

Factors No. of Respondent Mean Range S.D.
Min Max
Patience 155 20.883 12 24 2.321
Impatience 25 20.6 17 23 1.8484
Rigid 30 19.5 16 22 1.9253
Total 210 12 24


TableNo:26 SUPERVISION AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

Sources of variance Sum of squares DOF Mean Square F- Value Table Value Remarks
Between
Groups
Within Groups 132.657

830.867 2

207 66.328

4.014 16.525

3.00 Significant
Total 963.524 209

Table No: 27 Communication and Perception of quality of work life

State of mind No. of Respondent Mean Range S.D.
Min Max
Spontaneous 168 22.655 16 24 2.1933
Isolate 30 21.1 18 23 1.2690
Inconsistent 12 19.0833 14 21 1.7752
Total 210 21.757 14 24 1.8824

TableNo:28 INTER COMMUNICATION AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

Sources of variance Sum of squares DOF Mean Square F- Value Table Value Remarks
Between
Groups
Within Groups 114.718

625.896 2

207 57.359

3.024 18.97

3.00 Significant
Total 963.524 209

Table No: 29 Participation in decision making and Perception of quality of work life

Factors No. of Respondent Mean Range S.D.
Min Max
Highly Participative 175 22.2629 13 24 1.9738
Low participation 24 21.0417 17 23 1.8292
Idle 11 19 14 22 2.75681
Total 210 21.95 13 24 2.1471

TableNo:30 PARTICIPATION IN DECISION MAKING AND PERCEPTION OF QWL

Sources of variance Sum of squares DOF Mean Square F- Value Table Value Remarks
Between
Groups
Within Groups 87.211

980.412 2

207 43.606

4.736 9.207

3.00 Significant
Total 1067 209

Written By:  Mrs L. Kanagalakshmi, (Phd) Experience: 10 Years Lecturer, Publications: 2 selected for publication
Department of Management Studies, M. Phil Guideship: 2 Manonmaniam Sundaranar University  Tirunelveli


Miss Nirmala Devei .B,
Presently working in Vinayaka Missions University, Researh Scholar, VMKV Eng. College, Salem Department of Management Studies, Experience: 5 years Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Publication: 1 has selected for publication Tirunelveli

devibs2003@yahoo.co.in

Jobnet's Placement Consultants Directory - India & International

Jobnet Placement Consultants Directory

Buy this Job Directory NOW
Call










Latest Jobs & Vacancies, India on 123oye.com

123oye.com - Jobs in Delhi, Careers in India