Chapter - IV TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT - POLICIES AND ...shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/8496/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT - POLICIES AND PRACTICES IN

127

Chapter - IV

TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT - POLICIES AND

PRACTICES IN INDIAN BANKS WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE

TO STATE BANK OF INDIA

Introduction

Training and development is deep rooted in every human activity, and it is as

old as human society itself. Whenever human being has thought to create, doing,

and mastering the technique, he/she has looked more towards training and

development. They have been associated with learning and mastering technique.

Success of any organization, institution, firm and their activities entirely depend on

training and development. All jobs, professions, roles, tasks require some type of

training and development for their efficient and effective performance. The need for

systematic training and development has increased by rapid changes in the jobs.

Training and development of a human being is a process, which is very

much associated with thinking, feeling and willing unless these three aspects do go

together it is really difficult to relish the true taste of them. Training and

development words differ in their meaning but still they can be used synonymously.

Because training results in development of human beings. The dictionary meaning

of the word training implies: instruction and discipline in a particular art, profession

or in occupation. It means training relates to make a trainee closely controlled in

pursuit doing his work, updating knowledge to avoid obsolescence, enhancing

professional creativity. Training in the Oxford American disk dictionary, implies to

teach (a man, animal, oneself etc) a specified skill and mastering it through practice.

Thus training results in learning than teaching. Subba Rao 1(1996) considers this as

a process to teaching. It helps an individual to learn and apply skill, knowledge,

improve ability and attitude for the performance of job. Success of training depends

1 Subba Rao, P and Rao, V.S.P. (1996): Personnel /Human Resource Management, Konark Publishers

Private Limited, Main Vikas Marg, Delhi. PP 14-20.and pp 256-335

128

upon active listening and learning skill and knowledge, put forward by a careful

application in their work. Consequently, training is at all times a means to an end

but not an end in itself.

Success of an organization never comes without infrastructure and the good

quality of human resource at work. Both are very essential when someone feels that

people are essential at work, but without giving them the necessary equipment, raw

materials, tools and proper guidance, and if any one of these is missing, it can cause

obstacle and contribute to organization failure. Jangam 2 (1983) rightly feels,

training is training of hand, head and heart, training imparts skills to use hand, to

work competently , import knowledge so that head can think, and build positive

attitude so that heart feels and with this individual capacity to produce more surely

goes up.

Thus, training and development is an organized activity and includes several

steps. Conduct of such programmes requires passing through different stages like, it

begins from need identification, preparation of calendar, budget estimation,

deputation of trainees, evaluation and follow-up. Training and development is an

organized procedure for increasing skill and knowledge of people for a definite

purpose. Employees in most organization consist of many employees who differ in

age, qualification, experience, designation, attitude and interest. Therefore, training

is required to all categories of employees.

Training serves many advantages both to the organization and to the

employees. To make a mention few of those premier benefits namely, it helps to

achieve skill development of employee, it enables him to perform his job

satisfactorily, it helps to sustain production of quality goods with durability and also

helps in the better handling of tools and equipments promote safety and minimize

2 Jangam, R.T. (1983) : Introduction to the Study of Public Administration, Akalwadi Book Depot and

Publishers, Vijay Road, Dharwad pp 115-119

129

accidents. It also influences to bring change in the interest, attitude, motivation and

morale of employee.

Training calendar of many organizations includes wide range of programmes

suiting to the requirement of various categories of employees in the organization.

Programmes are organized for senior executives, middle level executives,

managers, supervisors and also to the workmen. Training topics relate to skill and

knowledge development, topics of management practices, marketing’s, technical

information, technology and quality and general topics, as well. All organizations

look forward to see that their employees would develop and improve their personal

and technical qualification. Organizations help them by sponsoring them to premier

institutions to undergo training. This would help them to improve their academic

and technical qualification, and also their skill and knowledge. This facility is

largely offered to the supervisory and managerial personnel than to the workman.

Objectives of the Research Study

1) To analyze the expectations about training and development programmes

2) To assess the perception about training and development programmes

3) To assess the impact of training and development programmes

4) To assess and analyze employees attitude toward training and development

programmes

5) To assess and analyze existing training and development methods in SBI.

6) To analyze the relation between employee performance and training and

development programmes.

7) To ascertain satisfaction amongst the employees about training and


130

8) To analyze the perceptions of the employee towards training and

development programmes of SBI.

9) To offer useful suggestions based on findings.

Significance of Training and Development in Modern Management

The dynamic environment in which organizations operate today poses multi-

faceted problems that make the task of the management risky and uncertain. The

systematic development of managerial talent is one of the primary tasks of any

organization and its survival in a dynamic environment.

The concept of management is multi-dimensional that necessitates

recognition in any programmes of managerial training and development.

Management development is a systematic effort in an organization, whereby

training and education develop a manager’s performance and potentials. The

success of an organisation depends upon a continuous flow of competent,

experienced and well-trained managers, who are alert and aware of the changing

environment.

Executive development is the process whereby people learn the skills,

knowledge, attitudes and behaviour needed, in order to perform their jobs

effectively. Training endeavours to improve the capabilities of individuals to meet

organization needs in terms of knowledge, skills, attitudes and values. However, it

has relevance only if it effects behavioural changes that enhance organizational

effectiveness.

We frequently refer to this shortage as a ‘management gap’. There is no easy

remedy to this situation. Managerial and administrative capability, be it in a public

or private sector undertaking is largely acquired and improved through practice in

the actual solution on regular operational problems. Along with hard work,

management education, training and development programmes, should be properly

planned and executed. This offers a means to produce effective managers.

131

The role of training and development programmes in a business firm or any

organization is obvious. Increased productivity, reduction in supervisor, efficient

performance of jobs, stability and flexibility of an organization are a few of the

benefits that can be achieved through the adoption of appropriate training and


After understanding the significant role played by training and development

programmes in modern management, it is essential to study and understand the

meaning of training, education and development. These three concepts are

sometimes accepted and considered as one and the same. However, with analysis of

these terms, it is possible to understand them as well as differentiate between them.

Evaluation of Training and Development Programmes

Training and development programmes contribute to organizations

intangible assets such as human capital. There is also a need to understand how to

evaluate the training and development function and how to measure human capital.

Training and development programmes require time, energy and money.

Therefore, an organization needs to know whether its investment in training is being

spent effectively and if it is the worth effort. Training evaluation means the

systematic collection of data relevant to the selection, adoption, value or

modification of workplace learning activities. Despite organization expending a

great deal of effort in setting up training and development programmes,

comparatively little attention is paid to evaluating their effectiveness. Every year the

American Society of Training and Development (ASTD) prepares a report that

summarizes company-provided training in the United States.3 This report provides

companies with information about training hours and delivery methods that they can

use to benchmark, or compare, themselves to other companies in similar industries

or with the same number of employees.

3 Dangot- Simpkin, G (1991), “How come Nothing Changed?”, in ‘HR Magazine’, November 1991,

pp 66-68.

132

Objectives of Training and Development Programmes Evaluation

Evaluation is a systematic process to determine the worth and value of the

training programmes. Broadly it has the following objectives:

a) To determine the degree of success in achieving the programme objectives.

b) To prepare a cost benefit of the training programme.

c) To draw a SWOT analysis of the training programme.

d) To decide about the level of participants for the future programmes.

e) To find out the efficacy of various training methodologies.

f) To measure participants results.

g) To know the suitability of the programmes.

Types of Evaluation Instruments

Data gathering device administered at different stages of training is called an

evaluation instrument. Though there are a lot of verities, common categories are as

follows:

a) Questionnaire

b) Interview

c) Test

d) Focus groups

e) Observation of trainees

f) Performance records

The Process of Training Evaluation

Training programmes, like design, development and manufacture of a

product, passes through several stages. Therefore, any comprehensive should cover

all such systems and must be specific. It should be based on objective methods and

pre determined standards. The steps in training evaluation are :

133

A) Pre-Training Evaluation

This is done prior to the course and covers an analysis of the expectations;

perceptions of the trainee, the existing level of skills and knowledge are reassessed.

B) Input and Delivery Evaluation

This is done concurrent to the training. Executive development programmes

(EDPs) have built in schedules for simultaneous review for the course inputs. Each

topic, module is evaluated in terms of its: content, presentation relevance and

applicability/usefulness. This is carried out by a comparison with pre-training

evaluation data and input evaluation findings as per the end of course questionnaire

feedback.

C) Post Training Evaluation

The objectives of training are to enhance individual effectiveness and

improvement in organizational performance. Therefore, any process of post

evaluation must have reference to job improvement plan. This cannot be done while

the trainee is still at the training centre. He/She must have an opportunity to go back

to workplace, demonstrate skills on the job to seek improvements. For this job,

improvement-plans are prepared and approved by the trainers and superiors. These

plans are implemented on a time bound basis.

After a lapse of 12-36 months the results obtained are used for evaluating the

applicability of training. The philosophy behind such an approach in training and

evaluation is that “learns while you solve the organization problem and contribute

directly while one is under training”.

The researcher has collected information from the respondents by serving

questionnaire and through interview. The study is based on post training evaluation.

However valid, reliable and adequate the data may be, it does not serve any

useful purpose unless it is carefully processed, systematically classified and

tabulated, scientifically analyzed, intelligently interpreted and rationally concluded.

134

After the data had been collected, it was processed and tabulated using

Microsoft Excel - 2000 Software. The data has been collected on training and

development programmes and its components like expectations from training and

development programmes, perception about training and development programmes,

impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change, impact of

training and development programmes on job performance, perception about

training and development programmes administration, climate for transfer of

learning after attending training and development programmes, overall opinion

about training and development programmes, perception about training centers,

impact of training and development programmes on self development and

perception about trainers of bank employees. Then the data were analyzed with

reference to the objectives and hypotheses by using descriptive statistics,

differential analysis including unpaired t-test, One way ANOVA followed by

Newman-Keuls multiple post hoc procedure and Pearson’s correlation coefficient

analysis by using SPSS 16.0 statistical software and the results obtained thereby

have been interpreted.

It is also the intention of the researcher to find the out whether differences in

the independent factors namely age groups, designations, sex, educational

qualifications, presently pursuing any degree/course, degree / course completed

after joining bank, membership in professional organizations, years of service,

number of training and development programmes attended, number of promotions

received, family structure, family size, marital status and employment status of

spouse with respect to training and development programmes and its components

like expectations from training and development programmes, perception about

training and development programmes, impact of training and development

programmes on behavioral change, impact of training and development

programmes on job performance, perception about training and development

programmes on administration, climate for transfer of learning after attending

135

training and development programmes, overall opinion about training and

development programmes, perception about training centers, impact of training and

development programmes on self development and perception about trainers of

bank employees and consequently others.

For purpose of the convenience, the different sections of chapter IV of the

study have been organized under the following sections:

1. Background of Respondents

2. Analysis of primary data

3. Descriptive statistics

4. Differential statistics

5. Co-relational analysis among independent variables

Section-I: Background of Respondents

This part describes the background of respondents. Background of

respondents has been analyzed in terms of age, designation, gender, work

experience, educational qualification, gender, work experience, educational

qualification, number of training and development programmes attended,

promotions received and marital status, presently pursuing any degree/course,

degree/course completed after joining bank, membership in professional

organization, family structure, family size and employment status of spouse.

Age

Table No: 10

Age of respondents

Sl.No Age groups Respondents(n)

1

2

3

4

20-29

30-39

40-49

50-59

100 (21)

109(23)

155(32)

116(24)

Total 400(100)

Source: Field study

Note: Figures in parentheses are percentage to total

136

Table 10 reveals the age group of respondents in four age groups. Out of the

480 sample, minority of the respondents were found in the age-group of 40-49.

Designation

Table No: 11

Designation of Respondents

Sl.no Designation Respondents

1

2

3

4

5

6

Assistants

Senior Assistants

Special Assistants

Scale I officers

Scale II officers

Scale III officers

100(21)

100(21)

100(21)

90(19)

60(12)

30(6)

Total 480(100)

Source: Field study


Table 11 reveals the designation of respondents classified in six categories.

Out of the sample of 480 respondents, majority of respondents were found in

assistants category i.e. assistants, senior assistants and special assistants. Almost the

same number of respondents were found in scale I officers category.

Gender

Table No: 12

Gender of respondents

Sl.No Gender Respondents

1

2

Male

Female

295(61)

185(39)

Total 480(100)

Source: Field study


137

Table 12 shows the gender wise classification of respondents. There are 295

male respondents accounting for 61 percent and 185 female respondents accounting

for 39 percent. In the total sample about one thirds are female respondents.

Work Experience

Table No: 13

Work experience of respondents

Sl.No Work Experience Respondents

1

2

3

0-9

10-19

20+Years

131(27)

146(30)

203(43)

Total 480(100)

Source: Field study.


Work experience of respondents is shown in table No: 13. The table reveals that

respondents with work experience of 20 and more years are maximum followed by

10-19 years and 0-9 years.

Educational Qualification

Table 14 shows educational qualification of respondents. It can be seen from

the table that a majority of respondents 378(79) are graduates followed by post

graduates 77(16) and with professional degrees 25(5).

Table No: 14

Educational qualification of respondents

Sl.no Educational Qualification Respondents

1

2

3

Graduate

Post-Graduate

Professional Degree

378(79)

77(16)

25(5)

Total 480(100)



138

Number of Programmes Attended

Table No: 15

Number of programmes attended by respondents

Sl.No Number of Programmes attended Respondents

1

2

3

1-10

11-20

21 and more

141(29)

254(53)

85(18)

Total 480(100)



Table No 15 shows the number of training and development programmes

attended by respondents. Out of the sample of 480 respondent 254 respondents have

attended 11-20 programmes followed by 141 respondents have attended 1-10

programmes, and 25 respondents have attended 21 and more programmes.

Promotion

Table No: 16

Promotions received by respondents

Sl.No Number of promotions received Respondents

1

2

3

None

One

Two

Three and more

106 (22)

178 (37)

122 (26)

74 (15)

Total 480(100)



Table 16 reveals the number of promotions received by respondents. Out of

the sample, majority of the respondents have received one promotion and two

promotions. And only 106 respondents have not received any promotion.

139

Marital Status

Table No: 17

Marital status of respondents

Sl.No Marital status Respondents

1

2

Married

Unmarried

404(84)

76(16)

Total (100)



Marital status of respondents is shown Table No 17. From the table, it is

revealed that 404(84) respondents are married and 76(16) respondents are

unmarried.

Presently pursuing any degree/course

Table No: 18

Presently pursuing any degree/course of respondents

Sl.no Pursuing any degree/course. Respondents

1

2

Pursuing any degree any degree / course.

Not pursuing any degree / course.

15(3)

465(97)

Total 480(100)



Presently pursuing and degree/course by respondents is shown in Table No: 18.

It reveals that 15(3) respondents are presently pursuing any degree / course and the

remaining 465(97) respondents are not pursuing any degree/course.

140

Degree/course completed after joining bank

Table No: 19

Degree/course completed after joining bank by respondents

Sl.no Degree/course completed after joining bank Respondents

1

2

Degree/ course completed after joining bank

No degree/course completed after joining bank

17(4)

463(96)

Total 480(100)



Respondents who have completed degree/course after joining bank are given in

Table No 19. Only 17(4) respondents out of sample of 480 respondents have

completed degree/course after joining bank.

Membership in professional organizations

Table No: 20

Membership in professional organization of respondents

Sl.No Membership in professional organisations Respondents(n)

1

2

Membership in professional organisations

No membership in professional organisations

17(4)

463(96)

Total 480(100)



Respondents who have become members in professional organizations are given

in Table No 20. Out of the sample size of 480 respondents only 17(4) respondents

have become members in professional organistions.

141

Family Structure

Table No: 21

Family structure of respondents

Sl.No Family Structure Responss of Respondents(n)

1

2

Joint family

Nuclear Family

270(56)

210(44)

Total 480(100)



Family structure of the sample size of 480 respondents is show in Table No: 21.

270(56) respondents are having joint family structure, and remaining 210(44)

respondents are having nuclear family structure.

Family size

Table No: 22

Family size of respondents

Sl.no Members in family Respondents(n)

1

2

1-5

6 and more

320(67)

160(33)

Total 480(100)

Source: Field study


Family size of respondents is show in Table no: 22. 320(67) respondents have 1-

5 members in their family and only 160(33) respondents have 6 and members in

their family.

Employment status of spouse

Table No: 23

Employment status of spouse of respondents

Sl.No Employment status of spouse of respondents Respondents(n)

1

2

Employed

Unemployed

177(37)

303(63)

Total 480(100)



142

Employment status of spouse of respondents is show in Table No: 23. It reveals

that 177(37) are employed and 303(63) are unemployed.

Section-II: Analysis of primary data

Table No: 24

Expectations from training and development programmes

Sl.

No

Str

on

gly

Ag

ree

Ag

ree

Nei

ther

ag

ree

no

r

dis

ag

ree

Dis

ag

ree

Str

on

gly

dis

ag

ree.

1. Improving job skills and

product knowledge

381

(79.38)

79

(16.46)

5

(1.04)

8

(1.67)

7

(1.46)

2. For promotional purpose 377

(78.54)

74

(15.42)

4

(0.83)

18

(3.75)

7

(1.46)

3. For my professional growth in

the bank.

52

(10.83)

400

(83.33)

18

(3.75)

5

(1.04)

5

(1.04)

4. To share my experiences with

others.

344

(71.67

105

(21.88)

19

(3.96)

5

(1.04)

7

(1.46)

5. To gain knowledge about my

bank

62

(12.92

398

(82.92)

8

(1.67)

6

(1.25)

6

(1.25)

6. A paid holiday. 4

(0.83)

4

(0.83)

19

(3.96)

407

(84.79)

46

(9.58)

7. As a routine work. 2

(0.42)

3

(0.63)

19

(3.96)

48

(10)

408

(85)

8. To understand different

management functions

51

(10.63)

408

(85)

10

(2.08)

6

(1.25)

5

(1.04)

Source: Field study


1. Improving job skills and product knowledge 381(79.38) respondents strongly

agree and 79(16.46) respondent agree with this question. It revea1s that

employees expect more from TDPs before attending.

2. For promotional purpose. 377 (78.54) respondents strongly agree and 74(15.42)

respondents agree with this question. Employees expect that TDPs should also

help for promotion.

143

3. For my professional growth in the bank. 400 (83.33) respondents agree and 52

(10.83) respondents strongly agree with the statement. TDPs are expected to

facilitate for professional growth of employees.

4. To share my experiences with others. 344(71.67) respondents strongly agree and

105(21.88) agree with this question. TDPs give an opportunity to respondents to

share their experiences related to the work with others.

5. To gain knowledge about my bank. 62 (12.92) respondents strongly agree and

398 (82.92) respondents agree with this question. TDPs make employees

familiar with the organization in order to render better services to the customers.

6. A paid holiday. 46 (9.58) respondents strongly disagree and 407 (84.79)

respondents disagree with this question. Employees consider TDPs as a learning

opportunity.

7. As a routine work. 408(85) respondents strongly disagree and 48(10)

respondents disagree with this question. Respondents attend programmes to

learn skills, knowledge and competencies related to their job.

8. To understand different management functions. 51(10.63) respondents strongly

agree and 408(85) respondents agree with the question. TDPs help respondents

to understand different management functions.

144

Table No: 25

Perception about training and development programmes

Sl.No Strongly

agree Agree

Neither agree nor

disagree Disagree Strongly disagree.

1. Programmes do not make any

difference to employees

3(0.83) 3(0.63) 11(2.29) 66(13.75) 397(82.71)

2. Skills are learnt by experience and

programmes make little difference

4(0.83) 4(0.83) 7(1.46) 390(81.25) 75(15.63)

3. Employees learn more from books

and self study than from attending

programmes

0(00) 0(00) 398(82.92) 34(7.08) 48(10)

4. Programmes teach concepts and

methods for improving skills

56(11.67) 406(84.5) 5(1.04) 7(1.46) 6(1.25)

5. Increases knowledge about the bank

and basic management

376(78.33) 77(16.04) 8(1.67) 10(2.08) 9(1.88)

6. Related to development in banking

sector

391(81.46) 67(13.96) 7(1.46) 8(1.67) 7(1.46)

7. Related to specific job or task 320(66.67) 118(24.58) 14(2.92) 14(2.92) 14(2.92)

8. Programmes are relevant and suitable 67(13.96) 363(75.63) 24(5) 15(3.13) 11(2.29)

9 Cost of programmes are less then

benefits received

358(74.5) 67(13.96) 42(8.75) 7(1.46) 6(1.25)

10 Top management is interested to invest

amount in development of bank staff

353(73.54) 97(20.21) 10(2.08) 11(2.29) 9(1.88)

Source: Field study


145

1. Programmes do not make any difference to employees 397(82.71) respondents

strongly disagree and 66(13.75) respondents disagree with this question. Hence,

TDPs makes a lot of difference and helps respondents to learn new knowledge.

2. Skills are learnt by experience and programmes make little difference 75(15.63)

respondents strongly disagree and 390(81.25) respondents disagree with this

question.TDPs imparts new skills to respondents.

3. Employees learn more from books and self study than from attending

programmes 398(82.92) respondents strongly disagree and 48(10.00)

respondents disagree with this question.TDPs are providing knowledge, skills

which books and self study cannot provide.

4. Programmes teach concepts and methods for improving skills 56(11.67)

respondents strongly agree and 406(84.58) agree with this question. It means

that TDPs teach concepts and methods for improving skills of trainees.

5. Increases knowledge about the bank and basic management 376(78.33)

respondents strongly agree and 77(16.04) respondents that TDPs are successful

in increasing knowledge about the bank and basic management of the

respondents.

6. Related to development in banking sector 391(81.46) respondents strongly

agree and 67(13.96) respondents agree with the above question. It is concluded

that TDPs are related to development in banking sector.

7. Related to specific job or task Out of the total sample size of 480 respondents,

320(66.67) strongly agree and 118(24.58) agree with this question. It can be

interpreted that TDPs are related to specific job or task and helps the

respondents to carry out their present as well as future jobs.

8. Programmes are relevant and suitable 67(13.96) respondents strongly agree and

363(75.63) respondents agree with this question. It means that TDPs are

relevant and suitable for respondents.

9. Cost of programmes is less then benefits received. 358(74.58) respondents

strongly agree and 64(13.96) respondents agree with this question, Hence, it

can be said that TDPs are beneficial to employees.

10. Top management is interested to invest amount in development of bank staff

.353(73.54) respondents strongly agree and 97(20.21) respondents agree with

this question. In may be concluded that top management is interested in

developing its human resources.

146

Table No: 26

Impact of training and development programmes on behavioural changes

Sl.No Impact Strongly

agree

Agree Neither agree

nor disagree

Disagree Strongly disagree.

1 Increased confidence. 265(55.21) 179(37.29) 15(3.13) 9(1.88) 12(2.50)

2 Improved leadership quality and style. 346(72.08) 117(24.38) 7(1.46) 5(1.04) 5(1.04)

3 Improved morale. 362(75.42) 89(18.54) 12(2.50) 9(1.88) 8(1.67)

4 Resulted in better analytical ability. 365(76.04) 69(14.38) 26(5.42) 10(2.08) 10(2.08)

5 Encouraged creativity. 373(77.71) 70(14.58) 27(5.63) 5(1.04) 5(1.04)

6 Developed proactiveness. 357(74.38) 95(19.79) 13(2.71) 8(1.67) 7(1.46)

7 Helped in team building. 329(68.54) 110(22.92) 19(3.96) 11(2.29) 11(2.29)

8 Helped to behave carefully with customers. 373(77.714) 79(16.46) 15(3.13) 7(1.46) 6(1.25)

9 Helped to enjoy work and life. 337(70.21) 68(14.17) 38(7.92) 18(3.75) 19(3.96)

10 Helped to manage stress and time. 347(72.29) 83(17.29) 23(4.79) 14(2.92) 13(2.71)

11 Reduced conflicts with colleagues. 319(66.46) 102(21.25) 30(6.25) 14(2.92) 15(3.13)

12 Helped to learn continuously. 344(71.67) 83(17.29) 17(3.54) 13(2.71) 23(4.79)

13 Prepared to change easily. 319(66.46) 102(21.25) 30(6.25) 14(2.92) 15(3.13)

14 Improved job satisfaction 344(71.67) 83(17.29) 17(3.54) 13(2.71) 23(4.79)

Source: Field study


147

1. Increased confidence: 265(55.21) respondents strongly agree and 179(37.29)

respondents agree with this question. It can be said that TDPs are increasing

confidence of respondents

2. Improved leadership quality and style: 346(72.08) respondents strongly agree

and 117(24.38) respondent agree with this question. It can be interpreted that

TDPs are improving leadership quality and style of respondents.

3. Improved morale: 362(75.42) respondents strongly agree and 89(18.54)

respondents agree with this question. It means that TDPs are improving

morale of respondents.

4. Resulted in better analytical ability: Out of 480 respondents 356 (76.04)

strongly agree and 69 (14.38) agree with this question. It may be concluded

that TDPs are increasing analytical ability

5. Encouraged creativity: 373 (77.71) respondents strongly agree and 70 (14.58)

agree with this question. It means that TDPs are encouraging creativity.

6. Developed proactiveness: 357 (74.38) respondents strongly agree and 95

(19.79) respondents Agree with this question. It can be said that TDPs

developed proactiveness.

7. Helped in team building: 329 (68.54) respondents strongly agree and 110

(22.92) agree with this question. It said that TDPs are helping in team building

to achieve the goals of the bank.

8. Helped to behave carefully with customers: 373 (77.71) respondents strongly

agree and 73 (16.46) respondents agree with the above question. It may be

interpreted that TDPs are changing the behaviour of bank staff to behave

carefully with customers.

148

9. Helped to enjoy work and life: 337 (70.21) respondents strongly agree and 68

(14.17) respondents agree with this question. It may be concluded that TDPs

makes employees to enjoy both work and life.

10. Helped to manage stress and time: 347 (72.29) respondents strongly agree and

83 (17.29) agree with the question. Hence it is concluded that TDPs helps

employees to mange stress and time.

11. Reduced conflicts with colleagues: Out of 480 respondents, 319 (66.46)

strongly agree and 102 (21.25) agree with this question. It is said that TDPs

are reducing conflicts in the bank.

12. Helped to learn continuously: 344 (71.67) respondents strongly agree and 83

(17.29) respondents agree with this question. It is interpreted that TDPs makes

staff to learn continuously.

13. Prepared to change easily: 319 (66.46) respondents strongly agree and 102

(21.25) respondents agree with this question. It means that TDPs makes bank

staff to change easily with the changing banking industry.

14. Improved job satisfaction: 344 (71.69) respondents strongly agree and 83

(17.29) respondents agree with this question. It may be concluded that TDPs

are successful in improving job satisfaction.

149

Table No: 27

Impact of training and development programmes on job performance


agree

Agree Neither agree

nor disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

1. Improved my ability to achieve bank’s goals. 266(55.42) 178(375.08) 15(3.13) 9(1.88) 12(2.5)

2. Improved efficiency in dealing with problems involving

human relations.

346(72.08) 117(24.38) 7(1.46) 5(1.04) 5(1.04)

3. Improved decision-making skills. 362(75.42) 89(18.54) 12(2.50) 9(1.88) 8(1.67)

4. Helped to infuse an atmosphere of team work in my team. 365(76.02) 69(14.38) 26(5.42) 10(2.08) 10(2.08)

5. Helped to transfer benefits of training to job. 373(77.71) 70(14.58) 27(5.63) 5(1.04) 5(1.04)

6. Increased knowledge of a particular job. 357(74.38) 95(19.79) 13(2.71) 8(1.67) 7(1.46)

7. Increased knowledge to achieve specific tasks 328(68.33) 111(23.13) 19(3.96) 11(2.29) 11(2.29)

8. Helped to socialize with the bank 373(77.71) 79(16.46) 15(3.13) 7(1.46) 6(1.25)

9. Helped to understand my bank and its functions 338(70.42) 67(13.96) 38(7.92) 18(3.75) 19(3.96)

10. Improved my attitude to work with others 347(72.29) 83(17.29) 23(4.79) 14(2.92) 13(2.71)

11. Resulted in improved productivity 319(66.46) 102(21.25) 30(6.25) 14(2.92) 15(3.13)

12. Helped to clarify some of my doubts 344(71.67) 83(17.29) 17(3.54) 13(2.71) 13(4.79)

Source: Field study


150

1. Improved my ability to achieve bank’s goals: 266(55.42) respondents strongly

agree and 178(37.08) respondents agree with this question. It is said that TDPs

are improving ability of stuff to achieve banks goals.

2. Improved efficiency in dealing with problems involving human relations:

346(72.08) respondents strongly agree and 117 (24.38) respondent agree with

this question. It can be said that TDPs are improving efficiency in dealing with

problems involving human relations.

3. Improved decision-making skills: 362(75.42) respondents strongly agree where

as 89 (18.54) agree with this question. Hence, it is interpreted that TDPs

improved decision makings skills.

4. Helped to infuse an atmosphere of teamwork in my team: 365(76.04)

respondents strongly agree and 69(14.38) respondents agree with this question.

It may be interpreted that TDPs helped to infuse an atmosphere of them work.

5. Helped to transfer benefits of training to job: 373 (77.71) respondents strongly

agree and. 70 (14.58) respondents agree with this question. It means that job

performance improved by transferring benefits of training to job.

6. Increased knowledge of a particular job: Out of the total respondents 357

(74.38) strongly agree and 95 (19.79) agree with this question. It may be said

that TDPs increased knowledge of a particular job.

7. Increased knowledge to achieve specific tasks: Out of the sample size 480

respondents, 328 (68.33) strongly agree and 111 (23.13) with this question. It

may be said that TDPs increased knowledge to achieve specific tasks.

8. Helped to socialize with the bank: Out of 480 respondents 373 (77.71)

respondents strongly agree and 79 (16.46) agree with this question. It may be

concluded that TDPs helped to socialize with the bank.

9. Helped to understand my bank and its functions: 338 (70.42) respondents

strongly agree and 67 (13.96) respondents agree with this question. It can be

concluded that TDPs helped the respondents to understand the bank and its

functions properly.

151

10. Improved my attitude to work with others: 347(72.29) respondents strongly

agree and 83 (17.29) respondents agree with this question. It can be interpreted

that TDPs improved the attitude of respondents to work others.

11. Resulted in improved productivity: 319(66.46) respondents strongly agree and

102 (21.25) respondents agree with this question. It may be interpreted that

TDPs improved productivity.

12. Helped to clarify some of my doubts: 344 (71.47) respondents strongly agree

and 83 (17.29 respondents agree with this question. It can be said that TDPs

helped to clarity the doubts of the respondents

Table No: 28

Perception about Training and development programmes administration

Sl.No. Details Highly

satisfied Satisfied

Neither

satisfied nor

dissatisfied

Dissatisfied. Highly

dissatisfied

1.

Communicating about

programmes to employees

365

(76.04)

69

(14.38)

26

(5.42)

10

(2.08)

10

(2.08)

2. Nomination of employees to

programmes

373

(77.71)

70

(14.58)

27

(5.63)

5

(1.04)

5

(1.04)

3. Preparation of training

material

357

(74.38)

95

(19.79)

13

(2.71)

8

(1.67)

7

(1.46)

4. Arrangements at centre 329

(68.54)

110

(22.92)

19

(3.96)

11

(2.29)

11

(2.29)

5. Support by faculty during

programmes

372

(77.5)

80

(16.67)

15

(3.13)

7

(1.46)

6

(1.25)

6. Distribution of evaluation

materials

338

(70.42)

67

(13.96)

38

(7.92)

18

(3.75)

19

(3.96)

7. Interaction between trainers

and trainees

347

(72.29)

83

(17.29)

23

(4.79)

14

(2.92)

13

(2.71)

8. Noting about trainings

attended in the service sheets

318

(66.25)

103

(21.46)

30

(6.25)

14

(2.92)

15

(3.13)

9. Role of training programmes

attended for consideration for

posting

344

(71.67)

83

(17.29)

17

(3.54)

13

(2.71)

23

(4.79)

Source: Field study


152

10. Communicating about programmes to employees: Out of 480 sample

respondents, 365 (76.04) are highly satisfied whereas 69 (14.38) are Satisfied

with this question. It is interpreted that employees are communicated in

advance about TDPs.

11. Nomination of employees to programmes: 373 (77.71) respondents are highly

satisfied and 70(14.58) respondents are satisfied with this question. It is

conclyded that respondents are satisfied with nomination to TDPs.

12. Preparation of training material: 357 (74.38) respondents are highly satisfied

and 95(19.79) respondents are satisfied with this question. It are said that

majority of the respondents are happy with training material.

13. Arrangements at center: 329 (68.54) respondents are highly satisfied and 110

(22.92) respondents are satisfied with the arrangements made at training

centers. It may be said that training centers are having all the facilities to meet

the demands of respondents.

14. Support by faculty during programmes: 372 (77.50 respondents are highly

satisfied and 80 (16.67 respondents satisfied with this question. It may be

concluded that raining center faculty give support for learning during the

programmes.

15. Distribution of evaluation materials: 338 (70.42 respondents are highly

satisfied whereas 67 (13.96) respondents are satisfied with this question. It

may be said that majority of the respondents are satisfied with distribution of

evaluation materials.

16. Interaction between trainers and trainees: Out of 480 respondents, 347(72.29)

are satisfied. It may be concluded that there is effective interaction between

trainers and trainees.

17. Noting about trainings attended in the service sheets: Out of the total sample

size, 318 (66.25) are highly satisfied and 103 (21.46) are satisfied with this

question. It is said that majority of the respondents are satisfied with the notary

about programmes

18. Role of training programmes attended for consideration for posting: 344

(71.67) respondents are highly satisfied and 83 (17.29) respondents are

153

satisfied with this question. It may be said that before posting to new jobs,

programmes attended by respondents are considered.

Table No: 29

Climate for transfer of learning after attending training and development programmes


agree

Agree Neither

agree nor

disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

1. Newly trained employees

discuss how to apply their

training on the job with

their supervisors and

colleagues

18

(3.75)

461

(96.04)

1

(0.21)

0

(0)

0

(0)

2. The job of a newly trained

employee is designed in

such a way as to allow him

to use the skills to be taught

in training

14

(2.92)

452

(94.17)

14

(2.92)

0

(0)

0

(0)

3. Supervisors notice newly

trained employees

418

(87.08)

48

(10)

14

(2.92)

0

(0)

0

(0)

4 When newly trained

employees fail to use their

training, they are not

reprimanded.

432

(90)

2

(0.42)

32

(6.67)

0

(0)

14

(2.92)

5. Newly trained employees

who successfully use their

training will receive a

salary increase

11

(2.29)

11

(2.29)

14

(2.92)

361

(75.21)

83

(17.29)

6. Supervisors appreciate

newly trained employees

who perform their job as

taught in training

418

(87.08)

62

(12.92)

0

(0)

0

(0)

0

(0)

7. Employees share learning

with each other and use job

as a basis for applying and

creating knowledge

61

(12.71)

419

(87.29)

0

(0)

0

(0)

0

(0)

8. Systems are developed for

creating, capturing and

sharing knowledge

15

(3.13)

465

(96.88)

0

(0)

0

(0)

0

(0)

9. Employees are encouraged

to think innovatively

33

(6.88)

447

(93.13)

0

(0)

0

(0)

0

(0)

10 Learning is rewarded,

promoted and supported

1

(0.21)

437

(91.04)

42

(8.75)

0

(0)

0

(0)

Source: Field study


154

1. Newly trained employees discuss how to apply their training on the job with

their supervisors and colleagues: 18 (3.75) respondents strongly agree and 461

(96.04) respondents agree with this question. It means that transfer of learning to

job is possible in the bank.

2. The job of a newly trained employee is designed in such a way as to allow him

to use the skills to be taught in training: 4 (2.92) respondents strongly agree and

452 (91.17) agree with this question. It may be said that posting of employees is

done in such a manner where they can apply the skills taught in TDPs.

3. Supervisors notice newly trained employees: 418 (87.08) respondents strongly

agree and 48 (10) respondents agree with this question. It may be interpreted

that their seniors notice trained employees.

4. When newly trained employees fail to use their training, they are not

reprimanded: 83 (17.29) respondents strongly disagree and 361 (75.21)

respondents disagree with this question. it may be concluded that employees are

reprimanded when they fail to use training knowledge and skills.

5. Newly trained employees who successfully use their training will receive a

salary increase: 83(17.29) respondents strongly disagree and 361 (75.21)

respondents disagree with this question It means that there is no salary increase

is given to employees who successfully use their training knowledge.

6. Supervisors appreciate newly trained employees who perform their job as taught

in training: 418 (87.08) respondents strongly agree and 2 (12.92) respondents

agree with this. It is said that employees are appreciated by their suspensors

when they do their job efficiently.

7. Employees share learning with each other and use job as a basis for applying

and creating knowledge: 61 (12.71) respondents strongly agree and 419 (87.29)

respondents agree with this question. It means that respondents share their

learning with colleagues and increase knowledge.

8. Systems are developed for creating, capturing and sharing knowledge: Out of

480 sample size 15 (3.13) strongly agree and 465 (96.88) agree with this

155

question. it may be said that bank environment provides systems for applying

new knowledge, skills etc.

9. Employees are encouraged to think innovatively: Out of total sample size 33

(6.88) strongly agree and 447 (93.13) agree with this question. Hence, it can be

concluded that respondents are motivated to think from different angles.

10. Learning is rewarded, promoted and supported: 431 (91.04) respondents agree

with this question. It may be interpreted that majority of the respondents feel

that attending programmes is rewarded, promoted and supported.

Table No: 30

Overall opinion about training and development programmes

Sl.No Strongly

agree

Agree Neither

agree nor

disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

1. Programmes are relevant to the

achievement of bank’s vision,

mission

433

(90.21)

47

(9.79)

0

(0)

0

(0)

0

(0)

2. Programmes have real and

lasting value

19

(3.96)

461

(96.04)

0

(0)

0

(0)

0

(0)

3. Money could have been better

spent on any other activity that

would have yielded better

results in terms of

organizational effectiveness

12

(2.50)

12

(2.50)

20

(4.17)

373

(77.71)

63

(13.13)

4. Programmes are an ornamental

exercise

0

(0)

0

(0)

12

(2.50)

128

(26.67)

340

(70.83)

5. Improves the quality of work

and the quality of life of the

staff

18

(3.75)

462

(96.25)

0

(0)

0

(0)

0

(0)

6 Helps to deal successfully with

the complex nature of

challenges that confront the

bank

465

(96.88)

15

(3.13)

0

(0)

0

(0)

0

(0)

7 Programmes are regularly and

properly organized

451

(93.96)

29

(6.04)

0

(0)

0

(0)

0

(0)

Source: Field study


19. Programmes are relevant to the achievement of bank’s vision, mission: 433

(90.21) respondents strongly agree where as 47 (9.79) aree with this question.

it can be concluded that TDPs are relevant and help bank staff to achieve

banks`s vision and mission.

156

20. Programmes have real and lasting value: Out of 4801 respondents 19 (3.96)

strongly agree and 461 (96.04) agree with this question. It is said that TDPs

have real and lasting value on respondents and help throughout their job.

21. Money could have been better spent on any other activity that would have

yielded better results in terms of organizational effectiveness: 63

(13.13) respondents strongly disagree and 373 (77.71) respondents disagree

with this question. It may be said that TDPS are useful for bank staff and help

for HRD.

22. Programmes are an ornamental exercise: 340 (70.83) respondents strongly

disagree and 128 (26.67) respondents disagree with this question. It is

interpreted that TDPs are not an ornamental exercise.

23. Improves the quality of work and the quality of life of the staff: 18 (3.75)

respondents strongly agree and 462 (96.25) respondents agree with this

question. It means that TDPs improve the quality of work and life of

respondents.

24. Helps to deal successfully with the complex nature of challenges that confront

the bank. Out of the sample size, 465 (96.88) respondents strongly agree and

15 (3.13) respondents agree with this question. It can be said that TDPs help to

face the challenges of the banking industry.

25. Programmes are regularly and properly organized: 451 (93.96) respondents

strongly agree and 19 (6.04) agree with this question. It means that TDPs are

properly and regularly organized to benefit the bank staff.

157

Table No: 31

Perception about training centers Sl.No Details Highly

satisfied Satisfied Neither satisfied nor

dissatisfied Dissatisfied. Highly

dissatisfied.

I. Facilities. in classroom 265 (55.21)

179 (37.29)

15 (3.13)

9 (1.88)

12 (2.50)

II. Facilities. in hostel 346 (72.08)

117 (24.33)

7 (1.46)

5 (1.04)

5 (1.04)

III. Facilities for extra-curricular activities in hostel. 362 (75.42)

89 (18.54)

12 (2.50)

9 (1.88)

8 (1.67)

IV. Medical Facilities. 365 (76.04)

69 (14.38)

26 (5.42)

10 (2.08)

10 (2.08)

V. Library Facilities. 373 (77.71)

70 (14.58)

27 (5.63)

5 (1.04)

5 (1.04)

VI. Training Methods / aids used for covering different topics.

357 (74.38)

95 (19.79)

13 (2.71)

8 (1.67)

7 (1.46)

1. Lecture. 329 (68.54)

110 (22.92)

19 (3.96)

11 (2.29)

11 (2.29)

2. Group discussion 373 (77.71)

79 (16.46)

15 (3.13)

7 (1.46)

6 (1.25)

3. Brain storming. 337 (70.21)

68 (14.17)

38 (7.92)

18 (3.75)

19 (3.96)

4. Assignments. 347 (72.29)

83 (17.29)

23 (4.79)

14 (2.92)

13 (2.71)

5. Satellite training 319 (66.46)

102 (21.25)

30 (6.25)

14 (2.92)

15 (8.13)

6. Case study. 344 (71.67)

83 (17.29)

17 (3.54)

13 (2.71)

23 (4.79)

7. Project method. 319 (66.46)

102 (21.25)

30 (6.25)

14 (2.92)

15 (3.13)

8. Games and educational tours. 344 (71.67)

83 (17.29)

17 (3.54)

13 (2.71)

23 (4.79)

9. Role play. 265 (55.21)

179 (37.29)

15 (3.13)

9 (1.88)

12 (2.50)

10. Quiz 346 (72.08)

117 (24.38)

7 (1.46)

5 (1.04)

5 (1.04)

11. Demonstration. 362 (75.42)

89 (18.54)

12 (2.50)

9 (1.88)

8 (1.67)

12 Field visit 365 (76.04)

69 (14.38)

26 (5.42)

10 (2.08)

10 (2.08)

13 Audio visual 373 (77.71)

70 (14.58)

27 (5.63)

5 (1.04)

5 (1.04)

14 Transformation training 357 (74.38)

95 (19.79)

13 (2.71)

8 (1.67)

7 (1.46)

15 Video Conference 329 (68.54)

110 (22.92)

19 (3.96)

11 (2.29)

11 (2.29)

16 Web based learning 373 (77.71)

79 (16.46)

15 (3.13)

7 (1.46)

6 (1.25)

17 On-line learning 337 (70.21)

68 (14.17)

38 (7.92

18 (3.75)

19 (3.96)

VII. Internet facility. 347 (72.29)

83 (17.29)

23 (4.79)

14 (2.92)

13 (2.71)

VIII Television facility. 319 (66.46)

102 (21.25)

30 (6.25)

14 (2.92)

15 (3.13)

IX No. of sessions in a day. 344 (71.67)

83 (17.29)

17 (3.54)

13 (2.71)

23 (4.73)

X Duration of programmes 319 (66.46)

102 (21.25)

30 (6.25)

14 (2.92)

15 (3.13)

XI Number of speakers in a day. 344 (71.67)

83 (17.29)

17 (3.54)

13 (2.71)

23

XII Number of speakers for a programme. 344 (71.67)

83 (17.29)

17 (3.54)

13 (2.71)

23

XIII Duration of the sessions. 319 (66.46)

102 (21.25)

30 (6.25)

14 (2.92)

15

XIV Duration of the programme. 344 (71.67)

83 (17.29)

17 (3.54)

13 (2.71)

23

Source: Field study


158

1. Facilities in classroom: Out of 480 respondents, 265 (55.21) were highly

satisfied and 179 (37.29) were satisfied with the question. It may be interpreted

that majority of the respondents were satisfied with the facilities in the

classroom.

2. Facilities in hostel: Out of the total sample size, 346 (72.08) were highly

satisfied and 117 (24.38) were satisfied with this question. It can be interpreted

that most of the respondents were satisfied with the facilities in the facilities in

the hostel.

3. Facilities for extra-curricular activities in hostel: 362 (75.42) respondents were

highly satisfied and 89(18.54) respondents were satisfied with this question. It

were satisfied with this question. It may be concluded that training centres have

enough facilities for extra-curricular activities.

4. Medical Facilities: 365 (76.04) respondents were highly satisfied and 69

(124.38) were satisfied with this question. It can be concluded that training

centres have necessary medical facilities.

5. Library Facilities: 373 (77.71) respondents were highly satisfied and 70 (14.58)

were satisfied with this question. It may be said that training centres have good

library facilities.

6. Training Methods / aids used for covering different topics: 357 (74.38)

respondents were highly satisfied and 95(19.79) respondents were satisfied with

this question. It can be said that majority of the respondents were happy with

the training methods.

7. Lecture: 329 (68.54) respondents were highly satisfied whereas 110(22.92)

respondents were satisfied with this question. It may be said that majority of the

respondents were satisfied with lecture method.

159

8. Group discussion: 373 (77.71) respondents were highly satisfied and 79 (16.46)

respondents were satisfied with this question. It can be said that most of the

respondent were satisfied with the group discussion method.

9. Brain storming: 337 (70.21) respondents were highly satisfied and 68(14.17)

respondents were satisfied with this question. It can be interpreted that majority

of the respondents were satisfied with brain storming method.

10. Assignments: 347 (72.29) respondents were highly satisfied and 83 (17.29)

were satisfied with this question. It may be said that respondents were satisfied

with assignments.

11. Satellite training: 319 (66.46) respondents were highly satisfied and 102 (21.25)

were satisfied with this question. It may be interpreted that respondents were

satisfied that resplendent were satisfied with satellite training method.

12. Case study: 344 (71.67) respondents were highly satisfied and 83 (17.29) were

satisfied with this question. It can be concluded that most of the respondents

were satisfied with case study method.

13. Project method: Out of the sample size, 319 (66.46) were highly satisfied and

102(21.25) were highly satisfied and 102(21.25) were satisfied with this

question. It may be said that majority of the respondents were satisfied with

project method.

14. Games and educational tours: 344 (71.67) respondents were highly satisfied and

83 (17.29) respondents were satisfied with this question. It can be said that most

of the respondents were satisfied with games and educational tours method.

15. Role play: 265 (55.21) respondents were highly satisfied and 179 (37.29) were

highly satisfied and 179 (37.29) were satisfied with this question. It may be

concluded that, respondent were satisfied with role play method.

160

16. Quiz: Out o f480 respondents, 346 (72.08) were highly satisfied and 117

(24.38) were satisfies with this question. It can be concluded that, majority of

the respondent were satisfied with quiz method

17. Demonstration: 362 (75.42) respondents were highly satisfied and 89 (18.54)

were satisfied with the question. It can be satisfied with the question. It can be

interpreted that, most of the respondents were satisfied with demonstration

method.

18. Filed visit: 365 (76.04) respondents were highly satisfied and 69 (14.38) were

satisfied with the question. It may be interpreted that most of the respondents

were satisfied with filed visit method of training.

19. Audio visual: 373 (77.71) respondents were highly satisfied and 70 (14.58)

were satisfied with this question. It may be said that responds were satisfied

with audio visual method.

20. Transformation training: Out of 480 respondents 357(74.38) were highly

satisfied and 95 (19.79) were satisfied with this question. It can be said that

respondents dents were satisfied with transformation training.

21. Video conference: 329 (68.54) respondents were highly satisfied and

110(22.92) were satisfied with the question. It can be concluded that most of

the respondents were satisfied with video conference method of training.

22. Web based learning: 373 (77.71) respondents were highly satisfied and 79

(16.46) were satisfied with this question. It may be concluded that majority of

the respondents were satisfied with web based learning method.

23. One-line-learning: 337 (70.21) respondents were highly satisfied whereas

68(14.17) were satisfied with this question. It may be said that respondents

were satisfied with on-line learning method.

161

24. Internet facility: Out of the total size 347 (72.29) were highly satisfied and 83

(17.29) were satisfied with the question. It can be said that most of the

respondents were satisfied with Internet Facility in the training centres.

25. Television facility: Out of 480 sample size, 319 (66.46) were highly satisfied

and 102 (21.25) were satisfied with this question. It can be concluded that

majority of the respondents were satisfied with television facility available in

the training centres.

26. No. of sessions in a day: Out of 480 respondents, 344 (71.67) were highly

satisfied and 83 (17.29) were satisfied with the question. It may be concluded

that respondents were satisfied with the number of sessions per day.

27. Duration of programmes: 319 (66.46) respondents were highly satisfied and

102(21.25) were satisfied with this question. It may be interpreted that most of

the respondent were satisfied with the duration of TDPs,

28. Number of speakers in a day: 344 (71.67) respondents were highly satisfied and

83 (17.29) were satisfied with this question. It can be interpreted that

respondents were satisfied with the number of spseakers per day.

29. Number of speakers for a programme: 344 (71.67) respondents were highly

satisfied and 83 (17.29) were satisfied with the question. It can be said that

respondents were satisfied be said that respondents were satisfied with the

number of speakers for a programme.

30. Duration of the sessions: 319 (66.46) respondents were satisfied with the

question. It means that most of the respondents were satisfied with the duration

of the sessions.

31. Duration of the programme: 344 (71.67) respondents were highly satisfied and

83 (17.29) were satisfied with this question. It may be interpreted that majority

of the respondents were satisfied with duration of the programme.

162

Table No: 32

Impact of training and development programmes on self development


agree

Agree Neither agree

nor disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

1. Helped to achieve my personal

goals and other aspirations

329

(68.54)

110

(22.92)

19

(3.96)

11

(2.29)

11

(2.29)

2. Derived benefits through

interaction with others

373

(77.71)

79

(16.46)

15

(3.13)

7

(1.46)

6

(1.25)

3. Helped to develop new ideas 337

(70.21)

68

(14.17)

38

(7.92)

18

(3.75)

19

(3.96)

4. Useful in long-term

development

347

(72.29)

83

(17.29)

23

(4.79)

14

(2.92)

13

(2.71)

5. Helped to develop personality 319

(66.46)

102

(21.25)

30

(6.25)

14

(2.92)

15

(3.13)

6. Helped to reduce job related

stress

344

(71.67)

83

(17.29)

17

(3.54)

13

(2.71)

23

(4.79)

7. Led to higher pride of work 319

(66.46)

102

(21.25)

30

(6.25)

14

(2.92)

15

(3.13)

8. Related to promotion and career

development

344

(71.67)

83

(17.29)

17

(3.54)

13

(2.71)

23

(4.79)

9. Helped to acquire knowledge 265

(55.21)

179

(37.29)

15

(3.13)

9

(1.88)

12

(2.50)

Source: Field study


1. Helped to achieve my personal goals and other aspirations: Out of 480

respondents, 329 (68.54) strongly agree and 110 (22.92) agree with this

question. It may be interpreted that TDPs also help to achieve personal and

other aspiration of bank staff.

2. Derived benefits through interaction with others: 373 (77.71) respondents

strongly agree and 79 (16.46) respondents agree with this question. It can be

concluded that TDPs provide an opportunity to interact with others and derive

benefits.

163

3. Helped to develop new ideas: 337 (70.21) respondents strongly agree and 68

(14.17) respondents agree with this question. It can be said that TDPs help to

develop new ideas among respondents.

4. Useful in long-term development: 347 (72.29) respondents strongly agree and

83 (17.29) respondents agree with this question. It may be said that TDPs focus

on long term development of bank staff.

5. Helped to develop personality: Out of the total sample size, 319 (66.46)

respondents strongly agree and 102 (21.25) respondents agree with this

question. It may be concluded TDPs also help for personality development of

bank staff.

6. Helped to reduce job related stress: 344 (71.67) respondents strongly agree and

83 (17.29) respondents agree with this question. It can be said that TDPs help in

reducing job related stress of respondents.

7. Led to higher pride of work: 319 (71.67) respondents strongly agree and 102

(21.25) respondents agree with this question. TDPs are increasing higher pride

of work among respondents.

8. Related to promotion and career development: 344 (71.67) respondents

strongly agree and 83 (17.29) respondents agree with this question. It may be

interpreted that TDPs are related to promotion and career development.

9. Helped to acquire knowledge: 265 (55.21) respondents strongly agree and 179

(37.29) respondents agree with this question. It can be said that TDPs helped to

acquire knowledge.

164

Table No: 33

Perception about the Trainers

Source: Field study


1. Contents were according to the objectives: Out of 480 respondents, 346 (72.08)

strongly agree and 117 (24.38) agree with this question. It means that trainers

covered the topics according to contents.

2. Clarity of contents and effectiveness of method: Out of the sample size 362

(75.42) strongly agree and 89 (18.54) agree with this question. It can be said that

trainers’ method of teaching was effective.

Sl.No Strongly

agree

Agree Neither

agree nor

disagree

Disagree Strongly

disagree

1. Contents were according to the

objectives

346

(72.08)

117

(24.38)

7

(1.46)

5

(1.04)

5

(1.04)

2. Clarity of contents and effectiveness of

method

362

(75.42)

89

(18.54)

12

(2.50)

9

(1.88)

8

(1.67)

3. Preparation of trainers 365

(76.04)

69

(14.38)

26

(5.42)

10

(2.08)

10

(2.08)

4. Relevance of the topic 373

(77.71)

70

(14.58)

27

(5.63)

5

(1.04)

5

(1.04)

5 Trainers involvement in the topic 357

(74.38)

95

(19.79)

13

(2.71)

8

(1.67)

7

(1.46)

6. Suitability of the trainers 329

(68.54)

110

(22.92)

19

(3.96)

11

(2.29)

11

(2.29)

7 Trainers made the training enjoyable. 373

(77.71)

79

(16.46)

15

(3.13)

7

(1.46)

6

(1.25)

8. Trainers allowed for two-way

communication.

337

(70.21)

68

(14.17)

38

(7.92)

18

(3.75)

19

(3.96)

165

3. Preparation of trainers: 365 (76.04) respondents strongly agree and 63 (14.38)

respondents agree with this question. It may be said that trainers teaching was

related to the topic.

4. Relevance of the topic: 357 (74.38) respondents strongly agree and 95 (19.79)

respondents agree with this question. It is said that trainees involvements the

topic was liked by the respondents

5. Trainers involvement in the topic: 329 (68.54) respondents strongly agree and

110(22.92) respondents agree with this question. It may be said that trainers

wire suitable for TDPs

6. Suitability of the trainers: 373 (77.17) respondents strongly agree and 79 (16.46)

respondents agree with this question Trainers made the training enjoyable.

7. Trainers allowed for two-way communication: 337(70.21) respondents strongly

agree and 68 (14.17) respondents agree with this question. It may be concluded

that trainers allowed for effective tw/o-way.

166

Section-III: Descriptive Statistics

In this section mean and standard values among different factors like age

groups, designations, sex, educational qualifications, presently pursuing any

degree/course, degree / course completed after joining bank, membership in

professional organizations, years of service, number of training and development

programmes attended, number of promotions received, family structure, family size,

marital status and employment status of spouse with respect to training and

development programmes and its components like expectations from training and

development programmes, perception about training and development programmes,

impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change, impact of

training and development programmes on job performance, perception about

training and development programmes on administration, climate for transfer of

learning after attending training and development programmes, overall opinion

about training and development programmes, perception about training centers,

impact of training and development programmes on self development and

perception about trainers of bank employees were calculated and presented in the

following section.

167

Table No: 34 Mean and SD of training and development programmes and its components of bank

employees by age groups

Variables

Summary

20-29

years

30-39

years

40-49

years

50-59

years

Total

n=100 n=109 n=155 n=116 n=480

Training and development

programmes

Mean 492.18 519.83 516.27 509.75 510.49

SD 37.01 29.53 27.99 31.83 32.80

Expectations from training and

development programmes

Mean 29.22 29.06 29.35 29.42 29.28

SD 1.79 2.03 1.72 1.62 1.78

Perception about training and


Mean 35.96 37.42 37.34 36.81 36.94

SD 3.05 2.64 2.44 2.93 2.79

Impact of training and development

programmes on behavioral change

Mean 60.65 65.22 64.59 63.53 63.66

SD 5.71 4.49 4.37 4.91 5.09


programmes on job performance

Mean 52.23 55.99 55.29 54.93 54.73

SD 4.75 3.71 3.70 3.73 4.16



administration

Mean 39.14 42.05 41.47 41.06 41.02

SD 3.93 2.99 3.14 3.34 3.48

Climate for transfer of learning after

attending training and development

programmes

Mean 40.78 40.57 40.70 40.36 40.61

SD 1.70 1.07 1.48 1.51 1.46

Overall opinion about training and


Mean 26.23 26.17 26.21 26.35 26.24

SD 1.04 0.83 0.77 1.02 0.91

Perception about training centers

Mean 134.00 144.17 143.10 140.12 140.73

SD 13.29 10.56 10.09 11.82 11.92


programmes on self development

Mean 38.63 41.66 41.15 39.95 40.45

SD 4.65 3.49 3.41 4.24 4.06

Perception about the trainers

Mean 35.34 37.52 37.07 37.21 36.85

SD 3.72 2.61 2.79 2.78 3.06

Source : Field Study

Table No: 34 represent the mean and SD of evaluation of training and

development programmes and its components of bank employees by age groups.

The mean of training and development programmes is 510.49±32.80, in which the

mean of training and development programmes score is highest in employees

belonging to 30-39 years of age groups (519.83±29.53) followed by 40-49 years

(516.27±31.83), 50-59 years (509.75±31.83) and 20-29 years (492.18±37.01). The

mean and SD of components of evaluation of training and development

programmes are also presented in the above table and in the Chart No:1.

168

492.18

37.01

519.83

29.53

516.27

27.99

509.75

31.83

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alu

e

20-29 years 30-39 years 40-49 years 50-59 years

Chart No:1 Comparison of age groups among employees of

SBI Bank with TDPs scores

Mean SD

Table No: 35 Mean and SD of training and development programmes and its components of bank

employees by their designations Variable

Assistants Senior

assistants

Special

assistants

Scale –I

Officers

Scale –II

Officers

Scale –III

Officers

Total

n=100 n=100 n=100 n=90 n=60 n=30 n=480

Training and development programmes

Mean 492.18 515.98 514.51 520.30 511.58 508.13 510.49

SD 37.01 29.75 31.80 27.69 29.61 29.26 32.80

Expectations from training and development programmes

Mean 29.22 28.81 29.56 29.33 29.40 29.63 29.28

SD 1.79 1.81 1.73 1.91 1.65 1.50 1.78

Perception about training and development programmes

Mean 35.96 37.11 37.03 37.68 36.78 37.47 36.94

SD 3.05 2.88 2.85 2.27 2.74 2.06 2.79

Impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change

Mean 60.65 64.66 64.21 65.21 63.98 63.17 63.66

SD 5.71 4.68 4.84 4.22 4.49 4.84 5.09

impact of training and development programmes on job performance

Mean 52.23 55.80 55.22 55.72 54.55 55.17 54.73

SD 4.75 3.52 3.94 3.70 4.01 3.00 4.16

Perception about training and development programmes administration

Mean 39.14 41.81 41.47 41.99 40.63 40.97 41.02

SD 3.93 3.03 3.38 2.92 3.40 2.94 3.48

Climate for transfer of learning after attending training and development programmes

Mean 40.78 40.53 40.66 40.46 40.62 40.53 40.61

SD 1.70 1.29 1.40 1.31 1.89 0.51 1.46

overall opinion about training and development programmes

Mean 26.23 26.37 26.42 26.03 26.13 26.07 26.24

SD 1.04 1.00 1.00 0.64 0.75 0.52 0.91

perception about training centers Mean 134.00 142.48 142.02 144.70 142.20 138.17 140.73

SD 13.29 11.72 11.07 9.25 9.75 12.93 11.92

impact of training and development programmes on self development

Mean 38.63 40.84 40.49 42.11 40.82 39.37 40.45

SD 4.65 3.99 4.04 2.72 3.26 4.77 4.06

perception about the trainers Mean 35.34 37.57 37.43 37.07 36.47 37.60 36.85

SD 3.72 2.62 2.72 2.87 2.97 1.96 3.06

Source: Field study

169


development programmes and its components of bank employees by their

designations. The mean of training and development programmes is 510.49±32.80,

in which the scale I officers have higher mean of training and development

programmes score (520.30±27.69) and assistants have least mean of training and

development programmes score (492.18±37.01) followed by senior assistants

(515.98±29.75), special assistants (514.51±31.80), scale II officers (511.58±29.61),

and scale III officers (508.13±29.26). The mean and SD of components of

evaluation of training and development programmes are also presented according to

designations in the above table and in the Chart No: 2

492.18

37.01

515.98

29.75

514.51

31.80

520.30

27.69

511.58

29.61

508.13

29.26

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alue

Assistants Senior

assistants

Special

assistants

Scale –I

Officers

Scale –II

Officers

Scale –III

Officers

Figure: Comparison of designations of employees of SBI bank with

training and development programme scores

Mean SD

170

Table No: 36

Mean and SD of training and development programmes and its components of bank

employees by assistants and officers

Variable

Summary

Assistants Officers Total

n=300 n=180 n=480

training and development

programmes

Mean 507.5567 515.3667 510.4854

SD 34.65 28.89 32.80



Mean 29.20 29.41 29.28

SD 1.80 1.76 1.78



Mean 36.70 37.34 36.94

SD 2.97 2.43 2.79

Impact of training and

development programmes on

behavioral change

Mean 63.17 64.46 63.66

SD 5.39 4.46 5.09

impact of training and


job performance

Mean 54.42 55.24 54.73

SD 4.38 3.72 4.16



administration

Mean 40.81 41.37 41.02

SD 3.66 3.14 3.48

Climate for transfer of learning

after attending training and


Mean 40.66 40.52 40.61

SD 1.47 1.44 1.46

overall opinion about training

and development programmes

Mean 26.34 26.07 26.24

SD 1.01 0.66 0.91

perception about training

centers

Mean 139.50 142.78 140.73

SD 12.64 10.32 11.92

impact of training and


self development

Mean 39.99 41.22 40.45

SD 4.33 3.45 4.06

perception about the trainers Mean 36.78 36.96 36.85

SD 3.22 2.79 3.06

Source: Field Study

171


development programmes and its components of bank employees by assistants and

officers as designations. The mean of training and development programmes is

510.49±32.80, in which the bank employees belonging to officers category have

higher mean of training and development programmes score (515.3667±28.89) as

compared to assistants category (507.5567±34.65). The mean and SD of

components of evaluation of training and development programmes are also

presented according to assistants and officers as designations in the above table and

in the Chart No: 3.

507.56

34.65

515.37

28.89

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alue

Assistants Officers

Figure: Comparison of assistants and officers of SBI bank with training and

development programme scores

Mean SD

172

Table No: 37


employees by sex

Variables Summary Male Female Total

n=295 n=185 n=480


programmes

Mean 511.70 508.55 510.49

SD 32.20 33.72 32.80



Mean 29.39 29.10 29.28

SD 1.79 1.76 1.78



Mean 36.83 37.12 36.94

SD 2.85 2.70 2.79



Mean 63.86 63.33 63.66

SD 4.96 5.30 5.09



Mean 54.83 54.55 54.73

SD 4.11 4.23 4.16



administration

Mean 41.08 40.91 41.02

SD 3.40 3.61 3.48



programmes

Mean 40.67 40.50 40.61

SD 1.46 1.46 1.46



Mean 26.26 26.21 26.24

SD 0.90 0.92 0.91


Mean 141.32 139.78 140.73

SD 11.43 12.63 11.92



Mean 40.56 40.28 40.45

SD 3.96 4.23 4.06


Mean 36.90 36.76 36.85

SD 3.05 3.09 3.06

Source: Field study

173

Table No: 37 represents the mean and SD of evaluation of training and

development programmes and its components of bank employees by gender. The

mean of training and development programmes is 510.49±32.80, in which the male

employees have higher mean of training and development programmes score

(511.70±32.20) as compared to female employees (508.55±33.72). The mean and

SD of components of evaluation of training and development programmes are also

presented according to gender in the above table and in the Chart No: 4.

511.70

32.20

508.55

33.72

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mean

valu

e

Male Female

Figure: Comparison of male and female employees of SBI bank with training

and development programme scores

Mean SD

174

Table No: 38


employees by educational qualifications

Variables

Summary

Graduate Postgraduate Professional Total

n=378 n=77 n=25 n=480


programmes

Mean 509.36 513.86 517.08 510.49

SD 33.83 29.44 25.37 32.80



Mean 29.23 29.30 29.88 29.28

SD 1.80 1.72 1.69 1.78



Mean 36.85 37.43 36.80 36.94

SD 2.88 2.38 2.50 2.79



Mean 63.47 64.21 64.72 63.66

SD 5.24 4.65 3.92 5.09



Mean 54.59 55.13 55.56 54.73

SD 4.30 3.66 3.18 4.16



administration

Mean 40.93 41.23 41.64 41.02

SD 3.58 3.10 2.96 3.48



programmes

Mean 40.65 40.40 40.56 40.61

SD 1.45 1.52 1.47 1.46



Mean 26.28 26.12 26.08 26.24

SD 0.95 0.71 0.64 0.91


Mean 140.28 142.13 143.20 140.73

SD 12.23 11.01 9.27 11.92



Mean 40.29 40.90 41.48 40.45

SD 4.17 3.72 3.25 4.06


Mean 36.79 37.01 37.16 36.85

SD 3.15 2.83 2.27 3.06

Source: Field study

175


development programmes and its components of bank employees by educational

qualifications. The mean of training and development programmes is

510.49±32.80, in which the bank employees with professional educational degree

have higher mean of training and development programmes score (517.08±25.37)

as compared to with post graduate degree (513.55±33.72) and graduation degree

(509.36±33.83). The mean and SD of components of evaluation of training and

development programmes are also presented according to gender in the above table

and in the Chart No: 5.

509.36

33.83

513.86

29.44

517.08

25.37

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alu

e

Graduate Postgraduate Professional

Chart No : 5 Comparison of educational qualifications of employees of SBI

bank with training and development programme scores

Mean SD

176

Table No: 39


employees by presently pursuing any degree/course

Variables

Summary

Pursuing

Any degree/course

Not pursuing

Any degree/course

Total

n=15 n=465 n=480

Training and development programmes Mean 510.40 510.49 510.49

SD 25.02 33.04 32.80



Mean 29.93 29.25 29.28

SD 1.16 1.80 1.78



Mean 36.93 36.94 36.94

SD 2.55 2.80 2.79



Mean 63.40 63.66 63.66

SD 3.96 5.13 5.09



Mean 54.60 54.73 54.73

SD 2.61 4.20 4.16



administration

Mean 40.80 41.02 41.02

SD 2.86 3.50 3.48



programmes

Mean 41.00 40.59 40.61

SD 1.07 1.47 1.46



Mean 26.27 26.24 26.24

SD 0.70 0.91 0.91


Mean 140.20 140.75 140.73

SD 10.62 11.97 11.92



Mean 40.27 40.46 40.45

SD 4.17 4.06 4.06


Mean 37.00 36.84 36.85

SD 2.07 3.09 3.06

Source: Field study

177


development programmes and its components of bank employees by presently

pursuing any degree/course. The mean of training and development programmes is

510.49±32.80, in which the bank employees who are pursuing any degree/course

(510.40±25.02) and not pursuing degree/course (510.49±33.04) have similar mean

of training and development programmes score. The mean and SD of components

of evaluation of training and development programmes are also presented according

to presently pursuing any degree/course in the above table and in the Chart No: 6

510.40

25.02

510.49

33.04

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alue

Persuing degree Not persuing degree

Chart No:6 Comparison of employees of SBI bank with training and

development programme scores by presently pursuing any degree/course

Mean SD

178

Table No: 40


employees by degree / course completed after joining bank

Variables

Summary

Degree / Course

completed

after joining bank

No degree /

Course completed

after joining bank

Total

n=17 n=463 n=480


SD 28.74 32.96 32.80



Mean 29.29 29.27 29.28

SD 2.02 1.78 1.78



Mean 37.71 36.91 36.94

SD 1.65 2.82 2.79



Mean 63.82 63.65 63.66

SD 4.73 5.11 5.09



Mean 55.00 54.71 54.73

SD 3.41 4.19 4.16



administration

Mean 40.76 41.03 41.02

SD 3.09 3.49 3.48



programmes

Mean 40.94 40.59 40.61

SD 1.09 1.47 1.46



Mean 26.24 26.24 26.24

SD 0.56 0.92 0.91


Mean 140.76 140.73 140.73

SD 12.22 11.92 11.92



Mean 40.29 40.46 40.45

SD 4.37 4.06 4.06


Mean 37.18 36.83 36.85

SD 2.43 3.08 3.06

Source: Field Study

179


development programmes and its components of bank employees by degree / course

completed after joining bank. The mean of training and development programmes

is 510.49±32.80, in which the bank employees who have completed degree / course

after joining bank have higher mean of training and development programmes score

(512.08±25.37) as compared to those bank employees who have not completed

degree / course after joining bank (510.43±32.96). The mean and SD of


presented according to degree / course completed after joining bank in the above

table and in the Chart No: 7.

512.00

28.74

510.43

32.96

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alue

Yes No

Chart No: 7 Comparison of employees of SBI bank with training and

development programme scores by degree / course completed after joining

bank

Mean SD

180

Table No: 41


employees by membership in professional organizations

Variables Summary

Membership

In professional

organizations

No membership

In professional

organizations

Total

n=17 n=463 n=480


SD 26.46 33.03 32.80



Mean 30.12 29.24 29.28

SD 1.27 1.79 1.78



Mean 37.00 36.94 36.94

SD 1.90 2.82 2.79



Mean 63.71 63.65 63.66

SD 4.37 5.12 5.09



Mean 55.06 54.71 54.73

SD 2.93 4.20 4.16



administration

Mean 41.24 41.01 41.02

SD 2.68 3.51 3.48



programmes

Mean 40.88 40.60 40.61

SD 0.60 1.48 1.46



Mean 26.29 26.24 26.24

SD 0.69 0.91 0.91

Perception about training centers Mean 140.35 140.74 140.73

SD 11.40 11.95 11.92



Mean 40.71 40.44 40.45

SD 4.25 4.06 4.06


Mean 37.06 36.84 36.85

SD 2.22 3.09 3.06

Source: Field Study

181


development programmes and its components of bank employees by membership in

professional organizations. The mean of training and development programmes is

510.49±32.80, in which the bank employees with membership in professional

organizations have higher mean of training and development programmes score

(512.41±26.46) followed by bank employees without membership in professional

organizations (510.41±33.03). The mean and SD of components of evaluation of

training and development programmes are also presented according to membership

in professional organizations in the above table and in the Chart No: 8.

512.41

26.46

510.41

33.03

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alue

Yes No

Chart No : 8 Comparison of employees of SBI bank with training and

development programme scores by membership in professional

organizations

Mean SD

182

Table No: 42


employees by total years of service

Variable Summary 0-9 years 10-19 years 20+ years Total

n=131 n=146 n=203 n=480

Training and development programmes Mean 498.36 514.31 515.56 510.49

SD 37.11 31.72 28.46 32.80



Mean 29.18 28.96 29.57 29.28

SD 1.82 1.83 1.68 1.78



Mean 36.40 37.03 37.22 36.94

SD 2.94 2.80 2.65 2.79



Mean 61.65 64.46 64.37 63.66

SD 5.78 4.84 4.43 5.09



Mean 53.15 55.23 55.38 54.73

SD 4.80 4.04 3.50 4.16



administration

Mean 39.82 41.34 41.55 41.02

SD 3.95 3.35 3.05 3.48



programmes

Mean 40.73 40.42 40.66 40.61

SD 1.59 1.58 1.27 1.46



Mean 26.24 26.13 26.32 26.24

SD 1.07 0.77 0.88 0.91

Perception about training centers Mean 136.05 142.74 142.30 140.73

SD 13.43 11.22 10.53 11.92



Mean 39.16 41.11 40.81 40.45

SD 4.56 3.80 3.72 4.06

Perception about the trainers Mean 35.98 36.89 37.37 36.85

SD 3.67 2.86 2.63 3.06


183


development programmes and its components of bank employees by total years of

service. The mean of training and development programmes is 510.49±32.80, in

which the bank employees belonging to 20 and above years of service have higher

mean of training and development programmes score (515.56±28.46) followed by

employees belonging to 10-19 years of service (514.31±31.72) and 0-9 years of

service (498.36±37.11). The mean and SD of components of evaluation of training

and development programmes are also presented according to total years of service

in the above table and in the Chart No: 9.

498.36

37.11

514.31

31.72

515.56

28.46

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alue

0-9 years 10-19 years 20+ years


development programme scores by total years of service

Mean SD

184

Table No: 43


employees by number of training and development programmes attended

Variables Summary

1-10

programmes

11-20

programmes

21+

programmes Total

n=141 n=254 n=85 n=480


programmes

Mean 499.27 515.21 514.96 510.49

SD 36.75 29.33 31.51 32.80



Mean 28.99 29.37 29.48 29.28

SD 1.96 1.77 1.44 1.78



Mean 36.30 37.15 37.38 36.94

SD 3.01 2.68 2.58 2.79



Mean 61.85 64.43 64.35 63.66

SD 5.74 4.49 4.97 5.09



Mean 53.28 55.31 55.39 54.73

SD 4.72 3.72 3.86 4.16



administration

Mean 39.96 41.46 41.45 41.02

SD 3.90 3.14 3.37 3.48



programmes

Mean 40.71 40.58 40.51 40.61

SD 1.59 1.32 1.64 1.46



Mean 26.27 26.26 26.13 26.24

SD 1.01 0.90 0.72 0.91


Mean 136.57 142.54 142.21 140.73

SD 13.43 10.44 11.84 11.92



Mean 39.35 40.93 40.85 40.45

SD 4.63 3.57 4.13 4.06


Mean 35.99 37.20 37.22 36.85

SD 3.55 2.72 2.89 3.06

Source: Field Study

185


development programmes and its components of bank employees by number of

training and development programmes attended. The mean of training and

development programmes is 510.49±32.80, in which employees who have attended

11-20 training and development programmes have higher mean of training and

development programmes score (515.21±29.33) as compared to 21 and more

training and development programmes attended (514.96±31.51) and 1-10 training

and development programmes attended (499.27±36.75). The mean and SD of


presented according to number of training and development programmes attended

in the above table and in the Chart No : 10 .

499.27

36.75

515.21

29.33

514.96

31.51

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alu

e

1-10 programmes 11-20 programmes 21+ programmes

Chart No : 10 Comparison of employees of SBI bank with TDPs

scores by number of training and development programmes attended

Mean SD

186

Table No: 44


employees by number of promotions received

Variable

Summary

None One Two Three &

more

Total

n=106 n=178 n=122 n=74 n=480


programmes

Mean 492.50 518.99 513.25 511.23 510.49

SD 37.20 27.99 31.73 28.99 32.80



Mean 29.26 29.02 29.59 29.38 29.28

SD 1.82 1.86 1.69 1.64 1.78



Mean 36.05 37.34 37.02 37.14 36.94

SD 3.01 2.61 2.87 2.51 2.79



behavioral change

Mean 60.70 65.10 64.04 63.80 63.66

SD 5.73 4.34 4.82 4.58 5.09


development programmes on job

performance

Mean 52.26 55.93 54.96 54.97 54.73

SD 4.76 3.46 4.05 3.49 4.16



administration

Mean 39.17 42.00 41.22 40.96 41.02

SD 3.97 2.89 3.45 3.07 3.48




Mean 40.72 40.52 40.61 40.64 40.61

SD 1.75 1.26 1.45 1.49 1.46



Mean 26.21 26.22 26.35 26.14 26.24

SD 1.03 0.88 0.94 0.69 0.91

Perception about training centers Mean 134.13 143.88 141.80 140.84 140.73

SD 13.31 10.46 10.87 11.24 11.92


development programmes on self

development

Mean 38.64 41.54 40.56 40.24 40.45

SD 4.62 3.48 3.88 3.94 4.06

Perception about the trainers Mean 35.36 37.44 37.09 37.14 36.85

SD 3.72 2.67 2.86 2.57 3.06


187


development programmes and its components of bank employees by number of

promotions received. The mean of training and development programmes is

510.49±32.80, in which the bank employees who have received one promotion have

higher mean of training and development programmes score (518.99±27.99) and

bank employees who have not received any promotions have lowest mean of

training and development programmes score (492.50±37.20) followed by

employees with two promotions (513.25±31.73) and employees with 3 or more

promotions (511.23±28.99). The mean and SD of components of evaluation of

training and development programmes are also presented according to number of

promotions received in the above table and in the Chart No: 11.

492.50

37.20

518.99

27.99

513.25

31.73

511.23

28.99

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alue

None One Two Three & more


development programme scores by number of promotions received

Mean SD

188

Table No: 45


employees by family structure

Variable Summary Joint Nuclear Total

n=270 n=210 n=480


programmes

Mean 512.84 507.45 510.49

SD 30.98 34.84 32.80



Mean 29.33 29.20 29.28

SD 1.79 1.78 1.78



Mean 36.99 36.88 36.94

SD 2.73 2.88 2.79



Mean 64.07 63.13 63.66

SD 4.78 5.43 5.09



Mean 55.02 54.34 54.73

SD 3.86 4.49 4.16



administration

Mean 41.27 40.69 41.02

SD 3.24 3.74 3.48



programmes

Mean 40.64 40.57 40.61

SD 1.46 1.46 1.46



Mean 26.15 26.35 26.24

SD 0.81 1.01 0.91


SD 11.23 12.65 11.92



Mean 40.74 40.07 40.45

SD 3.93 4.21 4.06

Perception about the trainers Mean 36.90 36.78 36.85

SD 2.90 3.26 3.06

Source: Field Study

189


development programmes and its components of bank employees by family

structure. The mean of training and development programmes is 510.49±32.80, in

which the bank employees living in a joint family have higher mean of training and

development programmes score (512.84±30.98) as compared to employees living in

a nuclear family (507.45±34.84). The mean and SD of components of evaluation of

training and development programmes are also presented according to family

structure in the above table and in the Chart No: 12.

512.84

30.98

507.45

34.84

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mean

val

ue

Joint family Nuclear family

Chart No :12 Comparison of employees of SBI bank with training and

development programme scores by family structure

Mean SD

190

Table No: 46


employees by family size

variable Summary 1-5 6 & more Total

n=320 n=160 n=480


programmes

Mean 508.51 514.43 510.49

SD 33.72 30.59 32.80



Mean 29.17 29.49 29.28

SD 1.81 1.72 1.78



Mean 36.83 37.16 36.94

SD 2.82 2.74 2.79



behavioral change

Mean 63.34 64.28 63.66

SD 5.28 4.66 5.09



performance

Mean 54.46 55.25 54.73

SD 4.30 3.81 4.16



administration

Mean 40.86 41.34 41.02

SD 3.61 3.18 3.48




Mean 40.62 40.58 40.61

SD 1.44 1.50 1.46



Mean 26.24 26.24 26.24

SD 0.94 0.83 0.91


SD 12.35 10.90 11.92



development

Mean 40.22 40.91 40.45

SD 4.20 3.75 4.06


SD 3.14 2.89 3.06

Source: Field Study

191

TableNo:46 represents the mean and SD of evaluation of training and

development programmes and its components of bank employees by family size.


bank employees living in a family with 6 or more members have higher mean of

training and development programmes score (514.43±30.59) as compared to

employees living in a family with 5 or less than 5 members (508.51±33.72). The

mean and SD of components of evaluation of training and development

programmes are also presented according to family size in the above table and in

the Chart No:13.

508.51

33.72

514.43

30.59

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alu

e

1--5 6 & more


development programme scores by family size

Mean SD

192

Table No: 47

: Mean and SD of training and development programmes and its components of

bank employees by marital status

Variable

Summary

Married Unmarried Total

n=404 n=76 n=480


SD 31.31 38.80 32.80

Expectations from training and development

programmes

Mean 29.29 29.17 29.28

SD 1.76 1.89 1.78

Perception about training and development

programmes

Mean 36.90 37.18 36.94

SD 2.85 2.49 2.79

Impact of training and development programmes

on behavioral change

Mean 63.95 62.09 63.66

SD 4.84 6.06 5.09


on job performance

Mean 54.98 53.39 54.73

SD 3.97 4.84 4.16


programmes administration

Mean 41.19 40.12 41.02

SD 3.30 4.23 3.48

Climate for transfer of learning after attending

training and development programmes

Mean 40.61 40.58 40.61

SD 1.54 0.96 1.46

Overall opinion about training and development

programmes

Mean 26.24 26.25 26.24

SD 0.87 1.08 0.91


SD 11.26 14.43 11.92


on self development

Mean 40.60 39.64 40.45

SD 3.88 4.87 4.06


SD 2.96 3.44 3.06


193

Table No:47 represents the mean and SD of evaluation of training and

development programmes and its components of bank employees by marital status.


married bank employees have higher mean of training and development

programmes score (512.19±31.31) as compared to unmarried bank employees

(501.45±38.80). The mean and SD of components of evaluation of training and

development programmes are also presented according to marital status in the above

table and in the Chart No: 14.

512.19

31.31

501.45

38.80

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mean

val

ue

Married Unmarried

Chart No : 14 Comparison of employees of SBI bank with training and

development programme scores by marital status

Mean SD

194

Table No: 48


employees by employment status of spouse

variable

Summary

Employed Unemployed Total

n=177 n=303 n=480


SD 29.26 34.66 32.80


programmes

Mean 29.31 29.25 29.28

SD 1.73 1.82 1.78


programmes

Mean 36.85 36.99 36.94

SD 2.81 2.78 2.79



Mean 64.01 63.45 63.66

SD 4.63 5.34 5.09


on job performance

Mean 55.19 54.45 54.73

SD 3.70 4.39 4.16



Mean 41.38 40.80 41.02

SD 3.07 3.68 3.48

Climate for transfer of learning after attending


Mean 40.68 40.56 40.61

SD 1.46 1.46 1.46

Overall opinion about training and development

programmes

Mean 26.34 26.18 26.24

SD 0.90 0.90 0.91


SD 10.92 12.46 11.92


on self development

Mean 40.59 40.37 40.45

SD 3.79 4.22 4.06


SD 2.87 3.15 3.06

Source: Field Study

195


development programmes and its components of bank employees by employment

status of spouse. The mean of training and development programmes is

510.49±32.80, in which the bank employees with employed spouse have higher

mean of training and development programmes score (513.01±29.26) as compared

to bank employees with unemployed spouse (509.01±34.66). The mean and SD of


presented according to employment status of spouse in the above table and in the

Chart No: 15.

513.01

29.26

509.01

34.66

0.00

100.00

200.00

300.00

400.00

500.00

600.00

Mea

n v

alu

e

Employed Unemployed

Chart No :15 Comparison of employees of SBI bank with training and

development programme scores by employment status of spouse

Mean SD

196

Section IV: Differential Statistics

In this section, the researcher has compared the different

characteristics/factors like age groups, designations, sex, educational qualifications,

presently pursuing any degree/course, degree / course completed after joining bank,

membership in professional organizations, years of service, number of training and

development programmes attended, number of promotions received, family

structure, family size, marital status and employment status of spouse with respect

to training and development programmes and its components like expectations from

training and development programmes, perception about training and development

programmes, impact of training and development programmes on behavioral

change, impact of training and development programmes on job performance,

perception about training and development programmes administration, climate for

transfer of learning after attending training and development programmes, overall

opinion about training and development programmes, perception about training

centers, impact of training and development programmes on self development and

perception of bank employees by one way ANOVA followed by unpaired t-test and

Newman-Keuls multiple comparison post hoc procedure.

Major Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between age groups (i.e. 20-

29 years, 30-39 years, 40-49 years and 50-59 years) of bank employees with respect

to training and development programmes scores.

To test this hypothesis the one way ANOVA test was applied and the results

are presented in the following table.

Table No: 49

Results of one way ANOVA between age groups with respect to training and

development programmes scores

Source of variation Degrees of

freedom

Sum of squares Mean sum of

squares

F-value P-value Signi.

Between age groups 3 48287.74 16095.9137 16.4078 0.0000 S

Within age groups 476 466952.16 980.9919

Total 479 515239.90

Source: Field Study

197

From the results of the Table No:49 showed that, the bank employees

belonging to different age groups i.e. 20-29 years, 30-39 years, 40-49 years and 50-

59 years differ statistically significant with respect to training and development

programmes scores (F=16.4078, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the

null hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the

bank employees belonging to different age groups i.e. 20-29 years, 30-39 years, 40-

49 years and 50-59 years have different training and development programmes

scores.

If F is significant, to know the pair wise comparison of age groups of bank

employees by applying the Newman-Keuls multiple comparison post hoc procedure

and the results are presented in the following table.

Table No: 50

Pair wise comparison of age groups with respect to training and development

programmes by Newman Keuls multiple post hoc procedures

Age group 20-29 years 30-39 years 40-49 years 50-59 years

Mean 492.1800 519.8349 516.2710 509.7500

20-29 years -

30-39 years 0.0000* -

40-49 years 0.0000* 0.3203 -

50-59 years 0.0002* 0.0147* 0.0748 -

*Significant at 5% level (p<0.05)

Source: Field Study

Table No: 50 reveals that, the bank employees belonging to 20-29 years and

30-39 years (p<0.05), 20-29 years and 40-49 years (p<0.05), 20-29 years and 50-59

years (p<0.05) & 30-39 years and 50-59 years (p<0.05) of age groups differ

significantly with respect to training and development programmes scores. In other

words, the bank employees belonging to 30-39 years of age group have significant

higher training and development programmes scores as compared to bank

employees belonging to 20-29 years, 40-49 years and 50-59 years of age groups.

198

Sub hypothesis:

There is no significant difference between age groups (i.e. 20-29 years, 30-39

years, 40-49 years and 50-59 years) of bank employees with respect to components

of training and development programmes i.e.

1. Expectations from training and development programmes

2. Perception about training and development programmes

3. Impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change

4. Impact of training and development programmes on job performance

5. Perception about training and development programmes administration

6. Climate for transfer of learning after attending training and development

programmes

7. Overall opinion about training and development programmes

8. Perception about training centers

9. Impact of training and development programmes on self development

10. Perception about the trainers



199

Table No: 51

Results of one way ANOVA between age groups with respect to Expectations from


Components Source of variation Degrees of

freedom

Sum of

squares

Mean sum

of squares


Expectations from training

and development

programmes

Between age

groups

3 9.08 3.0282 0.9517 0.4154 NS


Total 479 1523.70

Perception about training

and development

programmes

Between age

groups

3 147.56 49.1857 6.5310 0.0002 S


Total 479 3732.37




Between age

groups

3 1306.38 435.4598 18.6336 0.0000 S


Total 479 12430.28



on job performance

Between age

groups

3 851.62 283.8718 18.1859 0.0000 S


Total 479 8281.70


and development

programmes on

administration

Between age

groups

3 499.86 166.62 14.9813 0.0000 S


Total 479 5793.87

Climate for transfer of

learning after attending


programmes

Between age

groups

3 11.55 3.8486 1.8119 0.1441 NS


Total 479 1022.58

Overall opinion about


programmes

Between age

groups

3 2.15 0.7159 0.8709 0.4561 NS


Total 479 393.45


centers

Between age

groups

3 6738.44 2246.1483 17.4454 0.0000 S


Total 479 68024.79



on self development

Between age

groups

3 595.77 198.5910 12.9297 0.0000 S


Total 479 7906.80

Perception about the

trainers

Between age

groups

3 299.71 99.9017 11.3468 0.0000 S


Total 479 4490.59


200

Table No: 51 showed that

1. The bank employees belonging to different age groups i.e. 20-29 years, 30-39

years, 40-49 years and 50-59 years do not differ statistically significant with

respect to components of training and development programmes i.e. expectation

from training and development programmes scores (F=0.9517, p>0.05) at 5%

level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted and alternative

hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees belonging to different

age groups i.e. 20-29 years, 30-39 years, 40-49 years and 50-59 years have

similar expectation from training and development programmes.


years, 40-49 years and 50-59 years differ statistically significant with respect to

components of training and development programmes i.e. Perception about

training and development programmes scores (F=6.5310, p<0.05) at 5% level of

significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is

accepted. It means that, the bank employees belonging to different age groups

i.e. 20-29 years, 30-39 years, 40-49 years and 50-59 years have different

Perception about training and development programmes.



components of training and development programmes i.e. Impact of training and

development programmes on behavioral change scores (F=18.6336, p<0.05) at

5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and alternative

hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the bank employees belonging to different


different impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change.



components of training and development programmes i.e. impact of training and

development programmes on job performance scores (F=18.1859, p<0.05) at

201




different impact of training and development programmes on job performance.



components of training and development programmes i.e. perception about

training and development programmes on administration scores (F=14.9813,

p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and

alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the bank employees belonging

to different age groups i.e. 20-29 years, 30-39 years, 40-49 years and 50-59

years have different Perception about training and development programmes

administration.



respect to components of training and development programmes i.e. Climate for

transfer of learning after attending training and development programmes scores

(F=1.8119, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is

accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank

employees belonging to different age groups i.e. 20-29 years, 30-39 years, 40-49

years and 50-59 years have similar Climate for transfer of learning after

attending training and development programmes.



respect to components of training and development programmes i.e. overall

opinion about training and development programmes scores (F=0.8709, p>0.05)

at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted and

alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees belonging

202

to different age groups i.e. 20-29 years, 30-39 years, 40-49 years and 50-59

years have similar overall opinion about training and development programmes.



components of training and development programmes i.e. perception about

training centers scores (F=17.4454, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence,

the null hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means

that, the bank employees belonging to different age groups i.e. 20-29 years, 30-

39 years, 40-49 years and 50-59 years have different perception about training

centers.



components of training and development programmes i.e. impact of training and

development programmes on self development scores (F=12.9297, p<0.05) at




different impact of training and development programmes on self development.



components of training and development programmes i.e. perception about the

trainers scores (F=11.3468, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null

hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the

bank employees belonging to different age groups i.e. 20-29 years, 30-39 years,

40-49 years and 50-59 years have different perception about the trainers.

If F is significant, to know the pair wise comparison of age groups of bank

employees by applying the Newman-Keuls multiple comparison post hoc procedure

and the results are presented in Table No 52.

203

Table No: 52

Pair wise comparison of age groups with respect to different components of training

and development programmes by Newman Keuls multiple post hoc procedures

Component Age group 20-29 years 30-39 years 40-49 years 50-59 years

Perception about

training and

development

programmes

Mean 35.9600 37.4220 37.3355 36.8103

20-29 yrs -

30-39 yrs 0.0003* -

40-49 yrs 0.0001* 0.7843 -

50-59 yrs 0.0383* 0.1025 0.1095 -

Impact of training

and development

programmes on

behavioral change

Mean 60.6500 65.2202 64.5871 63.5345

20-29 yrs -

30-39 yrs 0.0000* -

40-49 yrs 0.0000* 0.2531 -

50-59 yrs 0.0001* 0.0079* 0.0639 -

Impact of training

and development

programmes on job

performance

Mean 52.2300 55.9908 55.2903 54.9310

20-29 yrs -

30-39 yrs 0.0000* -

40-49 yrs 0.0000* 0.1317 -

50-59 yrs 0.0000* 0.0338* 0.4312 -

Perception about

training and

development

programmes

administration

Mean 39.1400 42.0459 41.4710 41.0603

20-29 yrs -

30-39 yrs 0.0000* -

40-49 yrs 0.0000* 0.1363 -

50-59 yrs 0.0001* 0.0209* 0.3004 -

Perception about

training centers Mean 134.0000 144.1743 143.1032 140.1207

20-29 yrs -

30-39 yrs 0.0000* -

40-49 yrs 0.0000* 0.4057 -

50-59 yrs 0.0004* 0.0073* 0.0262* -

Impact of training

and development

programmes on self

development

Mean 38.6300 41.6606 41.1484 39.9483

20-29 yrs -

30-39 yrs 0.0000* -

40-49 yrs 0.0000* 0.2353 -

50-59 yrs 0.0304* 0.0011* 0.0104* -


Trainers Mean 35.3400 37.5229 37.0710 37.2069

20-29 yrs -

30-39 yrs 0.0000* -

40-49 yrs 0.0000* 0.1846 -

50-59 yrs 0.0000* 0.3807 0.6913 -

*Significant at 5% level (p<0.05) Source: Field Study

Table no: 52 reveals that,

The bank employees belonging to 20-29 years and 30-39 years (p<0.05), 20-29

years and 40-49 years (p<0.05) and 20-29 years and 50-59 years (p<0.05) of age

groups differ significantly with component of training and development

programmes i.e. Perception about training and development programmes scores.

In other words, the bank employees belonging to 30-39 years of age group have

significant higher Perception about training and development programmes

204

scores as compared to bank employees belonging to 20-29 years, 40-49 years

and 50-59 years of age groups.

The bank employees belonging to 20-29 years and 30-39 years (tp<0.05), 20-29

years and 40-49 years (p<0.05) and 20-29 years, 50-59 years p<0.05); 30-39

years and 50-59 years (p<0.05) of age groups differ significantly with

component of training and development programmes i.e. Impact of training and

development programmes on behavioral change scores. In another words, the

bank employees belonging to 30-39 years of age group have significant higher

Impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change scores as

compared to bank employees belonging to 20-29 years, 40-49 years and 50-59

years of age groups.


years and 40-49 years (p<0.05) and 20-29 years, 50-59 years (p<0.05); 30-39


component of training and development programmes i.e. impact of training and

development programmes on job performance scores. In another words, the


impact of training and development programmes on job performance scores as

compared to bank employees belonging to 20-29 years, 40-49 years and 50-59

years of age groups.


years and 40-49 years (p<0.05) and 20-29 years, 50-59 years (p<0.05); 30-39


component of training and development programmes i.e. Perception about

training and development programmes on administration scores. In other words,

the bank employees belonging to 30-39 years of age group have significant

higher Perception about training and development programmes administration

scores as compared to bank employees belonging to 20-29 years, 40-49 years

and 50-59 years of age groups.

205


years and 40-49 years (p<0.05) and 20-29 years, 50-59 years (p<0.05), 30-39

years and 50-59 years (p<0.05); 40-49 years and 50-59 years (p<0.05) of age


programmes i.e. perception about training centers scores. In another words, the


perception about training centers scores as compared to bank employees

belonging to 20-29 years, 40-49 years and 50-59 years of age groups.


years and 40-49 years (p<0.05) and 20-29 years, 50-59 years (p<0.05), 30-39

years and 50-59 years (p<0.05); 40-49 years and 50-59 years (p<0.05) of age


programmes i.e. impact of training and development programmes on self

development scores. In another words, the bank employees belonging to 30-39

years of age group have significant higher impact of training and development

programmes on self development scores as compared to bank employees

belonging to 20-29 years, 40-49 years and 50-59 years of age groups.


years and 40-49 years (p<0.05) and 20-29 years and 50-59 years (p<0.05) of age


programmes i.e. perception about the trainers scores. In another words, the bank

employees belonging to 30-39 years of age group have significant higher

perception about the trainers’ scores as compared to bank employees belonging

to 20-29 years, 40-49 years and 50-59 years of age groups.

Major Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between different

designations of bank employees i. e, Assistants, Senior assistants, Special

assistants, Scale –I Officers, Scale –II Officers and Scale –III Officers with respect

to training and development programmes.

206



Table No: 53

Results of one way ANOVA between different designations of bank employees with

respect to training and development programmes

Source of

variation

Degrees of

freedom

Sum of

squares

Mean sum

of squares

F-value P-value Sign

Between

designations 5 47055.24 9411.0476 9.5279 0.0000 S

Within

designations 474 468184.66 987.7314

Total 479 515239.90

Source: Field Study

Table No : 53 showed that, the bank employees belonging to different

designations i.e. Assistants, Senior assistants, Special assistants, Scale –I Officers,

Scale –II Officers and Scale –III Officers differ statistically significant with respect

to training and development programmes scores (F=9.5279, p<0.05) at 5% level of


accepted. It means that, the bank employees belonging to designations i.e.

Assistants, senior assistants, Special assistants, Scale –I Officers, Scale –II Officers

and Scale –III Officers have different training and development programmes scores.

If F is significant, to know the pair wise comparison of designations of bank

employees by applying the Newman Keuls multiple post hoc procedures and the

results are presented in the following table.

207

Table No: 54

Pair wise comparison of designations with respect to training and development

programmes by Newman Keuls multiple post hoc procedures

Designations Assistants Sr. assistants Spl.

assistants

Scale –I

Officers

Scale –II

Officers

Scale –III

Officers

Mean 492.1800 515.9800 514.5100 520.3000 511.5800 508.1300

Assistants -

Senior assistants 0.0001* -

Special assistants 0.0003* 0.7884 -

Scale –I Officers 0.0000* 0.4303 0.5408 -

Scale –II Officers 0.0012* 0.7013 0.5931 0.3834 -

Scale –III Officers 0.0036* 0.4788 0.4746 0.1717 0.5288 -


Source: Field Study

Table No 54 reveals that, the assistants and senior assistants (p<0.05),

assistants and special assistants (p<0.05), assistants and scale –I officers (p<0.05) ,

assistants and scale –II officers (p<0.05); assistants and scale –III officers (p<0.05)

as a designations differ significantly with training and development programmes

scores. In another words, the bank employees working as a scale –I officers have

significant higher training and development programmes scores as compared to

bank employees working as senior assistants, special assistants, scale –II officers,

scale –III officers and assistants.

Sub Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between different designations

of bank employees (Assistants, Senior assistants, Special assistants, Scale –I

Officers, Scale –II Officers and Scale –III Officers) with respect to components of

training and development programmes i.e.







programmes



208





Table No: 55

Results of one way ANOVA between different designations of bank employees with

respect to components of training and development programmes

Components Source of variation

Degrees

of

freedom

Sum of

squares

Mean sum

of squares F-value P-value Signi.



Between designations 5 35.14 7.0287 2.2381 0.0495 S

Within designations 474 1488.56 3.1404

Total 479 1523.70





Total 479 3732.37



behavioral change



Total 479 12430.28



job performance



Total 479 8281.70



administration



Total 479 5793.87




Between designations 5 6.10 1.2198 0.5688 0.7239 NS


Total 479 1022.58

Overall opinion about training




Total 479 393.45


centers



Total 479 68024.79



self development



Total 479 7906.80




Total 479 4490.59

Source: Field Study

209

Table No 55 showed that,

i. The bank employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants, senior

assistants, special assistants, scale–I officers, scale–II officers and scale–III

officers differ statistically significant with respect to component of training and

development programmes i.e. Expectations from training and development


null hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that,

the bank employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants, senior


officers have different Expectations from training and development

programmes.

ii. The bank employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants, senior



development programmes i.e. Perception about training and development





officers have different Perception about training and development programmes.

iii. The bank employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants, senior



development programmes i.e. Impact of training and development programmes

on behavioral change scores (F=10.7535, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance.

Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It

means that, the bank employees belonging to different designations i.e.

assistants, senior assistants, special assistants, scale–I officers, scale–II officers

and scale–III officers have different Impact of training and development

programmes on behavioral change.

210

iv. The bank employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants, senior



development programmes i.e. impact of training and development programmes

on job performance scores (F=10.9816, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance.




and scale–III officers have different impact of training and development

programmes on job performance.

v. The bank employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants, senior




programmes on administration scores (F=9.5379, p<0.05) at 5% level of


accepted. It means that, the bank employees belonging to different designations

i.e. assistants, senior assistants, special assistants, scale–I officers, scale–II

officers and scale–III officers have different Perception about training and

development programmes on administration.

vi. The bank employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants, senior


officers do not differ statistically significant with respect to component of

training and development programmes i.e. Climate for transfer of learning after

attending training and development programmes scores (F=0.5688, p>0.05) at

5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted and alternative

hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees belonging to different

designations i.e. assistants, senior assistants, special assistants, scale–I officers,

scale–II officers and scale–III officers have similar climate for transfer of

learning after attending training and development programmes.

211

vii. The bank employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants, senior



development programmes i.e. overall opinion about training and development





officers have different overall opinion about training and development

programmes.

viii. The bank employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants,

senior assistants, special assistants, scale–I officers, scale–II officers and scale–

III officers differ statistically significant with respect to component of training

and development programmes i.e. perception about training centers scores

(F=10.4383, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is

rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the bank

employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants, senior assistants,

special assistants, scale–I officers, scale–II officers and scale–III officers have

different perception about training center.

ix. The bank employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants, senior




on self development scores (F=8.3240, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance.




and scale–III officers have different impact of training and development

programmes on self development.

x. The bank employees belonging to different designations i.e. assistants, senior


212


development programmes i.e. perception about the trainers scores (F=8.3240,


alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the bank employees belonging

to different designations i.e. assistants, senior assistants, special assistants,

scale–I officers, scale–II officers and scale–III officers have different perception

about the trainers.

If F is significant, to know the pair wise differences between different

designations by applying the Newman Keuls multiple post hoc procedure and the

results are presented in the following table

Table No: 56

Pair wise comparison of designations with respect to Expectations from training and

development programmes by Newman Keuls multiple post hoc procedures

Components Designations Assistants Senior

assistants

Special

assistants

Scale –I

Officers

Scale –II

Officers

Scale –III

Officers

Expectations

from training and

development

programmes

Mean 29.2200 28.8100 29.5600 29.3330 29.4000 29.6330

Assistants -


Special assistants 0.6890 0.0499* -

Scale –I Officers 0.7136 0.2072 0.7433 -

Scale –II Officers 0.8293 0.2236 0.6044 0.8291 -

Scale –III

Officers

0.6671 0.0422* 0.8123 0.7658 0.7303 -

Perception about

training and

development

programmes

Mean 35.9600 37.1100 37.0300 37.6780 36.7830 37.4670

Assistants -



Scale –I Officers 0.0045* 0.4612 0.5286 -


Scale –III

Officers

0.0142* 0.4561 0.6324 0.6591 0.4817 -

Impact of

training and

development

programmes on

behavioral

change

Mean 60.6500 64.6600 64.2100 65.2110 63.9830 63.1670

Assistants -



Scale –I Officers 0.0000* 0.5147 0.4629 -


Scale –III

Officers

0.0029* 0.2900 0.4333 0.1106 0.3342 -

213

Impact of

training and

development

programmes on

job performance

Mean 52.2300 55.8000 55.2200 55.7220 54.5500 55.1670

Assistants -



Scale –I Officers 0.0000* 0.9102 0.4664 -


Scale III Officers 0.0001* 0.7950 0.9384 0.6995 0.3712 -

Perception about

training and

development

programmes

administration

Mean 39.1400 41.8100 41.4700 41.9890 40.6330 40.9670

Assistants -



Scale –I Officers 0.0000* 0.7581 0.6445 -



Overall opinion

about training

and development

programmes

Mean 26.2300 26.3700 26.4200 26.0330 26.1330 26.0670

Assistants -

Senior assistants 0.3715 -

Special assistants 0.4456 0.7496 -

Scale –I Officers 0.5915 0.1995 0.0436* -


Scale III Officers 0.5500 0.2129 0.0497* 0.8315 0.6705 -

Perception about

training centers

Mean 26.2300 26.3700 26.4200 26.0330 26.1330 26.0670

Assistants -

Senior assistants 0.3715 -

Special assistants 0.4456 0.7496 -

Scale –I Officers 0.5915 0.1995 0.0436* -


Scale III Officers 0.5500 0.2129 0.0497* 0.8315 0.6705 -

Impact of training

and development

programmes on self

development

Mean 38.6300 40.8400 40.4900 42.1110 40.8170 39.3670

Assistants -



Scale –I Officers 0.0000* 0.0625 0.0818 -


Scale III Officers 0.2804 0.1349 0.0998 0.0006* 0.0849 -

Perception about

the Trainers

Mean 35.3400 37.5700 37.4300 37.0670 36.4670 37.6000

Assistants -



Scale –I Officers 0.0023* 0.5918 0.4809 -



Source: Field Study

214

Table No: 56 revealed that,

1. The assistants and senior assistants (p<0.05), senior assistants and special

assistants (p<0.05), senior assistants and scale –III officers (p<0.05) as a

designations differ significantly with Expectations from training and

development programmes scores. In another words, the bank employees

working as a scale – III officers have significant higher expectations from

training and development programmes scores as compared to bank employees

working as special assistants, scale –II officers, scale –I officers, assistants and

senior assistants.

2. The assistants and senior assistants (p<0.05), assistants and special assistants

(p<0.05), assistants and scale –I officers (p<0.05), assistants and scale –II

officers (p<0.05); assistants and scale –III officers (p<0.05) as a designations

differs significantly with respect to Perception about training and development

programmes scores. In another words, the bank employees working as a scale –

I officers have significant higher perception about training and development

programmes scores as compared to bank employees working as senior

assistants, special assistants, scale –II officers, scale –III officers and assistants.




differs significantly with respect to Impact of training and development

programmes on behavioral change scores. In another words, the bank

employees working as a scale –I officers have significant higher impact of

training and development programmes on behavioral change scores as compared

to bank employees working as senior assistants, special assistants, scale –II

officers, scale –III officers and assistants.




215

differs significantly with respect to impact of training and development

programmes on job performance scores. In another words, the bank employees

working as a scale –I officers have significant higher impact of training and

development programmes on job performance scores as compared to bank

employees working as senior assistants, special assistants, scale –II officers,





differs significantly with respect to Perception about training and development

programmes administration scores. In another words, the bank employees

working as a scale –I officers have significant higher perception about training

and development programmes administration scores as compared to bank

employees working as senior assistants, special assistants, scale –II officers,


6. The special assistants and scale –I officers (p<0.05), special assistants and scale

–II officers (p<0.05) as a designations differs significantly with respect to

overall opinion about training and development programmes scores. In another

word, the bank employees working as a special assistants have significant higher

overall opinion about training and development programmes scores as compared

to bank employees working as assistants, senior assistants, special assistants,

scale –I officers, scale –II officers and scale –III officers.

7. The special assistants and scale –I officers (p<0.05), special assistants and scale

–II officers (p<0.05) as a designations differs significantly with respect to

overall perception about training center scores. In another word, the bank

employees working as a special assistants have significant higher perception

about training center scores as compared to bank employees working as

assistants, senior assistants, special assistants, scale –I officers, scale –II officers

and scale –III officers.

216



officers (p<0.05) as a designations differs significantly with respect to impact of

training and development programmes on self development scores. In another

words, the bank employees working as a scale –I officers have significant higher

impact of training and development programmes on self development scores as

compared to bank employees working as senior assistants, special assistants,

scale –II officers, scale –III officers and assistants.



officers (p<0.05); assistants and scale –II officers (p<0.05) as a designations

differs significantly with respect to perception about the trainers scores. In

another words, the bank employees working as a scale –III officers have

significant higher perception about the trainers scores as compared to bank

employees working as senior assistants, special assistants, scale –I officers, scale

–II officers and assistants.

Major Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between assistants and

officers as a designation of bank employees with respect to training and


To test this hypothesis the t test was applied and the results are presented in

the Table No 57.

Table No: 57

Results of t-test between assistants and officers as a designation of bank employees

with respect to training and development programmes

Designations n Mean SD t-value p-value Signi.

Assistants 300 507.5567 34.6484 -2.5401 0.0114 S

Officers 180 515.3667 28.8926

Source: Field Study

217

Table No 57 showed that, the bank employees working as assistants and

officers differ statistically significant with respect to training and development

programmes scores (t=-2.5401, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null


officers have higher training and development programmes scores than assistants.

Sub Hypothesis:

There is no significant difference between assistants and officers as a

designation of bank employees with respect to components of training and

development programmes i.e.







programmes





To test this hypothesis the t- test was applied and the results are presented in the

Table No 58.

218

Table No: 58 Results of t-test between assistants and officers of SBI with respect to components of

Training and Development Programmes

Variable Designations n Mean SD t-value p-value Signi.



Assistants 300 29.1967 1.7987 -1.2430 0.2145 NS

Officers 180 29.4056 1.7551



Assistants 300 36.7000 2.9675 -2.4616 0.0142 S

Officers 180 37.3444 2.4250



behavioral change

Assistants 300 63.1733 5.3876 -2.6988 0.0072 S

Officers 180 64.4611 4.4626



job performance

Assistants 300 54.4167 4.3788 -2.1049 0.0358 S

Officers 180 55.2389 3.7167



administration

Assistants 300 40.8067 3.6552 -1.7113 0.0877 NS

Officers 180 41.3667 3.1390




programmes

Assistants 300 40.6567 1.4740 0.9759 0.3296 NS

Officers 180 40.5222 1.4395



Assistants 300 26.3400 1.0138 3.1631 0.0017 S

Officers 180 26.0722 0.6604


centers

Assistants 300 139.500 12.6381 -2.9406 0.0034 S

Officers 180 142.777 10.3187



self development

Assistants 300 39.9867 4.3308 -3.2578 0.0012 S

Officers 180 41.2222 3.4472

Perception about the trainers Assistants 300 36.7800 3.2165 -0.6077 0.5436 NS

Officers 180 36.9556 2.7903

Source: Field Study

Table No 58 showed that,

The bank employees working as assistants and officers do not differ statistically

significant with respect to component of training and development programmes

i.e. expectations from training and development programmes scores (t=-1.2430,

p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted and

alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the assistants and officers have

similar expectations from training and development programmes .

The bank employees working as assistants and officers differ statistically


i.e. perception about training and development programmes scores (t=-2.4616,

219


alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the officers have higher

perception about training and development programmes scores as compared to

assistants.



i.e. impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change

scores (t=-2.6988, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null


officers have higher impact of training and development programmes on

behavioral change scores as compared to assistants.



i.e. impact of training and development programmes on job performance scores

(t=-2.1049, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is

rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the officers have

higher impact of training and development programmes on job performance on

behavioral change scores as compared to assistants.



i.e. perception about training and development programmes on administration

scores (t=-1.7113, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null

hypothesis is accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the

assistants and officers have similar Perception about training and development

programmes administration.



i.e. climate for transfer of learning after attending training and development

programmes scores (t=0.9759, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the

null hypothesis is accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that,

220

the assistants and officers have similar climate for transfer of learning after




i.e. overall opinion about training and development programmes scores

(t=3.1631, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is

rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the assistants have

higher overall opinion about training and development programmes scores as

compared to officers.



i.e. perception about training center scores (t=-2.9406, p<0.05) at 5% level of


accepted. It means that, the officers have higher perception about training

center scores as compared to assistants.



i.e. impact of training and development programmes on self development scores

(t=-3.2578, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is

rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the officers have

higher impact of training and development programmes on self development

scores as compared to assistants.



i.e. perception about the trainers scores (t=-0.6077, p>0.05) at 5% level of

significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted and alternative hypothesis

is rejected. It means that, the assistants and officers have similar perception

about the trainers’.

Major Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between male and female

bank employees with respect to training and development programmes.

221


the table no 59.

Table No: 59

Results of t-test between male and female employees with respect to Training and

Development Programmes

Sex n Mean SD t-value p-value Signi.

Male 295 511.6983 32.2030 1.0232 0.3067 NS

Female 185 508.5514 33.7209

Table No 59 we had seen that, the male and female bank employees do not

differ statistically significant with respect to training and development programmes

scores (t=1.0232, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is

accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the male and female

bank employees have similar training and development programmes scores.

Sub Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between male and female bank

employees with respect to components of training and development programmes i.e.







programmes





To test this hypothesis the t- test was applied and the results are presented in

the Table No 60.

222

Table No: 60

Results of t-test between male and female employees with respect to components of

Training and Development Programmes

Variable Sex n Mean SD t-value p-value Sign



Male 295 29.3864 1.7899 1.7323 0.0839 NS

Female 185 29.0973 1.7635



Male 295 36.8271 2.8453 -1.1356 0.2567 NS

Female 185 37.1243 2.7008



Male 295 63.8610 4.9615 1.1123 0.2665 NS

Female 185 63.3297 5.2961



Male 295 54.8339 4.1144 0.7242 0.4693 NS

Female 185 54.5514 4.2322



administration

Male 295 41.0814 3.3987 0.5142 0.6074 NS

Female 185 40.9135 3.6075



programmes

Male 295 40.6746 1.4577 1.2947 0.1961 NS

Female 185 40.4973 1.4638



Male 295 26.2576 0.8967 0.5504 0.5823 NS

Female 185 26.2108 0.9231

Perception about training centers Male 295 141.3220 11.4295 1.3777 0.1690 NS

Female 185 139.7838 12.6296



Male 295 40.5559 3.9550 0.7210 0.4713 NS

Female 185 40.2811 4.2346

Perception about the trainers Male 295 36.8983 3.0455 0.4737 0.6359 NS

Female 185 36.7622 3.0941

Source: Field Study

From Table No 60 the researcher has observed,

1. The male and female bank employees do not differ statistically significant with

respect to components of training and development programmes i.e.

expectations from training and development programmes scores (t=1.7323,


alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the male and female bank

employees have similar expectations from training and development

programmes.


respect to components of training and development programmes i.e. perception

223

about training and development programmes scores (t=-1.1356, p>0.05) at 5%


hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the male and female bank employees have

similar perception about training and development programmes.


respect to components of training and development programmes i.e. impact of

training and development programmes on behavioral change scores (t=1.1123,



employees have similar impact of training and development programmes on

behavioral change.



training and development programmes on job performance scores (t=0.7242,



employees have similar impact of training and development programmes on job

performance.


respect to components of training and development programmes i.e. Perception

about training and development programmes on administration scores

(t=0.5142, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is

accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the male and

female bank employees have similar Perception about training and development



respect to components of training and development programmes i.e. climate for

transfer of learning after attending training and development programmes scores


224

accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the male and

female bank employees have similar climate for transfer of learning after



respect to components of training and development programmes i.e. overall

opinion about training and development programmes scores (t=0.5504, p>0.05)



employees have similar overall opinion about training and development

programmes.



about training center scores (t=1.3777, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance.

Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It

means that, the male and female bank employees have similar perception about

training center.



training and development programmes on self development scores (t=0.7210,



employees have similar impact of training and development programmes on self

development.



about the trainers scores (t=0.4737, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence,

the null hypothesis is accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means

that, the male and female bank employees have similar perception about the

trainers.

225

Major Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between educational

qualifications of bank employees (graduate, postgraduate and professional) with

respect to training and development programmes.

To test this hypothesis, the one way ANOVA test was applied and the results

are presented in the table no 61.

Table No: 61

Results of one way ANOVA between educational qualifications of bank employees with



freedom

Sum of

squares

Mean sum

of squares

F-value P-value Signi

Between educations 2 2439.28 1219.6414 1.1345 0.3225 NS

Within educations 477 512800.62 1075.0537

Total 479 515239.90

Source: Field Study

From Table No 61 the researcher had seen that, the bank employees with

educational qualifications (graduate, postgraduate and professional) do not differ

statistically significant with respect to training and development programmes scores


accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees

with different educational qualifications (graduate, postgraduate and professional)

have similar training and development programmes scores.

Sub Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between educational

qualifications of bank employees (graduate, postgraduate and professional) with

respect to components of training and development programmes i.e.







programmes


226




To test this hypothesis the one way ANOVA test was applied and the results are

presented in the Table No 62.

Table No: 62

Results of one way ANOVA between educational qualifications of bank employees

with respect to components of training and development programmes


freedom

Sum of

squares

Mean sum

of squares



and development

programmes



Total 479 1523.70


and development

programmes



Total 479 3732.37






Total 479 12430.28



on job performance



Total 479 8281.70


and development

programmes

administration



Total 479 5793.87




programmes



Total 479 1022.58



programmes



Total 479 393.45


centers



Total 479 68024.79



on self development



Total 479 7906.80


trainers



Total 479 4490.59

Source: Field Study

227

From Table No 62the researcher has observed,

The bank employees with different educational qualifications (graduate,

postgraduate and professional) not differ statistically significant with respect to

components of training and development programmes i.e. expectations from

training and development programmes scores (F=1.5683, p>0.05) at 5% level of


is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with different educational

qualifications (graduate, postgraduate and professional) have similar

expectations from training and development programmes.


postgraduate and professional) do not differ statistically significant with respect

to components of training and development programmes i.e. perception about



is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with different educational

qualifications (graduate, postgraduate and professional) have similar perception

about training and development programmes.



to components of training and development programmes i.e. impact of training

and development programmes on behavioral change scores (F=1.2407, p>0.05)


alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with

different educational qualifications (graduate, postgraduate and professional)

have similar impact of training and development programmes on behavioral

change.




228

and development programmes on job performance scores (F=1.0767, p>0.05) at


hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with different

educational qualifications (graduate, postgraduate and professional) have similar

impact of training and development programmes on job performance.



to components of training and development programmes i.e. Perception about

training and development programmes on administration scores (F=0.6647,


alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with

different educational qualifications (graduate, postgraduate and professional)

have similar Perception about training and development programmes

administration.



to components of training and development programmes i.e. climate for transfer

of learning after attending training and development programmes scores



employees with different educational qualifications (graduate, postgraduate and

professional) have similar climate for transfer of learning after attending training

and development programmes.



to components of training and development programmes i.e. overall opinion

about training and development programmes scores (F=1.3862, p>0.05) at 5%



229


overall opinion about training and development programmes.




training center scores (F=1.3391, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence,

the null hypothesis is accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means

that, the bank employees with different educational qualifications (graduate,

postgraduate and professional) have similar perception about training center.




and development programmes on self development scores (F=1.5606, p>0.05) at




impact of training and development programmes on self development.




the trainers scores (F=0.3061, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the


the bank employees with different educational qualifications (graduate,

postgraduate and professional) have similar perception about the trainers.

Major Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between bank employees

with and without pursuing degree or course with respect to training and


To achieve this hypothesis the t test was applied and the results are presented

in the table No 63.

230

Table No: 63

Results of t-test between bank employees with and without pursuing degree or

course with respect to training and development programmes

Pursuing degree n Mean SD t-value p-value Sign

With 15 510.4000 25.0166 -0.0102 0.9918 NS

Without 465 510.4882 33.0386

Source: Field Study

From Table No 63 researcher had seen that, the bank employees with and

without pursuing new degree or course do not differ statistically significant with

respect to training and development programmes scores (t=-0.0102, p>0.05) at 5%


hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with and without pursuing

degree or course have similar training and development programmes scores.

Sub Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between with and without

pursuing degree or course of bank employees with respect to components of








programmes





Totest this hypothesis the t- test was applied and the results are presented in

the Table No 64

231

Table No: 64

Results of t-test between with and without pursuing degree or course of employees with

respect to components of Training and Development Programmes

Variable Pursuing

degree n Mean SD t-value p-value Signi.



With 15 29.9333 1.1629 1.4541 0.1466 NS

Without 465 29.2538 1.7968



With 15 36.9333 2.5486 -0.0117 0.9906 NS

Without 465 36.9419 2.8014



behavioral change

With 15 63.4000 3.9605 -0.1977 0.8433 NS

Without 465 63.6645 5.1297



performance

With 15 54.6000 2.6132 -0.1182 0.9060 NS

Without 465 54.7290 4.2002



administration

With 15 40.8000 2.8586 -0.2449 0.8066 NS

Without 465 41.0237 3.4984




With 15 41.0000 1.0690 1.0606 0.2894 NS

Without 465 40.5935 1.4711



With 15 26.2667 0.7037 0.1175 0.9065 NS

Without 465 26.2387 0.9127

Perception about training centers With 15 140.2000 10.6248 -0.1746 0.8615 NS

Without 465 140.7462 11.9662



development

With 15 40.2667 4.1656 -0.1774 0.8593 NS

Without 465 40.4559 4.0640

Perception about the trainers With 15 37.0000 2.0702 0.1979 0.8432 NS

Without 465 36.8409 3.0900

Source: Field Study

From Table No 64 researcher had seen that,

1. The bank employees with and without pursuing new degree or course do not

differ statistically significant with respect to components of training and

development programmes i.e. expectations from training and development

232



the bank employees with and without pursuing new degree or course have

similar expectations from training and development programmes.



development programmes i.e. perception about training and development

programmes scores (t=-0.0117, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the



similar perception about training and development programmes.




on behavioral change scores (t=-0.1977, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance.


means that, the bank employees with and without pursuing new degree or course

have similar impact of training and development programmes on behavioral

change scores.




on job performance scores (t=-0.1182, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance.



have similar impact of training and development programmes on job

performance.



233


programmes administration scores (t=-0.2449, p>0.05) at 5% level of


is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with and without pursuing new

degree or course have similar Perception about training and development




development programmes i.e. climate for transfer of learning after attending

training and development programmes scores (t=1.0606, p>0.05) at 5% level of


is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with and without pursuing new

degree or course have similar climate for transfer of learning after attending

training and development programmes.







similar overall opinion about training and development programmes.



development programmes i.e. perception about training center scores (t=-

0.1746, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is


employees with and without pursuing new degree or course have similar

perception about training center scores.

234




on self-development scores (t=-0.1774, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance.



have similar impact of training and development programmes on self-

development.



development programmes i.e. perception about the trainers’ scores (t=0.1979,


alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with and

without pursuing new degree or course have similar perception about the

trainers.


with and without completed degree or course after joining bank with respect to


To test this hypothesis the t-test was applied and the results are presented in

the Table No: 65

Table No: 65

Results of t-test between bank employees with and without completed degree or course

after joining bank with respect to training and development programmes

Competed degree

after join

n Mean SD t-value p-value Sign

With 17 512.0000 28.7446 0.1937 0.8465 NS

Without 463 510.4298 32.9626

Source: Field study

235

From Table No: 65 researcher had seen that, the bank employees with and

without completed degree or course after joining bank do not differ statistically

significant with respect to training and development programmes scores (t=0.1937,



without completed degree or course after joining bank have similar training and


Sub Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between bank employees with

and without completed degree or course after joining bank with respect to

components of training and development programmes i.e.







programmes






the Table No: 66.

236

Table No: 66

Results of t-test between bank employees with and without completed degree or course

after joining bank with respect to components of Training and Development Programmes

Variable Competed degree

after join n Mean SD t-value p-value Signi.

Expectations from


programmes

Completed 17 29.2941 2.0238 0.0450 0.9642 NS

Not Completed 463 29.2743 1.7766


and development

programmes

Completed 17 37.7059 1.6494 1.1497 0.2508 NS

Not Completed 463 36.9136 2.8217




Completed 17 63.8235 4.7333 0.1377 0.8905 NS

Not Completed 463 63.6501 5.1116



on job performance

Completed 17 55.0000 3.4095 0.2774 0.7816 NS

Not Completed 463 54.7149 4.1857


and development

programmes

administration

Completed 17 40.7647 3.0929 -0.3038 0.7614 NS

Not Completed 463 41.0259 3.4939




programmes

Completed 17 40.9412 1.0880 0.9623 0.3364 NS

Not Completed 463 40.5940 1.4724



programmes

Completed 17 26.2353 0.5623 -0.0198 0.9842 NS

Not Completed 463 26.2397 0.9169


centers

Completed 17 140.7647 12.2246 0.0125 0.9900 NS

Not Completed 463 140.7279 11.9191



on self development

Completed 17 40.2941 4.3698 -0.1609 0.8722 NS

Not Completed 463 40.4557 4.0561


trainers

Completed 17 37.1765 2.4299 0.4530 0.6508 NS

Not Completed 463 36.8337 3.0840

Source: Field study

From Table No: 66 researcher had seen that,

1. The bank employees with and without completed degree or course after joining

bank do not differ statistically significant with respect to components of training

and development programmes i.e. expectations from training and development



237

the bank employees with and without completed degree or course after joining

bank have similar expectations from training and development programmes.



and development programmes i.e. perception about training and development



the bank employees with and without completed degree or course after joining

bank have similar perception about training and development programmes.



and development programmes i.e. impact of training and development

programmes on behavioral change scores (t=0.1377, p>0.05) at 5% level of


is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with and without completed

degree or course after joining bank have similar impact of training and

development programmes on behavioral change.




programmes on job performance scores (t=0.2774, p>0.05) at 5% level of




development programmes on job performance.

238



and development programmes i.e. Perception about training and development

programmes administration scores (t=-0.3038, p>0.05) at 5% level of



degree or course after joining bank have similar Perception about training and

development programmes administration.



and development programmes i.e. climate for transfer of learning after attending




degree or course after joining bank have similar climate for transfer of learning

after attending training and development programmes.



and development programmes i.e. overall opinion about training and

development programmes scores (t=-0.0198, p>0.05) at 5% level of



degree or course after joining bank have similar overall opinion about training




239

and development programmes i.e. perception about training center scores



employees with and without completed degree or course after joining bank have

similar perception about training center.




programmes on self development scores (t=-0.1609, p>0.05) at 5% level of




development programmes on self-development s.



and development programmes i.e. perception about the trainers’ scores



employees with and without completed degree or course after joining bank have

similar perception about the trainers.


with membership in professional organizations with respect to training and



the Table No: 67.

240

Table No: 67

Results of t-test between bank employees with membership in professional

organizations with respect to training and development programmes

Membership n Mean SD t-value p-value Sign

Yes 17 512.4118 26.4577 0.2463 0.8055 NS

No 463 510.4147 33.0281

Source: Field study

From Table No: 67 researcher had seen that, the bank employees with and

without membership in professional organizations do not differ statistically

significant with respect to training and development programmes scores (t=0.2463,



without membership in professional organizations have similar training and

development programmes scores.


membership in professional organizations respect to components of training and








programmes






the Table No: 68.

241

Table No: 68

Results of t-test between bank employees with membership in professional

organizations respect to components of Training and Development Programmes

Variable Membership n Mean SD t-value p-value Signi.



Yes 17 30.1176 1.2690 1.9896 0.0472 S

No 463 29.2441 1.7931



Yes 17 37.0000 1.9039 0.0876 0.9302 NS

No 463 36.9395 2.8201



Yes 17 63.7059 4.3698 0.0409 0.9674 NS

No 463 63.6544 5.1229



Yes 17 55.0588 2.9255 0.3367 0.7365 NS

No 463 54.7127 4.1982



administration

Yes 17 41.2353 2.6816 0.2636 0.7922 NS

No 463 41.0086 3.5057



programmes

Yes 17 40.8824 0.6002 0.7930 0.4282 NS

No 463 40.5961 1.4826



Yes 17 26.2941 0.6860 0.2524 0.8009 NS

No 463 26.2376 0.9139

Perception about training centers Yes 17 140.3529 11.4014 -0.1324 0.8947 NS

No 463 140.7430 11.9471



Yes 17 40.7059 4.2539 0.2641 0.7918 NS

No 463 40.4406 4.0602

Perception about the trainers Yes 17 37.0588 2.2212 0.2918 0.7706 NS

No 463 36.8380 3.0899

Source:Field study

From Table No: 68 researcher had seen that,

The bank employees with and without membership in professional organizations



programmes scores (t=1.9896, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the


the bank employees with membership in professional organizations have higher

expectations from training and development programmes as compared to

without membership.

242


do not differ statistically significant with respect to components of training and




the bank employees with and without membership in professional organizations

have similar perception about training and development programmes.




on behavioral change scores (t=0.0409, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance.


means that, the bank employees with and without membership in professional

organizations have similar impact of training and development programmes on

behavioral change.




on job performance scores (t=0.3367, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance.




job performance.




programmes administration scores (t=0.2636, p>0.05) at 5% level of


is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with and without membership in

243

professional organizations have similar Perception about training and




development programmes i.e. climate for transfer of learning after attending



is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with and without membership in

professional organizations have similar climate for transfer of learning after







the bank employees with and without membership in professional organizations

have similar overall opinion about training and development programmes.



development programmes i.e. perception about training center scores (t=-

0.1324, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is


employees with and without membership in professional organizations have

similar perception about training center.




on self development scores (t=0.2641, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance.


244



self development.



development programmes i.e. perception about the trainers scores (t=0.2918,



without membership in professional organizations have similar perception about

the trainers.


belonging to different years of service of (0-9 years, 10-19 years and 20+ years)

with respect to training and development programmes.


are presented in the table No: 69.

Table No:69 Results of one way ANOVA between bank employees belonging to

different years of services of (0-9 years, 10-19 years and 20+ years) with respect to



freedom

Sum of

squares

Mean sum of

squares F-value P-value Signi.

Between years of service 2 26628.65 13314.3250 12.9979 0.0000 S

Within years of service 477 488611.25 1024.3422

Total 479 515239.90

Source: Field study

From Table No: 69 researcher had seen that, the bank employees belonging

to different years of service of (0-9 years, 10-19 years and 20+ years) differ

statistically significant with respect to training and development programmes scores


rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the bank employees

belonging to different years of service (0-9 years, 10-19 years and 20+ years) have

different training and development programmes scores.

245

If F is significant, to know the pair wise comparison of years of service (0-9

years, 10-19 years and 20+ years) of bank employees by applying the Newman-

Keuls multiple posthoc procedure and the results are presented in the Table No: 70.

Table No: 70

Pair wise comparison of years of service of bank employees with respect to training and

development programmes by Newman-Keuls multiple posthoc procedure

Years of service 0-9 years 10-19 years 20+ years

Mean 498.3588 514.3082 515.5616

0-9 years -

10-19 years 0.0001* -

20+ years 0.0000* 0.6992 -


Source: Field study

Table No: 70 revealed that, the bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and

10-19 years of service (p<0.05); 0-9 years and 20+ years of service (p<0.05) differs

significantly with respect to training and development programmes scores. In

another word, the bank employees belonging to 20+ years of service have higher

training and development programmes scores as compared to bank employees

belonging to 10-19 years and 0-9 years of service.

Sub Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between bank employees

belonging to different years of services of (0-9 years, 10-19 years and 20+ years)

with respect to components of training and development programmes i.e.







programmes





246


are presented in the Table No: 71.

Table No: 71

Results of one way ANOVA between bank employees belonging to different years of

services of (0-9 years, 10-19 years and 20+ years) with respect to components of



freedom

Sum of

squares

Mean sum of

squares F-value P-value Signi.


and development

programmes

Between yeras of service 2 33.13 16.5663 5.3014 0.0053 S


Total 479 1523.70


and development

programmes



Total 479 3732.37






Total 479 12430.28



on job performance



Total 479 8281.70


and development




Total 479 5793.87




programmes

Between years of service 2 7.87 3.9359 1.8502 0.1583 NS


Total 479 1022.58



programmes

Between years of service 2 3.07 1.5346 1.8751 0.1545 NS


Total 479 393.45


centers



Total 479 68024.79



on self development



Total 479 7906.80




Total 479 4490.59

Source: Field study

247

From the Table No: 71 researcher observed that,

The bank employees belonging to different years of service (0-9 years, 10-19

years and 20+ years) differ statistically significant with respect to components of

training and development programmes i.e. expectations from training and

development programmes scores (F=5.3014, p<0.05) at 5% level of


accepted. It means that, the bank employees belonging to different years of

service (0-9 years, 10-19 years and 20+ years) have different expectations from




training and development programmes i.e. perception about training and

development programmes scores (F=3.5642, p<0.05) at 5% level of



service (0-9 years, 10-19 years and 20+ years) have different perception about

training and development programmes .



training and development programmes i.e. impact of training and development

programmes on behavioral change scores (F=14.8075, p<0.05) at 5% level of



service (0-9 years, 10-19 years and 20+ years) have different impact of training

and development programmes on behavioral change.




programmes on job performance scores (F=13.7646, p<0.05) at 5% level of

248




and development programmes on job performance.



training and development programmes i.e. Perception about training and

development programmes administration scores (F=11.1975, p<0.05) at 5%

level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and alternative


years of service (0-9 years, 10-19 years and 20+ years) have different Perception

about training and development programmes administration.


years and 20+ years) do not differ statistically significant with respect to

components of training and development programmes i.e. climate for transfer of

learning after attending training and development programmes scores



employees belonging to different years of service (0-9 years, 10-19 years and

20+ years) have similar climate for transfer of learning after attending training



years and 20+ years) do not differ statistically significant with respect to

components of training and development programmes i.e. overall opinion about



is rejected. It means that, the bank employees belonging to different years of

service (0-9 years, 10-19 years and 20+ years) have similar overall opinion

about training and development programmes.

249



training and development programmes i.e. perception about training center

scores (F=14.7240, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null


bank employees belonging to different years of service (0-9 years, 10-19 years

and 20+ years) have different perception about training center.




programmes on self development scores (F=9.6479, p<0.05) at 5% level of




and development programmes on self development.



training and development programmes i.e. perception about the trainers scores



employees belonging to different years of service (0-9 years, 10-19 years and

20+ years) have different perception about the trainers.

If F is significant, to know the pair wise comparison of years of service (0-9

years, 10-19 years and 20+ years) of bank employees by applying the Newman-


250

Table No: 72

Pair wise comparison of years of service with respect to components of training and


Components Years of service 0-9 years 10-19 years 20+ years



Mean 29.1756 28.9589 29.5665

0-9 years -

10-19 years 0.3255 -

20+ years 0.0455* 0.0015* -



Mean 36.4046 37.0342 37.2217

0-9 years -

10-19 years 0.0688 -

20+ years 0.0088* 0.5248 -



Mean 61.6489 64.4589 64.3744

0-9 years -

10-19 years 0.0000* -

20+ years 0.0000* 0.8658 -



Mean 53.145 55.226 55.3842

0-9 years -

10-19 years 0.0001* -

20+ years 0.0000* 0.6962 -



administration

Mean 39.8244 41.3425 41.5517

0-9 years -

10-19 years 0.0006* -

20+ years 0.0000* 0.5443 -


Mean 136.053 142.74 142.3005

0-9 years -

10-19 years 0.0000* -

20+ years 0.0000* 0.7086 -



Mean 39.1603 41.1096 40.8079

0-9 years -

10-19 years 0.0001* -

20+ years 0.0004* 0.4595 -


Mean 35.9771 36.8904 37.3744

0-9 years -

10-19 years 0.0210* -

20+ years 0.0001* 0.1029 -


Source: Field study

251


i. The bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 10-19 years of service (p<0.05);

10-19 years and 20+ years of service (p<0.05) differs significantly with respect

to component of training and development programmes i.e. expectations from

training and development programmes scores. In another word, the bank

employees belonging to 0-9 years of service have higher expectations from

training and development programmes as compared to bank employees

belonging to 10-19 years and 20+ years of service.

ii. The bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 20+ years of service (p<0.05)

differs significantly with respect to component of training and development

programmes i.e. perception about training and development programmes scores.

In another word, the bank employees belonging to 20+ years of service have

higher perception about training and development programmes as compared to

bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 10-19 years of service.

iii. The bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 10-19 years of service (p<0.05);

0-9 years and 20+ years of service (p<0.05) differs significantly with respect to


development programmes on behavioral change scores. In another word, the

bank employees belonging to 10-19 years of service have higher impact of

training and development programmes on behavioral change as compared to

bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 20+ years of service.

iv. The bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 10-19 years of service (p<0.05);



development programmes on job performance scores. In another word, the bank

employees belonging to 20+ years of service have higher impact of training and

development programmes on job performance as compared to bank employees

belonging to 0-9 years and 10-19 years of service.

v. The bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 10-19 years of service (p<0.05);


252

component of training and development programmes i.e. Perception about

training and development programmes administration scores. In another word,

the bank employees belonging to 20+ years of service have higher Perception

about training and development programmes administration as compared to

bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 10-19 years of service.

vi. The bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 10-19 years of service (p<0.05);


component of training and development programmes i.e. perception about

training center scores. In another word, the bank employees belonging to 10-19

years of service have higher perception about training center as compared to

bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 20+ years of service.

vii. The bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 10-19 years of service (p<0.05);



development programmes on self development scores. In another word, the

bank employees belonging to 10-19 years of service have higher impact of

training and development programmes on self development as compared to bank

employees belonging to 0-9 years and 20+ years of service.

viii. The bank employees belonging to 0-9 years and 10-19 years of service

(p<0.05); 0-9 years and 20+ years of service (p<0.05) differs significantly with

respect to component of training and development programmes i.e. perception

about the trainers scores. In another word, the bank employees belonging to 20+

years of service have higher perception about the trainers as compared to bank

employees belonging to 0-9 years and 10-19 years of service.


attended by number of training programmes (1-10, 11-20, 21+)) with respect to




253

Table No: 73

Results of one way ANOVA between bank employees attended by number of training

programmes (1-10, 11-20, 21+)) with respect to training and development programmes

Source of variation Degrees of freedom Sum of squares Mean sum


Between number of

training attended 2 25118.73 12559.36 12.2231 0.0000 S

Within number of

training attended 477 490121.17 1027.51

Total 479 515239.90

Source: Field study

From the Table No: 73 researcher had seen that, the bank employees

attended by number of training programmes (1-10, 11-20, 21+)) differ statistically

significant with respect to training and development programmes scores



attended by number of training programmes (1-10, 11-20, 21+)) have different

training and development programmes scores.

If F is significant, to know the pair wise comparison of bank employees

attended by number of training programmes (1-10, 11-20, 21+)) by applying the

Newman-Keuls multiple posthoc procedure and the results are presented in the

Table No: 74.

Table No: 74

Pair wise comparison of bank employees attended by number of training programmes

(1-10, 11-20, 21+) with respect to training and development programmes by Newman-

Keuls multiple posthoc procedure

Number of training attended 1-10 11-20 21+

Mean 499.2695 515.2126 514.965

1-10 -

11-20 0.0000* -

21+ 0.0012* 0.9473 -


Source: Field study

254

Table No: 74 revealed that, the bank employees attended 1-10 and 11-20

training programmes (p<0.05); 1-10 and 21 and more training programmes attended

(p<0.05) differ significantly with respect to training and development programmes

scores. In another word, the bank employees attended 11-20 training programmes

have higher training and development programmes scores as compared to 1-10 and

21 and more training programmes attended by bank employees.

Sub Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between bank employees

attended by number of training programmes (1-10, 11-20 and 21+) with respect to

components of training and development programmes i.e.







programmes







255

Table No: 75

75 Results of one way ANOVA between bank employees attended by number of

training programmes with respect to components of training and development

programmes


freedom

Sum of

squares

Mean sum



and development

programmes

Between no of trainings

attended 2 17.56 8.78 2.7800 0.0630 NS

Within no of trainings

attended 477 1506.14 3.16

Total 479 1523.70


and development

programmes


attended 2 84.21 42.11 5.5054 0.0043 S


attended 477 3648.15 7.65

Total 479 3732.37





attended 2 650.92 325.46 13.1793 0.0000 S


attended 477 11779.36 24.69

Total 479 12430.28



on job performance


attended 2 419.25 209.63 12.7176 0.0000 S


attended 477 7862.45 16.48

Total 479 8281.70


and development



attended 2 221.01 110.50 9.4584 0.0001 S


attended 477 5572.86 11.68

Total 479 5793.87




programmes


attended 2 2.49 1.25 0.5827 0.5588 NS


attended 477 392.19 2.14

Total 479 394.68



programmes


attended 2 1.26 0.63 0.7676 0.4647 NS


attended 477 392.19 0.82

Total 479 393.45


centers


attended 2 3453.03 1726.51 12.7540 0.0000 S


attended 477 64571.76 135.37

Total 479 68024.79



on self development


attended 2 243.09 121.55 7.5652 0.0006 S


attended 477 7663.71 16.07

Total 479 7906.80



attended 2 147.71 73.85 8.1118 0.0003 S


attended 477 4342.88 9.10

Total 479 4490.59

Source: Field study

256

From the Table No: 75 researcher observed that,

1. The bank employees attended by number of training programmes (1-10, 11-20,

21+)) do not differ statistically significant with respect to component of training


programmes scores (F=2.7800, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the


the bank employees attended by number of training programmes (1-10, 11-20,

21+)) have similar expectations from training and development programmes.


21+)) differ statistically significant with respect to component of training and




the bank employees attended by number of training programmes (1-10, 11-20,

21+)) have different perception about training and development programmes.






means that, the bank employees attended by number of training programmes (1-

10, 11-20, 21+)) have different impact of training and development programmes

on behavioral change.







257


on job performance.




programmes administration scores (F=9.4584, p<0.05) at 5% level of


accepted. It means that, the bank employees attended by number of training

programmes (1-10, 11-20, 21+)) have different Perception about training and


6. The bank employees attended by number of training programmes (n1-10, 11-20,





is rejected. It means that, the bank employees attended by number of training

programmes (1-10, 11-20, 21+)) have similar climate for transfer of learning

after attending training and development programmes.




development programmes scores (F=0.7676, p>0.05) at 5% level of


is rejected. It means that, the bank employees attended by number of training

programmes (1-10, 11-20, 21+)) have similar overall opinion about training and




258

development programmes i.e. perception about training center scores



employees attended by number of training programmes (1-10, 11-20, 21+)) have









on self development.





alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the bank employees attended

by number of training programmes (1-10, 11-20, 21+)) have different perception

about the trainers’.

If F is significant, to know the pair wise comparison of bank employees

attended by number of training programmes (1-10, 11-20, 21+) by applying the

Newman-Keuls multiple posthoc procedure and the results are presented in the

Table No: 76.

259

Table No: 76

Pair wise comparison of number of training programmes attended with respect to

components of training and development programmes by Newman-Keuls multiple

posthoc procedure

Components No of trainings

attended 1-10 11-20 21+



Mean 28.9858 29.3661 29.4824

1-10 -

11-20 0.0498* -

21+ 0.0442* 0.5842 -



Mean 36.3050 37.1496 37.3765

1-10 -

11-20 0.0043* -

21+ 0.0068* 0.4962 -



Mean 61.8511 64.4252 64.3529

1-10 -

11-20 0.0000* -

21+ 0.0010* 0.9005 -



Mean 53.2766 55.3071 55.3882

1-10 -

11-20 0.0000* -

21+ 0.0006* 0.8631 -



administration

Mean 39.9645 41.4567 41.4471

1-10 -

11-20 0.0000* -

21+ 0.0040* 0.9808 -


Mean 136.5745 142.5394 142.212

1-10 -

11-20 0.0000* -

21+ 0.0016* 0.8089 -



Mean 39.3475 40.9291 40.8471

1-10 -

11-20 0.0002* -

21+ 0.0149* 0.8603 -


Mean 35.9858 37.1969 37.2235

1-10 -

11-20 0.0002* -

21+ 0.0071* 0.9386 -


Source: Field study

260


1. The bank employees attended 1-10 and 11-20 training programmes (p<0.05); 1-

10 and 21 and more attended training programmes (p<0.05) differs significantly

with respect to component of training and development programmes i.e.

expectations from training and development programmes scores. In another

word, the bank employees who have attended 21 and more training programmes

have higher expectations from training and development programmes as

compared to attended 1-10 and 11-20 training programmes by bank employees.




perception about training and development programmes scores. In another


have higher perception about training and development programmes as

compared to attended 1-10 and 11-20 training programmes by bank employees.



with respect to component of training and development programmes i.e. impact

of training and development programmes on behavioral change scores. In

another word, the bank employees who have attended 21 and more training

programmes have higher impact of training and development programmes on

behavioral change as compared to attended 1-10 and 11-20 training programmes

by bank employees.




of training and development programmes on job performance scores. In another


have higher impact of training and development programmes on job

261

performance as compared to attended 1-10 and 11-20 training programmes by

bank employees.




Perception about training and development programmes administration scores.

In another word, the bank employees who have attended 11-20 training

programmes have higher Perception about training and development

programmes administration as compared to attended 1-10 and 21 and more

training programmes by bank employees.




perception about training centers scores. In another word, the bank employee

who have attended 11-20 training programmes have higher perception about

training centers as compared to attended 1-10 and 21 and more training

programmes by bank employees.




of training and development programmes on self development scores. In

another word, the bank employees who have attended 21 and more training

programmes have higher impact of training and development programmes on

self development as compared to attended 1-10 and 11-20 training programmes

by bank employees.




perception about the trainers scores. In another word, the bank employees who

262

have attended 21 and more training programmes have higher perception about

the trainers as compared to attended 1-10 and 11-20 training programmes by

bank employees.


with number of promotions (none, one, two, three or more) with respect to training




Table No: 77

Results of one way ANOVA between bank employees with number of promotions

(none, one, two, three or more) with respect to training and development programmes


freedom

Sum of

squares

Mean sum of

squares


Between number of

promotions 3 48146.69 16048.90 16.3549 0.0000 S

Within number of

promotions 476 467093.21 981.29

Total 479 515239.90

Source: Field study

From the Table No: 77 researcher had seen that, the bank employees with

number of promotions of (none, one, two, three or more) differ statistically

significant with respect to training and development programmes scores



with number of promotions (none, one, two, three or more) have different training

and development programmes scores.

If F is significant, to know the pair wise comparison of bank employees with

number of promotions (none, one, two, three or more) by applying the Newman-


263

Table No: 78

Pair wise comparison of number of promotions received with respect to training and


Number of training attended None One Two Three or more

Mean 492.5000 518.9900 513.2500 511.2300

None -

One 0.0000* -

Two 0.0000* 0.1759 -

Three or more 0.0000* 0.1604 0.6350 -

*Significant at 5% level (p<0.05) Source: Field study

Table No: 78 revealed that, the bank employees with no promotions and

bank employees with one promotion (p<0.05), bank employees with no promotions

and bank employees with two promotions (p<0.05); bank employees with no

promotions and bank employees with three or more promotions (p<0.05) differs

significantly with respect to training and development programmes scores. In

another word, the bank employees with one promotion have higher training and

development programmes scores as compared to bank employees with no

promotion, two promotion and three or more promotions.


number of promotions (none, one, two, three or more) with respect to components

of training and development programmes i.e.







programmes





264


are presented in the Table No: 79. Table No: 79

Results of one way ANOVA between bank employees with number of promotions

(none, one, two, three or more) with respect to components of training and development

programmes

Components Source of variation Degrees

of freedom

Sum of

squares

Mean sum

of squares

F-

value

P-

value Sign


and development

programmes

Between number of promotions 3 24.27 8.09 2.5685 0.0538 NS

Within number of promotions 476 1499.43 3.15

Total 479 1523.70


and development

programmes

Between number of promotions 3 116.89 38.96 5.1298 0.0017 S


Total 479 3732.37






Total 479 12430.28



on job performance



Total 479 8281.70


and development

programmes

administration



Total 479 5793.87




programmes



Total 479 393.56



programmes



Total 479 393.45


centers



Total 479 68024.79



on self development



Total 479 7906.80


trainers



Total 479 515239.90

Source: Field study

265

From the Table No: 79 researcher had seen that,

1. The bank employees with number of promotions of (none, one, two, three or

more) do not differ statistically significant with respect to component of training


programmes scores (F=2.5685, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the


the bank employees with number of promotions (none, one, two, three or more)

have similar expectations from training and development programmes.


more) differ statistically significant with respect to component of training and




the bank employees with number of promotions (none, one, two, three or more)

have different perception about training and development programmes.






means that, the bank employees with number of promotions (none, one, two,

three or more) have different impact of training and development programmes

on behavioral change.





266




on job performance.




programmes administration scores (F=16.2754, p<0.05) at 5% level of


accepted. It means that, the bank employees with number of promotions (none,

one, two, three or more) have different perception about training and







is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with number of promotions

(none, one, two, three or more) have similar climate for transfer of learning after





development programmes scores (F=1.0186, p>0.05) at 5% level of


is rejected. It means that, the bank employees with number of promotions

267

(none, one, two, three or more) have similar overall opinion about training and




development programmes i.e. perception about training center scores



employees with number of promotions (none, one, two, three or more) have














alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the bank employees with

number of promotions (none, one, two, three or more) have different perception

about the trainers.

If F is significant, to know the pair wise comparison of bank employees with

number of promotions (none, one, two, three or more) by applying the Newman-


268

Table No: 80

Pair wise comparison of employees with number of promotions with respect to

components of training and development programmes by Newman-Keuls multiple

posthoc procedure

Components No of

Promotions

None One Two Three or

more


programmes

Mean 29.2640 29.0220 29.5900 29.3780

None -

One 0.3152 -

Two 0.3649 0.0451* -

Three or more 0.6350 0.3010 0.3788


programmes

Mean 36.0470 37.3430 37.0160 37.1350

None -

One 0.0030* -

Two 0.0095* 0.6572 -

Three or more 0.0101* 0.5786 0.7507 -



Mean 60.6980 65.0960 64.0410 63.7970

None -

One 0.0000* -

Two 0.0000* 0.1075 -

Three or more 0.0000* 0.1167 0.7099 -


on job performance

Mean 52.2640 55.9270 54.9590 54.9730

None -

One 0.0000* -

Two 0.0000* 0.1649 -

Three or more 0.0000* 0.0738 0.9791 -



Mean 39.1700 42.0000 41.2210 40.9590

None -

One 0.0000* -

Two 0.0000* 0.0839 -

Three or more 0.0001* 0.0544 0.5610 -


Mean 134.1300 143.8800 141.8000 140.8400

None -

One 0.0000* -

Two 0.0000* 0.1786 -

Three or more 0.0000* 0.1193 0.5310 -


on self development

Mean 38.6420 41.5390 40.5570 40.2430

None -

One 0.0000* -

Two 0.0009* 0.0652 -

Three or more 0.0026* 0.0397* 0.5553 -


Mean 35.3580 37.4440 37.0900 37.1350

None -

One 0.0000* -

Two 0.0000* 0.6527 -

Three or more 0.0000* 0.4422 0.9109 -

*significant at 5% level of significance (p<0.05)

Source: Field study

269


The bank employees with one promotion and two promotion (p<0.05) differ

significantly with respect to component of training and development

programmes i.e. expectations from training and development programmes

scores. In another word, the bank employees with one promotion have higher

expectations from training and development programmes as compared to bank

employees with no promotion, two and three or more promotions.

The bank employees with no promotion and one promotion (p<0.05), no

promotion and two promotions (p<0.05), no promotion and three or more

promotions (p<0.05) differs significantly with respect to component of training

and development programmes i.e. perception about training and development

programmes scores. In another word, the bank employees with one promotion

have higher perception about training and development programmes as

compared to bank employees with no promotion, two and three or more

promotions.





programmes on behavioral change scores. In another word, the bank employees

with one promotion have higher impact of training and development

programmes on behavioral change as compared to bank employees with no

promotion, two and three or more promotions.





programmes on job performance scores. In another word, the bank employees


programmes on job performance as compared to bank employees with no


270




and development programmes i.e. Perception about training and development

programmes administration scores. In another word, the bank employees with

one promotion have higher perception about training and development

programmes administration as compared to bank employees with no promotion,

two and three or more promotions.




and development programmes i.e. perception about training center scores. In

another word, the bank employees with one promotion have higher perception

about training center as compared to bank employees with no promotion, two

and three or more promotions.





programmes on self development scores. In another word, the bank employees


programmes on self development as compared to bank employees with no





and development programmes i.e. perception about the trainers scores. In

another word, the bank employees with one promotion have higher perception

about the trainers as compared to bank employees with no promotion, two and

three or more promotions.

271


living in joint and nuclear type of family with respect to training and development

programmes.


the Table No: 81.

Table No: 81

Results of t-test between bank employees living in joint and nuclear type of family with


Types of family n Mean SD t-value p-value Signi.

Joint 270 512.8444 30.9788 1.7910 0.0739 NS

Nuclear 210 507.4524 34.8373

From the Table No: 81 reesarcher had seen that, the bank employees living

in a joint and nuclear family do not differ statistically significant with respect to


significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted and alternative hypothesis is

rejected. It means that, the bank employees living in a joint and nuclear family have

similar training and development programmes scores.

Sub Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between bank employees living

in joint and nuclear type of family with respect to with respect to components of








programmes





272


the Table No: 82.

Table No: 82

Results of t-test between bank employees living in joint and nuclear type of family

with respect to components of training and development programmes

Variable Types of

family

n Mean SD t-value p-value Signi.



Joint 270 29.3296 1.7898 0.7606 0.4473 NS

Nuclear 210 29.2048 1.7773



Joint 270 36.9926 2.7267 0.4528 0.6509 NS

Nuclear 210 36.8762 2.8777



Joint 270 64.0667 4.7849 2.0078 0.0452 S

Nuclear 210 63.1286 5.4323



Joint 270 55.0222 3.8619 1.7798 0.0757 NS

Nuclear 210 54.3429 4.4910



administration

Joint 270 41.2704 3.2431 1.8165 0.0699 NS

Nuclear 210 40.6905 3.7409




Joint 270 40.6370 1.4613 0.5231 0.6012 NS

Nuclear 210 40.5667 1.4634



Joint 270 26.1519 0.8061 -2.4169 0.0160 S

Nuclear 210 26.3524 1.0117

Perception about training centers Joint 270 141.7333 11.2331 2.1008 0.0362 S

Nuclear 210 139.4381 12.6528



Joint 270 40.7444 3.9303 1.8046 0.0718 NS

Nuclear 210 40.0714 4.2064


Joint 270 36.8963 2.9044 0.4091 0.6827 NS

Nuclear 210 36.7810 3.2591

Source: Field study


1.The bank employees living in a joint and nuclear family do not differ

statistically significant with respect to components of training and development

programmes i.e. expectations from training and development programmes

scores (t=0.7606, p>0.05), perception about training and development

programmes scores (t=0.4528, p>0.05), impact of training and development

programmes on job performance scores (t=1.7798, p>0.05), Perception about

training and development programmes on administration scores (t=1.8165,

p>0.05), climate for transfer of learning after attending training and

273

development programmes scores (t=0.5231, p>0.05), impact of training and

development programmes on self development scores (t=1.8046, p>0.05) and

perception about the trainer scores (t=0.4091, p>0.05) at 5% level of

significance. Hence, in these cases the null hypothesis is accepted and

alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees living in a

joint and nuclear family have similar expectations from training and

development programmes, perception about training and development

programmes, impact of training and development programmes on job

performance, perception about training and development programmes

administration, climate for transfer of learning after attending training and

development programmes, impact of training and development programmes on

self development and perception about the trainer.

2. The bank employees living in a joint and nuclear family differ statistically

significant with respect to components of training and development programmes

i.e. impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change

scores (t=0.7606, p>0.05), overall opinion about training and development

programmes scores (t=0.4528, p>0.05), perception about training center scores

(t=1.7798, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, in these cases the null


bank employees living in a joint and nuclear family have different impact of

training and development programmes on behavioral change, overall opinion

about training and development programmes and perception about training

center.

Major Hypothesis:

There is no significant difference between bank employees living in a

smaller (1-5 members) and larger (6+) family with respect to training and



the Table No: 83.

274

Table No: 83

Results of t-test between bank employees living in a smaller (1-5 members) and larger

(6+) family with respect to training and development programmes

Family size n Mean SD t-value p-value Sign.

1-5 320 508.5125 33.7216 -1.8687 0.0623 NS

6+ 160 514.4313 30.5868

Source: Field study

From the Table No: 83 researcher had seen that, the bank employees living

in a smaller (1-5 members) and larger (6+) family do not differ statistically

significant with respect to training and development programmes scores (t=-1.8687,


alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees living in a

smaller (1-5 members) and larger (6+) families have similar training and


Sub Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between bank employees living

in a smaller (1-5 members) and larger (6+) family with respect to components of








programmes






the Table No: 84.

275

Table No: 84

Results of t-test between bank employees living in a smaller (1-5 members) and larger

(6+) family with respect to components of training and development programmes

Variable Family

size

n Mean SD t-value p-value Sign.



1-5 320 29.1688 1.8064 -1.8505 0.0649 NS

6+ 160 29.4875 1.7229



1-5 320 36.8344 2.8152 -1.1914 0.2341 NS

6+ 160 37.1563 2.7393



1-5 320 63.3438 5.2767 -1.9059 0.0573 NS

6+ 160 64.2813 4.6611



1-5 320 54.4625 4.3026 -1.9618 0.0504 NS

6+ 160 55.2500 3.8116



administration

1-5 320 40.8563 3.6127 -1.4307 0.1532 NS

6+ 160 41.3375 3.1779



programmes

1-5 320 40.6188 1.4444 0.2648 0.7913 NS

6+ 160 40.5813 1.4983



1-5 320 26.2375 0.9435 -0.0711 0.9433 NS

6+ 160 26.2438 0.8298

Perception about training centers 1-5 320 140.0469 12.3540 -1.7779 0.0760 NS

6+ 160 142.0938 10.9002



1-5 320 40.2188 4.1968 -1.7674 0.0778 NS

6+ 160 40.9125 3.7507

Perception about the trainers 1-5 320 36.7250 3.1423 -1.2234 0.2218 NS

6+ 160 37.0875 2.8887

Source: Field study

From the Table No: 84 researcher observed that, the bank employees living

in a smaller (1-5 members) and larger (6+) family do not differ statistically

significant with respect to components of training and development programmes i.e.

expectations from training and development programmes scores (t=-1.8505,

p>0.05), perception about training and development programmes scores (t=-1.1914,

p>0.05), impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change

scores (t=-1.9059, p>0.05), impact of training and development programmes on job

performance scores (t=-1.9618, p>0.05), Perception about training and development

programmes administration scores (t=-1.4307, p>0.05), climate for transfer of

learning after attending training and development programmes scores (t=0.2648,

276

p>0.05), overall opinion about training and development programmes scores (t=-

0.0711, p>0.05), perception about training center scores (t=-1.7779, p>0.05), impact

of training and development programmes on self development scores (t=-1.7674,

p>0.05), perception about the trainers scores (t=-1.2234, p>0.05) at 5% level of

significance. Hence, in these cases the null hypothesis is accepted and alternative

hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the bank employees living in a smaller (1-5

members) and larger (6+) family have similar in all components of training and


Major Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between married and

unmarried bank employees with respect to training and development programmes.


the Table No: 85. Table No: 85

Results of t-test between married and unmarried bank employees with respect to


Marital status n Mean SD t-value p-value Sign.

Married 404 512.1856 31.3055 2.6348 0.0087 S

Unmarried 76 501.4474 38.8005

Source: Field study

From Table No: 85 researcher had seen that, the married and unmarried bank

employees differ statistically significant with respect to training and development

programmes scores (t=2.6348, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null


married bank employees have higher training and development programmes scores

as compared to unmarried bank employees.

Sub Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between married and unmarried

bank employees with respect to components of training and development

programmes i.e.




277




programmes






the Table No: 86.

Table No: 86

Results of t-test between married and unmarried bank employees with respect to

components of training and development programmes

Variable Marital

status n Mean SD t-value p-value Signi.



Married 404 29.2946 1.7640 0.5534 0.5802 NS

Unmarried 76 29.1711 1.8931



Married 404 36.8960 2.8458 -0.8254 0.4096 NS

Unmarried 76 37.1842 2.4857



behavioral change

Married 404 63.9505 4.8427 2.9409 0.0034 S

Unmarried 76 62.0921 6.0645



performance

Married 404 54.9752 3.9732 3.0666 0.0023 S

Unmarried 76 53.3947 4.8445



administration

Married 404 41.1856 3.2964 2.4672 0.0140 S

Unmarried 76 40.1184 4.2299




Married 404 40.6114 1.5386 0.1774 0.8593 NS

Unmarried 76 40.5789 0.9559



Married 404 26.2376 0.8702 -0.1091 0.9132 NS

Unmarried 76 26.2500 1.0847

Perception about training centers Married 404 141.4332 11.2642 3.0091 0.0028 S

Unmarried 76 136.9868 14.4347



development

Married 404 40.6015 3.8806 1.8884 0.0596 NS

Unmarried 76 39.6447 4.8709

Perception about the trainers Married 404 37.0000 2.9638 2.5581 0.0108 S

Unmarried 76 36.0263 3.4447

Source: Field study

278


1. The married and unmarried bank employees do not differ statistically significant


expectations from training and development programmes scores (t=0.5534,

p>0.05), perception about training and development programmes scores (t=-

0.8254, p>0.05), climate for transfer of learning after attending training and

development programmes scores (t=0.1774, p>0.05), overall opinion about

training and development programmes scores (t=-0.1091, p>0.05) and impact of


p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, in all these cases the null

hypothesis is accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the

married and unmarried bank employees have similar perception about training

and development programmes, climate for transfer of learning after attending


development programmes and impact of training and development programmes


2. The married and unmarried bank employees differ statistically significant with

respect to component of training and development programmes i.e. impact of

training and development programmes on behavioral change scores (t=2.9409,

p<0.05), impact of training and development programmes on job performance

scores (t=3.0666, p<0.05), Perception about training and development

programmes administration scores (t=2.4672, p<0.05), perception about training

center scores (t=3.0091, p<0.05) and perception about the trainers scores

(t=2.5581, p<0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, in all these cases the null


married bank employees have higher impact of training and development


programmes on job performance, perception about training and development

programmes administration, perception about training center and perception

about the trainers as compared to unmarried bank employees.

279

Major Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between employment status

of spouse (employed and unemployed) of bank employees with respect to training




Results of t-test between employment status of spouse (employed and unemployed) of

bank employees with respect to training and development programmes

Employment status of

spouse


Employed 177 513.0113 29.2573 1.2905 0.1975 NS

Unemployed 303 509.0099 34.6600

Source: Field study

Table No: 87 reveal that, the spouse of bank employees with employed and

unemployed status do not differ statistically significant with respect to training and

development programmes scores (t=1.2905, p>0.05) at 5% level of significance.


means that, the spouse of bank employees with employed and unemployed status

has similar training and development programmes scores.

Sub Hypothesis: There is no significant difference between employment status of

spouse (employed and unemployed) of bank employees with respect to training and








programmes

280







Results of t-test between employment status of spouse (employed and unemployed) of

bank employees with respect to components of training and development programmes

Variable Employment

status of

spouse




Employed 177 29.3107 1.7319 0.3352 0.7376 NS

Unemployed 303 29.2541 1.8155



Employed 177 36.8531 2.8125 -0.5308 0.5958 NS

Unemployed 303 36.9934 2.7824



behavioral change

Employed 177 64.0113 4.6270 1.1675 0.2436 NS

Unemployed 303 63.4488 5.3447



job performance

Employed 177 55.1921 3.7000 1.8860 0.0599 NS

Unemployed 303 54.4521 4.3866



administration

Employed 177 41.3842 3.0747 1.7734 0.0768 NS

Unemployed 303 40.8020 3.6810




Employed 177 40.6836 1.4583 0.8865 0.3758 NS

Unemployed 303 40.5611 1.4633



Employed 177 26.3390 0.9035 1.8411 0.0662 NS

Unemployed 303 26.1815 0.9044


centers

Employed 177 141.3729 10.9242 0.9043 0.3663 NS

Unemployed 303 140.3531 12.4626



self development

Employed 177 40.5876 3.7906 0.5666 0.5713 NS

Unemployed 303 40.3696 4.2178

Perception about the trainers Employed 177 37.2768 2.8658 2.3684 0.0183 S

Unemployed 303 36.5941 3.1481

Source: Field study

281


1. The spouse of bank employees have employed and unemployed status do not



programmes scores (t=0.3352, p>0.05), perception about training and

development programmes scores (t=-0.5308, p>0.05), impact of training and

development programmes on behavioral change scores (t=1.1675, p>0.05),

impact of training and development programmes on job performance scores

(t=1.8860, p>0.05), Perception about training and development programmes

administration scores (t=1.7734, p>0.05), climate for transfer of learning after

attending training and development programmes scores (t=0.8865, p>0.05),

overall opinion about training and development programmes scores (t=1.8411,

p>0.05), perception about training center scores (t=0.9043, p>0.05), impact of


p>0.05) at 5% level of significance. Hence, in these cases the null hypothesis is

accepted and alternative hypothesis is rejected. It means that, the spouse of

bank employees with employed and unemployed status have similar

expectations from training and development programmes, perception about

training and development programmes, impact of training and development


programmes on job performance, Perception about training and development

programmes administration, climate for transfer of learning after attending


development programmes, perception about training center and impact of

training and development programmes on self development.

2. The spouse of bank employees with employed and unemployed status differ

statistically significant with respect to components of training and development

programmes i.e. perception about the trainer scores (t=2.3684, p<0.05) at 5%

level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and alternative

hypothesis is accepted. It means that, the spouse of bank employees with

employed status have higher perception about the trainer as compared to spouse

of bank employees with unemployed status.

282

Section V: Correlation Analysis

In this section, the researcher has performed correlation coefficients among

components of training and development programmes scores i.e. expectations from

training and development programmes(X1), perception about training and

development programmes(X2), impact of training and development programmes on

behavioral changeX3), impact of training and development programmes on job

performance(X4), perception about training and development programmes on

administration(X5), climate for transfer of learning after attending training and

development programmes(X6), overall opinion about training and development

programmes(X7), perception about training centers(X8), impact of training and

development programmes on self development(X9) and perception about

trainers(X10) of bank employees by applying Karl Pearson’s correlation coefficient

procedure and t-test was applied to know the correlation coefficients are significant

or not.

Hypothesis: There is no significant relationship among components of training and

development programmes scores of bank employees’ i.e.







programmes


8. Perception about training center



To test this hypothesis, the Karl Pearson’s correlation coefficient technique

has been applied and the results are presented in the Table No : 89

283

Table No: 89 Correlation among different variables of training and development

programmes by Karl Pearson’s correlation coefficient procedure (n=480)

Variable X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 X10

X1 1.0000

X2 0.1714* 1.0000

X3 0.2184* 0.4004* 1.0000

X4 0.2399* 0.4262* 0.9695* 1.0000

X5 0.2328* 0.3900* 0.9498* 0.9460* 1.0000

X6 0.0440 0.3286* 0.3276* 0.3605* 0.3193* 1.0000

X7 0.1774* 0.1235* 0.2123* 0.2369* 0.2279* 0.1991* 1.0000

X8 0.2027* 0.3670* 0.9895* 0.9267* 0.9256* 0.3028* 0.1941* 1.0000

X9 0.1485* 0.3009* 0.9141* 0.8221* 0.8732* 0.2272* 0.1612* 0.9391* 1.0000

X10 0.2624* 0.3978* 0.7783* 0.8822* 0.8107* 0.3821* 0.2646* 0.6993* 0.5205* 1.0000

*significant at 5% level of significance (p<0.05) Source : Field Study

Table No: 89reveals that,

1. The relationship of expectations from training and development programmes

scores of bank employees is found to be positive and statistically significant with

- perception about training and development programmes scores

- impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change

scores

- impact of training and development programmes on job performance scores

- perception about training and development programmes administration

scores

- overall opinion about training and development programmes scores

- perception about training center scores

- impact of training and development programmes on self development scores

- perception about the trainers scores at 5% level of significance. Hence, the

null hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means

284

that, all these variables increase (decrease) with increase (decrease) in

expectations from training and development programmes scores.

2 The relationship of perception about training and development programmes

scores of bank employees is found to be positive and statistically significant

with


scores



scores

- climate for transfer of learning after attending training and development

programmes scores






that, all these variables increase (decrease) with increase (decrease) in the

perception about training and development programmes scores.

3. The relationship of impact of training and development programmes on

behavioral change scores of bank employees is found to be positive and

statistically significant with



scores

285


programmes scores







impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change

scores.

4. The relationship of impact of training and development programmes on job

performance scores of bank employees is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


scores


programmes scores







impact of training and development programmes on job performance scores.

286

5. The relationship of perception about training and development programmes

administration scores of bank employees is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


programmes scores







perception about training and development programmes on administration

scores.

4. The relationship of climate for transfer of learning after attending training and

development programmes scores of bank employees is found to be positive and







that, all these variables increase (decrease) with increases (decrease) in the

climate for transfer of learning after attending training and development

programmes scores.

287

5. The relationship of overall opinion about training and development programmes

scores of bank employees is found to be positive and statistically significant

with






overall opinion about training and development programmes scores.

6. The relationship of perception about training center scores of bank employees is

found to be positive and statistically significant with




that, these two variables increase (decrease) with increase (decrease) in the


7. The relationship between impact of training and development programmes on

self development scores of bank employees is found to be positive and

statistically significant with perception about the trainers’ scores at 5% level of


accepted. It means that, the perception about the trainers increase (decrease)

with increase (decrease) the impact of training and development programmes on

self development scores.

288


development programmes scores of assistant’s i.e.



3. Impact of training and development programmes on behavioral

change



administration

6. Climate for transfer of learning after attending training and







has been applied and the results are presented in the Table No 90.

289

Table No: 90

Correlation among different variables of Training and development programmes by

Karl Pearson’s correlation coefficient procedure -Assistants (n=100) Variable X1 X2 X3 X4 X5 X6 X7 X8 X9 X10

X1 1.0000

X2 0.1477 1.0000

X3 0.3454* 0.3873* 1.0000

X4 0.3694* 0.3818* 0.9728* 1.0000

X5 0.3671* 0.3875* 0.9431* 0.9199* 1.0000

X6 0.1519 0.0935 0.2691* 0.3497* 0.2278* 1.0000

X7 0.3297* 0.0727 0.2814* 0.2930* 0.2924* 0.1766* 1.0000

X8 0.3368* 0.3510* 0.9902* 0.9344* 0.9358* 0.2316* 0.2726* 1.0000

X9 0.2309* 0.3331* 0.8758* 0.7728* 0.8650* 0.0636 0.2157* 0.9122* 1.0000

X10 0.4197* 0.2995* 0.7764* 0.8764* 0.7426* 0.4506* 0.3156* 0.7023* 0.4289* 1.0000

*significant at 5% level of significance (p<0.05) Source: Field Study.

Table No: 90 reveals that,


scores of assistants is found to be positive and statistically significant with


scores



scores







expectations from training and development programmes scores

290




scores



scores








behavioral change scores of assistants is found to be positive and statistically

significant with



scores


programmes scores




291





scores.


performance scores of assistants is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


scores


programmes scores









administration scores of assistants is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


programmes scores



292






scores.


development programmes scores of assistants is found to be positive and








programmes scores.








overall opinion about training and development programmes scores.

8. The relationship of perception about training center scores of assistants is found

to be positive and statistically significant with

293







self development scores of assistants is found to be positive and statistically

significant with perception about the trainers’ scores at 5% level of significance.


means that, perception about the trainers increase (decrease) with increase

(decrease) in the impact of training and development programmes on self

development scores.


development programmes scores of senior assistants i.e.







programmes






has been applied and the results are presented in the Table No:91.

294

Table No: 91. Correlation among different variables of Training and development

programmes by Karl Pearson’s correlation coefficient procedure – senior assistants

(n=100)-


X1 1.0000

X2 0.0485 1.0000

X3 0.1830* 0.1428 1.0000

X4 0.2283* 0.2271* 0.9535* 1.0000

X5 0.2137* 0.1790* 0.9523* 0.9680* 1.0000

X6 -0.1119 0.5132* 0.3750* 0.4550* 0.4103* 1.0000

X7 0.1337 0.1781* 0.1479 0.2390* 0.1829* 0.2609* 1.0000

X8 0.1488 0.0859 0.9858* 0.8925* 0.9046* 0.3088* 0.0957 1.0000

X9 0.0950 -0.0090 0.9491* 0.8437* 0.8943* 0.2483* 0.0377 0.9672* 1.0000

X10 0.2337* 0.3153* 0.6778* 0.8524* 0.7997* 0.4657* 0.3194* 0.5601* 0.4908* 1.0000

*significant at 5% level of significance (p<0.05) Source : Field Study

Table No: 91 reveal that,


scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and statistically significant with


scores



scores






scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and statistically significant

with

295



scores


programmes scores







behavioral change scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and



- perception about training and development programmes on administration

scores


programmes scores







scores.

296


performance scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and statistically

significant with

- perception about training and development programmes on administration

scores


programmes scores






that, all these variables increase (decrease) with increase (decrease)in the



administration scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


programmes scores







297


scores.


development programmes scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and









programmes scores.



with perception about the trainers scores at 5% level of significance. Hence, the


perception about the trainers scores increase (decrease) with increase (decrease)

in the overall opinion about training and development programmes scores.

8. The relationship of perception about training center scores of senior assistants is







298


self development scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and



accepted. It means that, perception about the trainers increases (decreases) with

increases (decreases) in the impact of training and development programmes on



development programmes scores of special assistants i.e.




change



administration








has been applied and the results are presented in the Table No: 92.

299

Table No: 92


Karl Pearson’s correlation coefficient procedure –special assistants (n=100)


X1 1.0000

X2 0.2401* 1.0000

X3 0.2054* 0.4587* 1.0000

X4 0.2393* 0.4855* 0.9773* 1.0000

X5 0.2569* 0.4475* 0.9647* 0.9442* 1.0000

X6 0.1084 0.5157* 0.4204* 0.4122* 0.4247* 1.0000

X7 0.2136* 0.1697 0.2874* 0.2847* 0.2829* 0.1756* 1.0000

X8 0.1829* 0.4424* 0.9928* 0.9483* 0.9558* 0.4160* 0.2913* 1.0000

X9 0.1698 0.3399* 0.9398* 0.8678* 0.9272* 0.4027* 0.2645* 0.9562* 1.0000

X10 0.2441* 0.5029* 0.8026* 0.8742* 0.8036* 0.3642* 0.2862* 0.7463* 0.6078* 1.0000

*significant at 5% level of significance (p<0.05)Source: Field Study



scores of special assistants is found to be positive and statistically significant with


scores


perception about training and development programmes administration

scores

overall opinion about training and development programmes scores

perception about training center scores

perception about the trainers scores at 5% level of significance. Hence, the


that, all these variables increase (decrease) with increase (decrease)in the




with

300

impact of training and development programmes on behavioral

change scores


scores

perception about training and development programmes

administration scores

climate for transfer of learning after attending training and

development programmes scores



scores

perception about the trainers scores at 5% level of significance.

Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is

accepted. It means that, all these variables increase (decrease) with

increase (decrease) in the perception about training and development

programmes scores.


behavioral change scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and



scores


scores


programmes scores



301


scores

perception about the trainers scores at 5% level of significance. Hence,

the null hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It

means that, all these variables increase (decrease) with increase

(decrease) in the impact of training and development programmes on

behavioral change scores.


performance scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


scores


programmes scores



impact of training and development programmes on self development scores






administration scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


programmes scores



302


scores





scores.


development programmes scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and





scores




(decrease) in the climate for transfer of learning after attending training

and development programmes scores.


scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and statistically significant with



scores




303

(decrease) in the overall opinion about training and development

programmes scores.

8. The relationship of perception about training center scores of senior assistants is



scores




(decrease) in the perception about training center scores.


self development scores of senior assistants is found to be positive and







development programmes scores of scale-I officers i.e.







programmes



304




has been applied and the results are presented in the Table No : 93.

Table No: 93.


Karl Pearson’s correlation coefficient procedure - scale-I officers (n=90)


X1 1.0000

X2 0.3263* 1.0000

X3 0.2816* 0.4948* 1.0000

X4 0.2777* 0.5013* 0.9876* 1.0000

X5 0.2810* 0.4728* 0.9463* 0.9438* 1.0000

X6 0.0375 0.4023* 0.5302* 0.5214* 0.5366* 1.0000

X7 0.2103* 0.2922* 0.2539* 0.2447* 0.2512* 0.1685* 1.0000

X8 0.2782* 0.4935* 0.9965* 0.9722* 0.9370* 0.5332* 0.2583* 1.0000

X9 0.2204* 0.4399* 0.9090* 0.8669* 0.8372* 0.4977* 0.2291* 0.9202* 1.0000

X10 0.2642* 0.4704* 0.9005* 0.9385* 0.9209* 0.4519* 0.2234* 0.8720* 0.6968* 1.0000

*significant at 5% level of significance (p<0.05) Source: Field Study

Table No : 93. reveals that,


scores of scale-I officers is found to be positive and statistically significant with

perception about training and development programmes scores


scores


scores


scores



305


scores




(decreases) in the expectations from training and development

programmes scores




scores



scores


programmes scores









behavioral change scores of scale-I officers is found to be positive and



306


scores


programmes scores







impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change scores.


performance scores of scale-I officers is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


scores


programmes scores









administration scores of scale-I officers is found to be positive and statistically

significant with

307


programmes scores








scores.


development programmes scores of scale-I officers is found to be positive and









programmes scores.





scores



308


(decrease) in the overall opinion about training and development

programmes scores.

8. The relationship of perception about training center scores of scale-I officers is








self development scores of scale-I officers is found to be positive and







development programmes scores of bank employees’s as a scale-II officers i.e.







programmes



309




has been applied and the results are presented in the Table No : 94.

Table No: 94


Karl Pearson’s correlation coefficient procedure - scale-II officer’s (n=60)


X1 1.0000

X2 0.2260 1.0000

X3 0.1498 0.5334* 1.0000

X4 0.1560 0.5010* 0.9835* 1.0000

X5 0.1022 0.3901* 0.9302* 0.9497* 1.0000

X6 -0.0207 0.4298* 0.3613* 0.3556* 0.3000* 1.0000

X7 0.0248 -0.0188 0.1725 0.1676 0.1864 0.2652* 1.0000

X8 0.1384 0.5429* 0.9954* 0.9627* 0.9072* 0.3645* 0.1616 1.0000

X9 0.0801 0.4551* 0.8962* 0.8670* 0.8625* 0.2886* 0.2538 0.8969* 1.0000

X10 0.2003 0.4239* 0.8727* 0.9053* 0.8914* 0.3777* 0.1474 0.8476* 0.6612* 1.0000




scores of scale-II officers is found to be positive and statistically significant with

impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change scores


perception about training and development programmes administration scores


programmes scores



310

perception about the trainers scores at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null

hypothesis is rejected and alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, all

these variables increase (decrease) with increase (decrease) in the perception

about training and development programmes scores.


behavioral change scores of scale-II officers is found to be positive and




scores


programmes scores







scores.


performance scores of scale-II officers is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


scores


programmes scores



311






administration scores of scale-II officers is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


programmes scores







scores.


development programmes scores of scale-II officers is found to be positive and









programmes scores.

312

6. The relationship of perception about training center scores of scale-II officers is








self development scores of scale-II officers is found to be positive and







development programmes scores of bank employees’s as a scale-III officers i.e.




change



administration







313


has been applied and the results are presented in the Table No: 95.

Table No: 95


Karl Pearson’s correlation coefficient procedure- scale-III officer’s (n=30)


X1 1.0000

X2 -0.0878 1.0000

X3 0.0897 0.0852 1.0000

X4 0.1064 0.0707 0.9408* 1.0000

X5 0.0754 0.0538 0.9482* 0.9673* 1.0000

X6 0.0848 -0.2459 0.5387* 0.4386* 0.4974* 1.0000

X7 -0.1887 0.0984 0.0639 0.0589 0.0240 -0.0087 1.0000

X8 0.0817 0.1081 0.9909* 0.8913* 0.9129* 0.5588* 0.0597 1.0000

X9 0.0968 0.1187 0.9666* 0.8505* 0.8714* 0.5151* 0.1148 0.9795* 1.0000

X10 0.0188 -0.0119 0.3132* 0.5997* 0.5244* 0.0139 -0.0406 0.2002 0.1197 1.0000


Table No: 95reveals that,


behavioral change scores of scale-II officers is found to be positive and




scores


programmes scores







scores.

314


performance scores of scale-II officers is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


scores


programmes scores







3. The relationship of perception about training and development programmes on

administration scores of scale-II officers is found to be positive and statistically

significant with


programmes scores







scores


development programmes scores of scale-II officers is found to be positive and




at 5% level of significance. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and

315

alternative hypothesis is accepted. It means that, all these variables increase

(decrease) with increase (decrease) in the climate for transfer of learning

after attending training and development programmes scores

5. The relationship of perception about training center scores of scale-II officers is

found to be positive and statistically significant with impact of training and

development programmes on self development scores at 5% level of


accepted. It means that, impact of training and development programmes

increases (decreases) with increases (decreases) in the perception about training

center scores.

Where

X1=Expectations from training and development programmes

X2=Perception about training and development programmes

X3=Impact of training and development programmes on behavioral change

X4=Impact of training and development programmes on job performance

X5=Perception about training and development programmes administration

X6=Climate for transfer of learning after attending training and development

programmes

X7=Overall opinion about training and development programmes

X8=Perception about training center

X9=Impact of training and development programmes on self development

X10= Perception about the trainers

Documents

Chapter - IV TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT - POLICIES AND ...shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/8496/10/10_chapter 4.pdf · TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT - POLICIES AND PRACTICES IN