GUIDE CERTIFICATE

Certified that Mr. Homi Nath, Roll No: 4121077, a student of Master of Business
Administration in the Department Of Business Administration, NIT-KURUKSHETRA has
completed the research project entitled “Employee Retention and Engagement: A Study of
Banking Employees” under my supervision in partial fulfilment of the Master of Business
Administration Degree.

Dr. Aparna Sharma

Assistant Professor
National Institute of Technology
Kurukshetra
Date: April 09, 2014
Place: Kurukshetra

1
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

No task is a single person’s Endeavour. Various factors, situations and people integrate to
provide the back-ground for the accomplishment of the task. Behind this work there are many
factors like- the kind help, assistance and valuable advice of many people; to whom, I will
remain indebted.

I wish to express my sincere thanks to my guide and mentor Dr. Aparna Sharma (Assistant
Professor) of her valuable and innovative guidance and for providing necessary facility.
Without her knowledgeable guidance, this work wouldn’t have been possible.

I am thankful to many of my friends & participants for their valuable time and help in
collecting the surveys.

HOMI NATH
MBA (4121077)

2
 DECLARATION

I, hereby declare that the research project report entitled “Employee Retention and
Engagement: A Study of Banking Employees” is my original research work and this report
has not been submitted to any University/ Institute for the award of any professional degree
or diploma.

Homi Nath
4121077
MBA- IV Semester
National Institute of Technology
Kurukshetra
Date: April 09, 2014
Place: Kurukshetra

Signature of the student

(HOMI NATH)

3
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TOPIC NAME PAGE NUMBER

Guide Certificate 1
Acknowledge 2
Declaration 3
Table of Contents 4
1.0 Introduction 6
1.1 Banking sector 6
1.2 Emergence of Concept 7
1.3 Definitions related to Study 15
2.0 Literature Review 17
2.1 Engagement 17
2.2 Retention 23
3.0 Research Design 26
3.1 Problem Statement 26
3.2 Research Objectives 28
3.3 Research Hypothesis 29
3.4 Research Question 30
3.5 Sample Design 31
4.0 Analysis and Interpretation 37
4.1 Pearson Correlation 37
4.2 Multiple regression 38
4.3 T-test 42
4.4 Anova 43
5.0 Findings and Conclusions 47
6.0 6.1 Scope of the study 49
6.2 Implementations 49
Annexure 51

List of Figures
1.1 Rise of searches of Employee Engagement 10
1.2 Evolution of Employee Engagement 11

4
3.1 Global Engagement trend compared to Global 27
GDP
3.2 Asia Pecific Engagement trend compared to GDP 27
5.1 Comparison of level of Retention in Employees of 48
different banks in Kurukshetra
5.2 Comparison of level of Engagement in Employees 48
of different banks in Kurukshetra
List of Tables
4.1 Correlation Metrix 37
4.2 Multiple Regression: Between Retention and three 38
variables of Engagement
4.3 Multiple Regression: Between Engagement and 40
three variables of Retention
4.4 T-test 42
4.5 Post hoc test for Six banks 44
4.6 Post hoc test for different age groups 46

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

5
1.1 BANKING SECTOR:

The Banking sector in India has always been one of the most preferred avenues of
employment. In the current decade, this has emerged as a resurgent sector in the Indian
Economy. As per the McKinsey report ‘India Banking 2010’, the banking sector index has
grown at a compounded annual rate of over 51 per cent since the year 2001, as compared to a
27 per cent growth in the market index during the same period. It is projected that the sector
has the potential to account for over 7.7 per cent of GDP with over Rs.7, 500 billion in
market cap, and to provide over 1.5 million jobs.

History of banking sector:

Banking in India originated in the last decades of the 18th century. The first banks were The
General Bank of India, which started in 1786, and Bank of Hindustan, which started in 1790;
both are now defunct. The oldest bank existence in India is the State Bank of India, which
originated in the Bank of Calcutta in June 1806, which almost immediately became the Bank
of Bengal. This was one of the three presidency banks, the other two being the Bank of
Bombay and the Bank of Madras, all three of which were established under charters from the
British East India Company. For many years the Presidency banks acted as quasi-central
banks, as did their successors. The three banks merged in 1921 to form the Imperial Bank of
India, which, upon India's independence, became the State Bank of India. Foreign banks too
started to arrive, particularly in Calcutta, in the 1860s.

The Comptoire d'Escompte de Paris opened a branch in Calcutta in 1860, and another in
Bombay in 1862; branches in Madras and Pondicherry, then a French colony, followed.
HSBC established itself in Bengal in 1869. Calcutta was the most active trading port in
India, mainly due to the trade of the British Empire, and so became a banking centre.
The next was the Punjab National Bank, established in Lahore in 1895, which has survived to
the present and is now one of the largest banks in India.

Government took major steps in this Indian Banking Sector Reform after independence.
o First major step in this direction was nationalization of Reserve Bank in 1949.
o Enactment of Banking Regulation Act in 1949

6
 o Reserve Bank of India Scheduled Banks' Regulations, 1951.
o Nationalization of Imperial Bank of India in 1955, with extensive banking facilities
on a large scale especially in rural and semi-urban areas.
o Nationalization of SBI subsidiaries in 1959.

The Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Limited (ICICI) was incorporated
at the initiative of World Bank, the Government of India and representatives of Indian
industry, with the objective of creating a development financial institution for providing
medium-term and long-term project financing to Indian businesses.

In the early 1990s, the then Narasimha Rao government embarked on a policy of
liberalization, licensing a small number of private banks. These came to be known as ‘New
Generation tech-savvy banks’, and included Global Trust Bank (the first of such new
generation banks to be set up), which later amalgamated with Oriental Bank of Commerce,
Axis Bank(earlier as UTI Bank),ICICI Bank and HDFC Bank. This move, along with the
rapid growth in the economy of India, revitalized the banking sector in India

1.2 EMERGENCE OF CONCEPT:

1.2.1 Emergence of ‘Engagement’:

Employee Engagement may seem a relatively recent concept but actually it goes back over 20
years when the term first appeared in an academic journal in 1990. Prior to that, during the
70’s and 80’s, HR’s (or as it was then ‘personnel’s’) focus was on employee satisfaction. But
this had little or no connection with performance and was more about the employee than the
organisation or the employee’s relationship with it.

The focus then moved from satisfaction to commitment (and somewhere along the way
‘personnel’ became ‘human resources.’) in return for a job, and possibly a job for life, the
employee would be loyal and commit himself to the organisation. Whilst commitment is an
important element of and predictor of Engagement it cannot replace Engagement.

But then things started to change. Increased global competition and the shift from a
manufacturing economy to a service one meant employers needed to be more flexible, leaner
and competitive. Traditional industries closed or were severely cut back and employees

7
learned the hard way that there were no jobs for life, that to progress in their careers they too
needed to be more flexible and move to where the opportunities were.

And that’s what they did. The old contract of a job for life with a nice fat pension at the end
of it was broken. People were free – encouraged even – to move from job to job, selling their
skills and at the same time acquiring new ones courtesy of the new employer. Loyalty didn’t
come into it, or if it did it was more fleeting, more short term. So it benefited the employee
but employers soon realised that actually they were losing people they didn’t want to lose. It
was costing them money and affecting their ability to compete effectively.

The rise of Engagement:

It is at this point in the story - during the nineties - that the concept of Engagement matured.
Key to this was a paper published by the Institute of Employment Studies (IES) in 1990
‘From People to Profits, the HR link to the service-profit chain’ which showed how employee
attitudes and behaviour could improve customer Retention and consequently sales
performance. This clear link between Engagement and performance, supported by extensive
research, helped establish Engagement’s importance to both HR and business performance.
The fact that the UK had become a service-based economy made the report’s findings even
more relevant and increased the focus on employees and their interaction with customers. For
service-based businesses, the old mantra that ‘staff are your greatest asset’ became ‘staff are
your only asset.’ This led to greater incentives to invest in staff as the returns were seen as
greater employee commitment, motivation, productivity and ultimately profit (or, in the case
of not-for-profits, achieving strategic objectives).

The business case for Engagement was supported by another seminal study in 2002 which
also showed the link between engaged employees and profit. What had back in 1990 been
confined to predominantly academic circles was now being discussed and implemented at
practitioner level.  Organisations began to see the potential that Engagement had to positively
affect a whole raft of HR and business measures including employee Retention, absenteeism
and turnover; sales; profitability and customer service/satisfaction scores. 

HR or business function?
Engagement has also grown from something that was seen as being owned or ‘done’ by HR
to something that needs to be owned and driven by the CEO and senior leadership team. In

8
fact to be truly effective Engagement needs to be owned by everybody; it needs to be part of
an organisation’s DNA. Indeed, Engagement measures are often aligned to managers’
performance through KPIs – Key Performance Indicators. Engagement’s importance to a
business and its subtle move of ownership away from the HR department (who still
ultimately have responsibility for delivering the policies around it) has seen the rise not only
of roles like Head or Director of Engagement but Engagement’s place around the Board
table.

Engagement and the public sector:

Engagement is just as relevant to the public sector. Indeed, the impact of overworked,
stressed and demotivated staff is far more serious in the health sector than in a supermarket or
call centre. A study by Aston University in 2011 showed that patient mortality rates were
approximately 2.5% lower in health trusts with high Engagement levels than in those with
medium Engagement levels. So next time you have to choose a hospital for treatment, ask
how engaged the staff are, not how experienced the surgeon is…

So, what is ‘Engagement’?

Despite all the research, the jury is still out on a universally agreed definition. These have
evolved as our knowledge and experience of Engagement has evolved but there is a strong
consensus as to what it is and isn’t.

Engagement boils down to an employee’s passion and commitment to the organisation and
their job and the drive to deliver the organisation’s objectives, going the extra mile to do so.
Engagement is not transactional - it’s about emotion, behaviours and relationships; there’s a
connection between the employee and the organisation. Engaged employees have pride in
their job and the organisation and are more likely to recommend the organisation, its products
and services to others.  One of the key drivers of Engagement is trust which applies at a
number of levels:
 Work group

 Line manager

 Senior leaders

 Systems and processes

9
The future scope of Engagement:
Engagement is now firmly embedded in the collective consciousness of the HR community
as seen in the proliferation of conferences, events and LinkedIn groups dedicated to
Engagement, the inclusion of a module on employee Engagement in the CIPD diploma and
the large number of vendors and service provides offering surveys, consultancy, research and
training. It’s inroads into the wider business community was aided by the launch of the
government-backed movement, ‘Engage for Success’, in 2011 which also nailed the evidence
for the financial benefits of Engagement. Its status as ‘mainstream’ is also reflected in the
increase in searches on ‘employee Engagement’ as reported by Google Trends which has
shown a continuous rise since 2006.
Figure-1.1: The rise of searches for ‘employee Engagement’

Source: Google trends

As for the future of Engagement, that now seems to be more about sustaining it rather than
finding the next hot HR theory about how to attract, motivate and retain good employees. As
demographics change (Baby Boomers, Generation X, Generation Y/ Millenials and now
Generation G) Engagement gives organisations the tools to provide the kind of workplace
that will attract, retain and motivate its changing workforce. Engagement has reached the
point in its growth where it requires clarity and consistency of definition, delivery and
measurement and movements like the Engagement Taskforce will be instrumental in
achieving this. It would seem that there are very few businesses which are against
Engagement, the problem is more about doing something about it, particularly those in the
SME sector which don’t have the same resources and infrastructure as larger organisations.
The taskforce is keen to bring the growing importance of employee Engagement to investors

10
who are starting to look at the people side of financial metrics such as employee turnover and
absence rates.

Sustaining Engagement:
Of all the theories about what Engagement is and what drives it, there seems to be agreement
(Great Place to Work®, Engage for Success) that trust is one of the key drivers. We believe
that trust is and will continue to be critical to both driving and sustaining Engagement.

The evolution of Engagement:

Figure- 1.2: – the evolution of ‘employee Engagement’

Source: Google trends

Emergence of ‘Retention’:
Employee Retention is relatively older concept as compared to Employee Engagement. It
refers to previous studies of employee turnover which suggested the importance of taking a
macro perspective in studying human resource Retention. Baysinger and Mobley (1983)
criticized the traditional research focus on relationship resource managers cannot attempt to
manage employee turnover by influencing the termination decisions of each employee.
Instead, the overall termination rate is an organizational number that must be effectively
controlled.

11
Others (Abelson and Baysinger, 1984; Boudreau and Berger, 1985) have suggested that an
effective human resource management strategy should balance the cost of replacing the
employees who leave against the cost of retaining those who stay. Since it is generally more
expensive to replace highly productive employees than to replace weak performers (Cascio,
1982), a cost-effective human resource management strategy will attempt to minimize
turnover among strong performers. Furthermore, since all employees will eventually leave an
organization, the strategy should induce new employees who perform well to stay longer
while encouraging weaker performers to leave at earlier seniority (Peters and Sheridan,
1988).

Unfortunately, there is little research evidence on how organizations can best accomplish
these goals. McEvoy and Cascio's (1985) meta-analysis of 20 turnover studies indicated that
some human resource management practices, such as job enrichment programs, have
consistent but only moderate effects (4 = .17) on turnover rates across organizations. Other
practices, such as realistic job previews, have very weak (4 = .09) and inconsistent effects on
turnover rates. Terborg and Lee (1984) found that the variation in annual turnover rates
across organizations was related to local labour market conditions and the demographic
characteristics of employees but that organizational climate variables had very weak
relationships with turnover rates.

Kerr and Slocum (1987) and Kopelman and colleagues (1990) argued that the variation in
employee Retention across organizations may be related to organizational culture values.
Those authors suggested that an organization's cultural values influence its human resource
strategies, including selection and placement policies, promotion and development
procedures, and reward systems. Different strategies result in psychological climates that
foster varying levels of commitment and Retention among employees working in different
organizations.

McEvoy and Cascio's (1987) meta-analysis of another 24 turnover studies indicated that an
organization's stronger performers tend to have lower turnover rates than weaker performers
during particular calendar periods (rc = -.28). They found that the strength of the inverse
relationship between job performance and turnover varied significantly with the length of the

12
calendar period investigated and labour market unemployment rates but reported no
moderating effects for organizational variables. Peters and Sheridan (1988) and Barkman,

Sheridan Academy of Management Journal Kerr and Slocum (1987) further suggested that
organizational culture values may moderate differences in the Retention rates of strong and
weak performers. They reported that some organizations have cultures that emphasize values
of teamwork, security, and respect for individual members. Sheridan, and Peters (1992) also
indicated that new employees' job performance was significantly related to their Retention
rates. The difference in the Retention rates of strong and weak performers varied widely
across organizations, but no human resource management moderating variables were
identified.

These values foster Loyalty and long-term commitment to the organizations among all
employees, regardless of their job performance. Other organizations have cultures that
emphasize personal initiative and individual rewards for accomplishing specific work
objectives. These values foster an entrepreneurial norm whereby the organization does not
offer long-term security and the employees do not promise Loyalty. They suggested that
weaker performers would soon leave such a culture, and stronger performers would stay in
order to "exploit the organization until better rewards could be gotten elsewhere" (Kerr and
Slocum, 1987). Consequently, employee Retention rates may be uniformly high for both
strong and weak performers in some organizational cultures but in other cultures may vary
greatly depending on employees' job performance.

Since this study was conducted in the public accounting industry, employee gender and
marital status, as well as market factors such as labour supply and starting salary levels, were
considered important exogenous influences on professional staff Retention (Bullen and
Martin, 1987; Doll, 1983; Gaertner, Hemmeter, and Pittman, 1987; Walkup and Fenzau,
1980). I controlled for those exogenous variables in testing the following hypotheses
regarding organizational culture effects on employee Retention:

Need of Retention:
Let us understand why retaining a valuable employee is essential for an organization.

13
 Hiring is not an easy process: The HR Professional shortlists few individuals from a
large pool of talent, conducts preliminary interviews and eventually forwards it to the
respective line managers who further grill them to judge whether they are fit for the
organization or not. Recruiting the right candidate is a time consuming process.
 An organization invests time and money in grooming an individual and make him
ready to work and understand the corporate culture: A new joinee is completely raw
and the management really has to work hard to train him for his overall development.
It is a complete wastage of time and money when an individual leaves an organization
all of a sudden. The HR has to start the recruitment process all over again for the same
vacancy; a mere duplication of work. Finding a right employee for an organization is
a tedious job and all efforts simply go waste when the employee leaves.
 When an individual resigns from his present organization, it is more likely that he
would join the competitors: In such cases, employees tend to take all the strategies,
policies from the current organization to the new one. Individuals take all the
important data, information and statistics to their new organization and in some cases
even leak the secrets of the previous organization. To avoid such cases, it is essential
that the new joinee is made to sign a document which stops him from passing on any
information even if he leaves the organization. Strict policy should be made which
prevents the employees to join the competitors. This is an effective way to retain the
employees.
 The employees working for a longer period of time are more familiar with the
company’s policies, guidelines and thus they adjust better: They perform better than
individuals who change jobs frequently. Employees who spend a considerable time in
an organization know the organization in and out and thus are in a position to
contribute effectively.
 Every individual needs time to adjust with others: One needs time to know his team
members well, be friendly with them and eventually trust them. Organizations are
always benefited when the employees are compatible with each other and discuss
things among themselves to come out with something beneficial for all. When a new
individual replaces an existing employee, adjustment problems crop up. Individuals
find it really difficult to establish a comfort level with the other person. After striking
a rapport with an existing employee, it is a challenge for the employees to adjust with
someone new and most importantly trust him. It is a human tendency to compare a
new joinee with the previous employees and always find faults in him.

14
  It has been observed that individuals sticking to an organization for a longer span are
more loyal towards the management and the organization: They enjoy all kinds of
benefits from the organization and as a result are more attached to it. They hardly
badmouth their organization and always think in favour of the management. For them
the organization comes first and all other things later.
 It is essential for the organization to retain the valuable employees showing
potential: Every organization needs hardworking and talented employees who can
really come out with something creative and different. No organization can survive if
all the top performers quit. It is essential for the organization to retain those
employees who really work hard and are indispensable for the system.

1.3 DEFINITIONS:

1.3.1 Employee Engagement:

 Kahn (1990), provided the first formal definition of employee Engagement, as such:
"the harnessing of organisation members' selves to their work roles; in Engagement,
people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally
during role performances."
 Schmidt et al (1993), proposed a bridge between the pre-existing concept of 'job
satisfaction' and employee Engagement with the definition: "an employee's
involvement with, commitment to, and satisfaction with work. Employee Engagement
is a part of employee Retention." This definition integrates the classic constructs of
job satisfaction (Smith et al., 1969), and organizational commitment (Meyer and
Allen, 1991).
 “A persistent, positive affective-motivational state of fulfilment in employees
characterized by high levels of activation and pleasure” (Maslach et al., 2001, p. 417).
 “Employee Engagement refers to the individual’s involvement and satisfaction with
as well as enthusiasm for work” (Harter et al., 2002, p. 269).
 “A distinct and unique construct that consists of cognitive, emotional, and behavioural
components that are associated with individual role performance” (Saks, 2005, p.
602).
 “[Engaged] employees are mentally and emotionally invested in their work and in
contributing to their employer’s success” (Czarnowsky, 2008, p. 6).

Some organizations have defined Employee Engagement as following:

15
  Employees' willingness and ability to contribute to company success. (Towers Perrin)
 Staff commitment and a sense of belonging to the organization. (Hewitt)
 Employee's commitment to the organization and motivation to contribute to the
organization's success. (Mercer)
 Employees' exertion of "discretionary effort". . . going beyond meeting the minimum
standards for the job. (Hay)
 Creating the sense that individuals are a part of a greater entity. (Best Practices, LLC)

Thus, considering all above definitions, we can say that mainly three components are
important in determination of Engagement level in any employee. These are Cognitive
component, Emotional component and Behavioural component. Further we can explain
Engagement as a state of employee when he performs more than his duty, he shows mental
and emotional commitment to employer or organization.

1.3.2 Employee Retention:

 According to Get Les McKeon, employee Retention is defined as "A systematic effort
by employers to create and foster an environment that encourages current employees
to remain employed by having policies and practices in place that address their
diverse needs. The costs associated with turnover may include lost customers,
business and damaged morale. In addition, there are the hard costs of time spent in
screening, verifying credentials, references, interviewing, hiring and training the new
employee just to get back to where you started.”
 Employee Retention involves taking measures to encourage employees to remain in
the organization for the maximum period of time (Griffeth and Hom 2001)

Thus Retention is an effort from the part of employer to make such an environment in the
organization so that employees willingly remain in the organization and feel pride in doing
so.

16
 CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 ENGAGEMENT:

2.1.1. Worldwide literature:

Kahn (1990) completed some of the earliest work on Engagement and defined Engagement
as, “the harnessing of organization members’ selves to their work roles; in Engagement,
people employ and express themselves physically, cognitively, and emotionally during role
performances.”

Coffman and Gonzalez-Molina (2002) explained how widespread this problem is and how
critical it can be. 54% of workers were not engaged and 17% were actively disengaged. In
other words, the companies surveyed were operating on only a fraction of the resources that
should be available to them. In this study, the most engaged work groups were noted to be the
most productive and the rest were shown to be mediocre or, in some cases, destructive.

Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA) (2004): found that the average salary across
the nation (US) for counsellors is four to six thousand dollars below salaries in other human
service professions (Chan, 2004). The national study also noted that 26% of Vocational
Rehabilitation (VR) Counsellors are considering leaving their agency to find better pay
(Chan, 2004). In addition to pay disparity, other factors in counsellor satisfaction or
dissatisfaction are equally disconcerting. For instance, research indicates that students who

17
graduate with a master’s degree in Rehabilitation Counselling perceive VR counsellors to be
overworked, underpaid, and overloaded with paperwork.

Kahn, 1990, 1992. Luthans and Peterson, 2002): Employee Engagement has also been
conceptualized into two dimensions: Cognitive Engagement – the extent to which the worker
is aware of his mission at work and his role in the organization – and Emotional Engagement
- the extent to which the worker empathizes with others at work and connects meaningfully
with his or her co-worker. High Engagement on each dimension is predictive of high overall
Engagement for an employee.

(Shaw, 2005), also created a definition of employee Engagement, which is, “translating
employee potential into employee performance and business success” and thus “changing the
way employee perform by utilizing the tools in the armory of internal communication
professionals.”

Miles (2001) described it as intensively involving all employees in high-Engagement

cascades that create understanding, dialogue, feedback and accountability, empower people
to creatively align their subunits, teams and individual jobs with the major transformation of
the whole enterprise. It is making employees to work with not only their minds and body but
also with ‘hearts’. Engaged employees and organizations will “go the extra mile” for each
other because they see mutual benefits of investing in their relationship.

(Schaufeli et al., 2002) Work Engagement is defined as a “positive, fulfilling work related
state of mind that is characterized by Vigor, Dedication and Absorption”. Vigor refers to high
levels of energy while working. Dedication refers to an intense work involvement and
encompasses feelings of inspiration, pride, enthusiasm, significance and challenge. The final
dimension of Engagement is Absorption, characterized as being totally focused on one’s
work such that time appears to pass speedily and one finds it increasingly difficult to detach
oneself from work. In short, engaged employees work hard; they are enthusiastic about their
work; and are fully immersed in their work activities.

Kalani and Hayase (2009): The purpose of this study was to determine if internal
communication has an effect on employee Engagement levels. Examining the factors of
communication and Engagement it was found that a relationship does exist. The results

18
indicated that organizations could utilize internal communication to improve employee
Engagement.

Markos and Sridevi (2010): In order to have engaged employees in any organization,
managers suggested looking at ten points. Start it on day one, start it from the top, Enhance
employee Engagement through two-way communication, give satisfactory opportunities for
development and advancement. Organizations should ensure that employees have everything
they need to do their jobs. Give employees appropriate training, have strong feedback
systems. Incentives have a part to play, Build a distinctive corporate culture. Focus on top-
performing employees.

Smith and Dumas (2007): The researchers examined the impact of flexibility policies and
employee family configuration on work Engagement. More specifically, rather than looking
at one or two particular policies, they examined the impact of groups of policies based on the
dimension of temporal flexibility they afforded. In considering to different types of temporal
flexibility, they found that episodic flexibility had more of a positive effect on employees’.
Impact of Flexibility policies for single, childless workers is counter intuitive. Other findings
also suggest that by implementing policies that offer employees the opportunity to develop in
all aspects of their lives, organizations can increase their supply of coveted commodity –
employee Engagement. Broader policies that allow all employees a greater degree of control
over their work and non-work lives, and that explicitly encourage employees to develop
enriching lives outside of work can benefit the entire organization. Thus according to them by
doing well and helping employees to enhance their whole lives, organizations can also do
well.

Ncube and Jerie (2006): found that Employee Engagement in the hospitality industry plays a
critical role in determining the competitiveness of a company. As such successful
organizations can be distinguished by unsuccessful organization by virtue of looking at the
levels of employee Engagement. This research also highlighted the other determinants of
competitive advantage in the two organizations. But equally indicating the significance of
employee Engagement, to strengthen these other factors. The findings from both hotels
demonstrated the differences in overall performance between the two organizations. There
was strong evidence that highly engaged workgroups outperform groups with lower
employee Engagement, Organization having a greater number of employees that are

19
completely disengaged is poorly placed in employee Engagement. Employees of the
organization having less completely disengaged employees are strongly satisfied, and are
very much willing to stay with their employer. As a result the hotel with higher Engagement
levels enjoyed a competitive edge with 43.7% markets share against 17.3% market share of
the other hotel.

Padmakumar and Prabhakar (2011) recommended that assisting organization to retain their
talented staff and not only to retain them but to provide more holistic experience that
included a balance between their work environment and their home life. Employee turnover
causes and little commitment on the part of organization can be alleviated through effective
Retention and WLB strategies. The results confirmed the relationship between Employee
Engagement and Perceived Organizational Support. The effect of Job Characteristics,
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Rewards, Perceived Supervisor Support, Perceptions of Procedural
Justice, Perceptions of Distributive Justice on Employee Engagement is also confirmed.
Respondents also valued recognition, appreciation, challenging work, growth opportunities
along with equitable pay plans. Together, the presence of these dimensions considered for
this study contribute to Employee Engagement and in turn influencing the extent of Job
Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Intention to continue with the employer and
heightened responsibility toward work related issues

Janjhua (2011) found that job characteristics in India contribute to job Engagement, and
organizational Engagement. If the employees feel that their jobs provided variety, freedom,
identity and proper feedback the employees get more engrossed and engaged in their work
thereby leading to more quality, productivity and efficiency. Perceived organizational support
was significantly positively related to job Engagement and organizational support.

Ghafoor, Quereshi, Khan and Hijazi (2011) found that leadership style and human resource
practice, employee Engagement, significantly affects the dimensions discussed in the context
of psychological ownership. Transformational leadership develops self-efficacy in employees
to move further and it also supports the development of self-identity. Employee Engagement
makes employees more responsible and enhances their sense of belongingness towards the
organization. Transformational leader’s develops the positive behaviour that leads to enhance
satisfaction and sense of belongingness among followers. The increase in self- identity and
association with organization will increase the employees’ commitment towards the

20
organization and improve their performance. This identity and association with organization
develops commitment in employees and their performance increases. The study also
supported the direct impact of employee’s satisfaction and sense of belongingness to the
quality of relationship between employees and organization. Both transformational leadership
style and employee Engagement practices develop sense of ownership in employees. They
feel responsible for their actions; develop confidence in their abilities, sense of self-identity
and sense of belongingness to their work and organization.

2.1.2 Indian Literature:

Bhatla (2011) found that organizations had to give their employees the freedom to make their
work exciting and provide an environment having an engaged work life. With increase in
responsibilities at home and a desire to excel in their careers, employees often get distracted
from their work which needs to be taken care of. She proposes that employees are the assets
of the organization and if they are not given space whereby they can make a perfect blend of
both work and fun, optimum performance from them may be difficult. Employee
Engagement also emphasise the importance of employee communication on the success of a
business. Organizations and employees share a symbiotic relation, where both are dependent
on each other to satisfy their needs and goal. Therefore; employee Engagement should not be
a onetime exercise, but a continuous Process of learning, improvement and action.

Sharma et. al. (2010) in their exploratory study to determine of Employee Engagement in a
Private Sector Organization concluded that Objectivity and Recognition emerged as the
critical determinants of organizational commitment which explained 93.9% of the variance in
organizational commitment. Similarly, Career Opportunity and Pay emerged as the critical
determinants of job involvement. These two variables together explained a little over 91% of
the variance in job involvement.

Swatee et al. (2012), in their paper identified key dimensions of organizational culture and
communication which can shape employee Engagement in bank.
Pradeep et al (2011), suggested that people seek more meaning in their day-to-day work than
they do in their personal lives. This implies employers should be seeking to make work
meaningful by finding out what matters to their employees especially since evidence suggests
that meaningfulness impacts not only on the individual, but also on the bottom line. They also
suggested a connection between employee Engagement and business result, the effect of

21
individual differences on work performance, perception and personality, emotional factor,
personal relational ship and demographic factors.

Bhatt (2012), noted that Employee Engagement in an organization can definitely enhance
organization’s performance, productivity, pride and prestige. Employee Engagement depends
on one’s professional knowledge, concern for job and motivation from superiors. In GNFC
she found good working environment, sharing and openness to share views, training and
development, good pay structure and perks, etc. which were responsible for high ratio of
employee Engagement, and with the help of employee Engagement, it becomes easy to find
out the performance of an employee and his participation in an organization.

(Vijayashri et. al, 2012): Emphasised that highly engaged workforce will definitely make an
organization more successful in terms of financial and nonfinancial parameters. Employee
Engagement is critical to business success. This study had brought in a new variable
employee Engagement which is unusual in DCCBs. The management should understand the
importance of employee Engagement, that unlike other business organizations various studies
reveal a significant relationship between employee Engagement and business outcomes and
performance of any business organization.

Kumar (2011), identified the factors of Employee Engagement which influence the
performance outcome of organization. These factors included Factors Influencing Employee
Engagement i.e. Recruitment, Job Designing, Career Development Opportunities,
Leadership, Empowerment, Equal Opportunities and Fair Treatment, Training and
Development, Performance Management, Compensation, Health and Safety, Job Satisfaction,
Communication, Family Friendliness. The highest contributing factor employee recognition
was powerful contributor more than any other variable.

Now, when we are through with the past studies of employee Engagement; we have a lot of
variables that describe Employee Engagement. These can be listed as follows:-
 Physical, Cognitive and Emotional components of Employee.
 Internal Communication, flexibility policies and employee’s work family
configuration.
 Job Characteristics, Intrinsic and Extrinsic Rewards, Perceived Supervisor Support,
Perceptions of Procedural Justice, Perceptions of Distributive Justice on Employee

22
 Engagement, recognition, appreciation, challenging work, growth opportunities and
equitable pay plans.
 Variety, freedom, identity and proper feedback in Job.
 Transformational leadership, objectivity and meaning in their day to day work.
 Professional knowledge, concern for job and motivation from superiors.
 Good working environment, sharing and openness to share views, training and
development, good pay structure and perks.
 Recruitment, Job Designing, Career Development Opportunities, Empowerment,
Equal Opportunities and Fair Treatment, Training and Development, Performance
Management, Compensation, Health and Safety, Job Satisfaction and Family
Friendliness.
 Vigor, Dedication and Absorption.

Out of above shown variables, it has been found that Vigor, Dedication and Absorption
variables, explain Employee Engagement very clearly. These variables were studied by
Schaufeli in 2002. Now these variables have been used in present study to determine
Employee Engagement Level of Banking Sector Employees in Kurukshetra.

2.2. RETENTION:

2.2.1 Worldwide literature:

William and Werther (1996) explained reward as what employees receive in exchange for
their contributions to the organisation. This reward could come in form of salary, promotion,
bonuses and other incentives. When the reward system is effectively managed, it helps in
achieving organizations corporate objectives, and maintains and retains a productive
workforce. If Employee Retention Practices in Indian Corporate – A Study of Select MNCs
362 employees perceive that they are inadequately rewarded, it is often likely that they will
leave and replacement can be costly and in most cases not readily available. A number of
reward related factors have been articulated in order to explain the reason employees leave
one organisation for another, or in some cases, leave the country.

Jackson March (1999) found out the reasons for high turnover such as long work week, job
dissatisfaction and lack of promotional opportunities. Finally the researcher provided

23
suggestions to the top management to concentrate on 6 keys to identify Retention such as
recruiting, training, communication, job satisfaction, pay and benefits.

Sheridan (1992) conducted a study to investigate the Retention rates of 904 college graduates
hired in six public accounting firms over a six year period. The author has taken
organizational culture as an independent variable to analyse its effects on employee
Retention. The organizational culture values on voluntary Retention was examined through
survival analysis and the statistical analysis used were descriptive statistics and correlations
for organizational cultural variables and ANOVA for organizational culture profiles. The
author concluded the study by emphasizing that organizational culture has a dominant theme
in Retention of employees.

Stauss et.al. (2001) suggested a more detailed and recent definition for the concept of
Retention which is customer liking, identification, commitment, trust, readiness to
recommend, and repurchase intentions, with the first four being emotional-cognitive
Retention constructs, and the last two being behavioural intentions.

Fitzenz (1990) indicated that Retention is driven by following key factors, which ought to be
managed congruently: organizational culture strategy, pay and benefits philosophy, and
career development systems.

Boxall, Macky and Rasmussen (2003) stated that the Retention variables are
multidimensional. These include interesting work, which was rated as the strongest factor in
attracting and retaining employees in both public and private sector organisations. The
research outcome showed that employees expect management to make personnel decisions
based on merit and also demonstrated that extrinsic rewards (such as pay, promotion and job
security) play a role in both employee Retention and turnover management. The research
further suggested that management support to the idea of good relationships with co-
employees and supervisors.

Lockwood and Anari (1997) concluded the following factors as crucial Retention strategies
for IT professionals in the USA and U.K. In order of their importance, the study revealed
money (base salary plus bonus and stock options); the chance to learn new skills (i.e. those
that the market values); the reputation of the organization in technology; and working

24
conditions (e.g. physical, colleagues and boss, casual dress) as some of the important factors.
Among Retention strategies that were particularly successful in maintaining a low turnover
rate, one of the solutions suggested was an increase in salary.

Samuel and Chipunza (2009), the main purpose of Retention is to prevent the loss of
competent employees from leaving the organisation as this could have adverse effect on
productivity and profitability. However, Retention practices have become a daunting and
highly challenging task for managers and Human Resources (HR) practitioners in a hostile
economic environment. One of the traditional ways of managing employee Retention and
turnover is through organisational reward system.

Kinnear and Sutherland, (2001) and Meudell and Rodham, (1998) and Maertz and
Griffeth( 2004) have revealed that extrinsic factors such as competitive salary, good
interpersonal relationships, friendly working environment, and job security were cited by
employees as key motivational variables that influenced their Retention in the organisations.
The implication of this therefore is that management should not rely only on intrinsic
variables to influence employee Retention; rather, a combination of both intrinsic and
extrinsic variables should be considered as an effective Retention strategy.

2.2.2. Indian Literature:

Hong and kaur (2008) identified the relationship between organizational climate, employee
personality and Retention with to the organizations at Malaysia. The author employed a
descriptive design to ascertain the characteristic of groups of employees. Non probability
sampling method was adopted and hierarchical multiple and correlation techniques were used
to analyse data. The study brought out a positive result that all these factors paves way for
Retention of an employee.

Ananthan BR Sudheendra Raa LN (2011) the author highlighted the multi-tier view of
employee Retention strategies in Indian and global companies. The study was a descriptive –
analysis design using survey method. The study was conducted at Bengaluru with leading
Indian and MNCs employing a minimum of 500 employees stratified random sampling was
used and the sample size was 550 of which 215 from top management and 335 were
employees. The research finally suggested that orientation and training development

25
strategies obtained maximum points. Rewards recognition strategies employed least and
finally employee fringe benefits have been moderately employed.

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH DESIGN

3.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT:

As we have seen in various studies in literature review, employee Engagement and employee
Retention are burning issues in organizations today. Engaged employees deliver better
performance, which is critical for business success. They understand their role in the business
strategy, have a strong connection and commitment to the company, are more involved, and
strive to go above and beyond in their jobs. The bottom line is that employee Engagement
matters—now more than ever. And the solutions for maintaining or improving Engagement
are increasingly complex for companies operating in an environment of instability and varied
economic conditions. Striving to maintain a higher level of employee Engagement not only
contributes toward short-term survival during economic volatility, but is also a key factor for
longer-term business performance and better positioning when market conditions become
favourable. The companies that get Engagement “right” will enjoy a source of competitive
advantage in talent strategy and business results that is hard for others to replicate.

Engagement levels are stabilizing globally but shifting across regions: Despite the economic
recession, Engagement levels have remained relatively stable at 58% in 2011, up two

26
percentage points from 56% in 2010. We see the largest upward movement in Asia Pacific, a
slight increase in Europe, small downward movement in Latin America, with North America
staying the same.

Employee Engagement lags economic indicators: Engagement appears to have fallen a year
after the economic crisis in 2009 and had a slight recovery a year after economic indicators
showed some relative improvement from 2009 to 2010. This trend was visible in all regions
across the globe. Emerging markets showed a bit more volatility.
 Four employees out of ten are not engaged worldwide: Engagement level by region
varies. While almost three-fifths (58%) of employees globally are considered in the
engaged status, 42% of employees are somewhat or completely disengaged.
 Employees’ motivation to stay and exert extra effort falls short: While Engagement
levels are relatively stable, coming years will be challenging for Retention as
employees seek new opportunities outside their organization as a result of limited
career development and advancement opportunities.

Figure 3.1 Global Engagement Trends Compared to Global GDP

6

0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

-2

-4

-6

Global Engagement(% change in score) Global GDP(% change YOY)

Source- AON HEWITT Survey

27
 Figure 3.2: Asia Pecific Engagement Trends Compared to GDP
12

10

0
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
-2

-4

-6

Global Engagement(% change in score) Global GDP(% change YOY)

Source- AON HEWITT Survey

Further, in a recent study made by Deloitte along with Forbes which included survey of 560
employees worldwide, founded 56% of surveyed employees agreed with the statement that
their current job did not make good use of their skills and abilities, and that they were seeking
new employment as a result. One recent developing trend is that employees who are on the
job for less than two years are much more likely to leave their current positions than their
colleagues. Of those surveyed by Deloitte, 66% of employees who had been in their position
for two to three years said they expected to stay with their employer for the next 12 months.
What that actually reveals, however, is that 33% of people who have been in their current
position for less than three years are thinking about leaving to go to another employer. “A
third of your workforce is actively thinking about this today,” says Morrison.

Further Banking sector is currently facing a great competition in India. A lot of Job hopping
can be seen by employees in this sector. That’s why citing above considerations, I have taken
into account to know the Engagement and Retention level of banking employees in
Kurukshetra district.

3.2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES:

This study aims to understand the Retention and Engagement level of banking sector
employees in Kurukshetra district. Along with this, the study also focuses on the difference of
Engagement and Retention level of Public sector and Private sector employees. Further, more

28
segregation of samples is also made on the basis of specific bank also. It means comparison
of Engagement and Retention is also made on the basis of different brands of Banks (i.e. SBI,
SBP, PNB, HDFC, ICICI and AXIS bank).
Main objectives of the research are following:
 To determine the overall level of Engagement and Retention in banking sector
employees in Kurukshetra district.
 To assess the relationship between different variables of Engagement and Retention.
 To assess whether there is difference in perceptual tendencies of respondents
regarding Engagement and Retention on the basis of their age groups.
 To assess whether there is difference in perceptual tendencies of respondents
regarding Engagement and Retention on the basis of their banking sector (i.e. public
and private)
 To assess whether there is difference in perceptual tendencies of respondents
regarding Engagement and Retention on the basis of their respective banking
company.

3.3 RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS:

A hypothesis is a tentative statement about the relationship between two or more variables. A
hypothesis is a specific, testable prediction about what you expect to happen in your study. A
supposition or explanation (theory) that is provisionally accepted in order to interpret
certain events or phenomena, and to provide guidance for further investigation. A hypothesis
may be proven correct or wrong, and must be capable of refutation. If it remains unrefuted
by facts, it is said to be verified or corroborated.
The Null Hypothesis:-The null hypothesis reflects that there will be no observed effect for
our experiment. In a mathematical formulation of the null hypothesis there will typically be
an equal sign. This hypothesis is denoted by H0.The null hypothesis is what we are attempting
to overturn by our hypothesis test. We hope to obtain a small enough p-value that we are
justified in rejecting the null hypothesis

Alternative hypothesis:-The alternative or experimental hypothesis reflects that there will be

an observed effect for our experiment. In a mathematical formulation of the alternative
hypothesis there will typically be an inequality, or not equal to symbol. This hypothesis is

29
denoted by either Ha or by H1. The alternative hypothesis is what we are attempting to
demonstrate in an indirect way by the use of our hypothesis test. If the null hypothesis is
rejected, then we accept the alternative hypothesis.

So here are some hypothesis proposed for this study:-

 Causal Relationship between Engagement with three variables of Retention(Loyalty,
Burnout and Turnover Intent)
H0: There is no significant causal relationship between Engagement and three
variables namely Loyalty, Burnout and Turnover Intent)
H1: There is significant causal relationship between Engagement and three variables
namely Loyalty, Burnout and Turnover Intent).

 Causal Relationship between Retention with three variables of Engagement (Vigor,

Dedication and Absorption)
H0: There is no significant causal relationship between Retention and three variables
namely Vigor, Dedication and Absorption.
H1: There is significant causal relationship between Retention and three variables
namely Vigor, Dedication and Absorption.
 Degree of Relationship in between six independent variables namely Vigor,
Absorption, Dedication, Loyalty, Burnout and Turnover Intent
H0: There is no significant degree of relationship among study variables
H1: There is significant degree of relationship among study variables.
 Difference between perceptual tendencies of Public and private sector bank
employees for Engagement and Retention.
H0: There is no significant difference in perceptual tendencies of Public and Private
sector bank employees in respect of Engagement and Retention.
H1: There is significant difference in perceptual tendencies of Public and Private
sector bank employees in respect of Engagement and Retention.
 Difference in perception of all six types of Bank employee (SBI, SBP, PNB, HDFC,
ICICI and AXIS bank)
H0: There is no significant difference in perceptual tendencies regarding Engagement
and Retention of bank employees towards their respective banking company.
H1: There is significant difference in perceptual tendencies regarding Engagement
and Retention of bank employees towards their respective banking company.

30
  Relationship between response level of different age groups regarding Engagement
and Retention both.
H0: There is no significant difference in perceptual tendencies of respondents
regarding Engagement and Retention on the basis of their age groups.
H1: There is significant difference in perceptual tendencies of respondents regarding
Engagement and Retention on the basis of their age groups.

3.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

The study is based on finding the relationship of Engagement and Retention level of banking
sector employees in Kurukshetra region. For this study, Standardised questionnaire from
Schaufeli (for Engagement) and Mak and Sockel (for Retention have been used). With the
help of these questionnaires the study aims to find answers to following questions:
 Is there a degree of relationship between Engagement and Retention level of banking
employees in Kurukshetra?
 Do public and private sector banking employees differ in their perceptual tendencies
about Engagement and Retention?
 Whether there exists any significant difference in perceptual tendencies of banking
employees regarding Engagement and Retention towards their respective banking
company?
 Whether any significant difference exists in perceptual tendencies of banking
employees regarding Engagement and Retention on the basis of their age groups

3.5 SAMPLE DESIGN:

3.5.1 Type of study:
Descriptive method of research is used to make this study. As this study concentrates into
existing standardized questionnaires made by Schaufeli(2009), Mak and Sockel(2001) with
an effort to understand their application in Kurukshetra region, this study tries to describe the
effect of the validity of these questionnaires in this region. Quantitative survey were
distributed and response was collected thereafter from banking employees of SBI, PNB, SBP,
HDFC, ICICI and AXIS bank.

3.5.2 Target Population:

Target population is the population from which we take response for our survey. In this
study, the target population was all the banking sector employees in Kurukshetra region,
31
including its various constituent assemblies (namely Ladwa, Shahabad etc.). Both public and
private sector banks have been chosen to make the sample complete representative of
population. Further in between public sector and private sector banks, an equal amount of
banks have been chosen. So that good comparison can be made between different brands of
banks also. Brands of Banks, that have been chosen for the study are State Bank of India
(SBI), State Bank of Patiala (SBP), Punjab National Bank (PNB), HDFC (Housing
development Finance Corporation), ICICI (Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of
India) and Axis Bank. Further, target population was taken from different age groups i.e.
below 30, 30-50 and above 50. Small part of the target population was female respondents
also. But these were very less as compared to male respondents. Public sector banks had
comparatively less number of female employees.

3.5.3 Sample Size:

Out of target population, such size of sample should be chosen so that it can fully represent
the target population. For this purpose, total of 112 sample of respondents has been chosen in
this study. Out of 112 respondents, 55 are from public sector banks and 57 are from private
sector. Out of 55 in public sector, 21 were from SBI, 17 from SBP and 17 from were from
PNB. Out of 57 in private sector, 19 respondents were from HDFC, 19 from ICICI and 19
from Axis bank. Further classifications of the sample are on the basis of age and sex. On the
basis of age respondents ranging below 30 were 23, 30-50 range employees were 78 and
employees in range above 50 were 11 only. Out of 112 respondents 79 were male and 33
were female respondents.

3.5.4 Sampling Methods:

Various sampling methods that can be used for the purpose of research are Probability and
Non-probability sampling. Non-probability sampling is that sampling procedure which does
not afford any basis for estimating the probability that each item in the population has of
being included in the sample. Non-probability sampling is also known by different names
such as deliberate sampling, purposive sampling and judgement sampling. Probability
sampling is also known as ‘random sampling’ or ‘chance sampling’. Under this sampling
design, every item of the universe has an equal chance of inclusion in the sample.
For the purpose of convenience, Convenient Sampling has been used to conduct this study.
Convenience sampling is a type of Non-probability sampling. In this sampling researcher

32
chooses sample by his own intuition. Same has been done in this study. With the help of my
guide, I have chosen sample of 6 banks with 3 from public sector and 3 from private sector.

3.5.5 Research Instrument:

This study tries to determine the Engagement and Retention level of banking sector
employees on the basis of their response on six variables. For the purpose of determining the
Engagement level, Schaufeli’s (2009) standardised questionnaire has been used, which
contains three variables namely Vigor, Dedication and Absorption. For the purpose of
determining Retention level of employees, Mak and Sockel’s (2001) standardised
questionnaire has been used, which also contains three variables namely Loyalty, Burnout
and Turnover Intent. Responses of two variables ‘Burnout’ and ‘Turnover Intent’ have been
reverted to get accurate results, as these two variables are negatively related to Retention. For
the purpose of feedback, five point Likert scale is used, which varies from 0 (which stands for
‘never’ experienced the feeling related to question) to 4 ( which stands for ‘always’
experienced the feeling related to question). First four questions of the questionnaire are
related to ‘Loyalty’ variable, next 10 are related to ‘Burnout’ variable and next 4 questions
are related to ‘Turnover Intent’ variable. After that question numbers 19, 22, 26, 30, 33 and
35 are related to ‘Vigor’, next question numbers 20, 23, 25, 28, 31 are related to ‘Dedication’
variable and lastly question numbers 21, 24, 27, 29, 32 and 34 are related to variable
‘Absorption’.
Further data has been gathered on the basis of sex, age, designation, bank category and bank
name.

3.5.6 Important terms related to questionnaire:

For clear understanding of questionnaire, no ambiguity should be held in understanding the
questionnaire and its use. So for full clearance of the questionnaire, following terms are
needed to be defined:
 Vigor: refers to high levels of energy and mental resilience while working, the
willingness to invest effort in one’s work, and persistence in the face of difficulties
 Dedication: refers to an intense work involvement and encompasses feelings of
inspiration, pride, enthusiasm, significance and challenge.
 Absorption: refers to being fully concentrated and deeply engrossed in one’s work,
and is characterized by time passing quickly and difficulties in detaching oneself from
work.

33
  Turnover Intent: While employees with low turnover tendency are characterized by
high job satisfaction and job security perceptions, employees with high Turnover
Intent may be filled with frustration and may not concentrate on their jobs.
 Burnout: An employee for whom organizational culture has becomes too stressful,
abusive, and inconsistent with its employees' needs and desires may experience
personnel Burnout. Physical and emotional exhaustion may increase this risk, which
may become debilitating, with depression, internal personal problems and mental or
physical illness.
 Loyalty: It may be defined as a relative strength of individuals' identification with the
involvement in a particular organization.

3.5.7 Data Collection Procedure:

Main data related to survey was collected as primary data, which was direct response from
banking sector employees in the form of questionnaire. Some secondary data was also used
from internet and books, also from my guide and friends to understand the concepts related to
research and complete the survey. About 150 questionnaires were distributed among bank
employees and only 112 questionnaires were responded back.

3.5.8 Statistical treatment of data (tools and techniques):

All collected data was computed and analyzed using the SPSS computer program.
Descriptive statistics and inferential statistics were applied as statistical treatments in this
study.
 Descriptive statistics: “Descriptive statistics deals with methods of organizing,
summarizing, and presenting data in a convenient and informative way” (Keller,
2009). The variables which are analyzed using interval scale of measurement, tables
of percentage and arithmetic mean will be applied to summarize the data. The
variables which are analyzed using nominal scale such as gender, age, year,
infrastructure, etc. open end scale such as terms, table of frequency and percentage
will be applied to summarize the data.
 Inferential statistics: “Inferential statistics is a body of methods used to draw
conclusions or inferences about characteristics of populations based on sample data”
(Keller, 2009). “Pearson’s correlation coefficient is a measure of the correlation
between 2 variables (X) independent and (Y) dependent variables, which gives a
value between +1 and 1”. Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient will be used to examine

34
 the scores between the between (X) variables of Engagement and Retention and (Y)
of other variables. The formula of Pearson’s correlation coefficient is:

The rule for testing the hypothesis is, if the P-value (significance of correlation) is less
than the value of Alpha, the null hypothesis (Ho) will be rejected, which means the
alternative hypothesis (Ha) will be accepted.
 Independent sample t-test: This is probably the most widely used statistical test of all
time, and certainly the most widely known. It is simple, straightforward, easy to use,
and adaptable to a broad range of situations. No statistical toolbox should ever be
without it. The independent-samples t-test (or independent t-test, for short) compares
the means between two unrelated groups on the same continuous dependent variable.

Its utility is occasioned by the fact that scientific research very often examines the
phenomena of nature two variables at a time, with an eye toward answering the basic
question: Are these two variables related? If we alter the level of one, will we thereby
alter the level of the other? Or alternatively: If we examine two different levels of one
variable, will we find them to be associated with different levels of the other? 
 One sample t-test: The one-sample t-test is used to determine whether a sample comes
from a population with a specific mean. This population mean is not always known,
but is sometimes hypothesized. For example, you want to show that a new teaching
method for pupils struggling to learn English grammar can improve their grammar
skills to the national average. Your sample would be pupils who received the new
teaching method and your population mean would be the national average score.

3.5.9 Statistical Definitions:

For this report, each of the reported quantitative measures is computationally unique and
defined by the following:

35
  Average score: The average score is computed as the sum of the rating scores divided
by the total number of responses for each survey question.
 Median score: The median score is the middle value after scores are ordered from
smallest to largest, or vice versa. Even and odd scores counts require distinct
computational techniques. In the case of an odd count, the middle value is
immediately apparent after data ordering. When the count is even, and after data
ordering, the median is found by adding the middle two values and dividing by two.
 Mode: The mode is the value or category repeated most often in the survey data.
 Response percent: The response percent is the percentage found by dividing the total
number of survey responses by the sum of both survey responses and non-responses.
 Standard deviation: The standard deviation is a measure of the dispersion of the data
away from the average score. Standard deviations with a lower numerical value tend
to indicate data nearer the average score, while higher values indicate data with a
greater distance away from the average score.
 Standard error: The standard error is the estimated standard deviation or measure of
variability in the sampling distribution of a statistic. A low standard error means there
is relatively less spread in the sampling distribution. The standard error indicates the
likely accuracy of the sample mean as compared with the population mean. The
standard error decreases as the sample size increases and approaches the size of the
population. 

3.5.10 Limitations:
 This study was constrained for banking employees belonging to Kurukshetra district
only.
 This study constitutes a small sample of 112 banking personnel.
 Given research work has been carried out for limited/specified dimensions of
Engagement and Retention.
 Sometimes employees filled questionnaires without due attention in filling it. Perhaps
at those times, their answers would have been not that much true.

36
 CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

This chapter contains the graphs and tables showing the analysis and interpretations from the
results obtained from survey. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS, version- 22)
software has been used extensively for analysis. Pearson correlation, multiple regression, one
way ANOVA and t-tests were used for analytical purpose.

37
4.1 PEARSON PRODUCT MOMENT CORRELATION ANALYSIS: ASSESSING
RELATIONSHIP AMONG STUDY VARIABLES:

Table: 4.1
Correlation Matrix of Study Variables
Loyalty Burnout TI Vigor Dedication Absorption
Loyalty 1 .859** .338** .206* .549** .247**
Burnout 1 .361** .264** .594** .291**
TI 1 .317** .375** .248**
Vigor 1 .647** .641**
Dedication 1 .745**
Absorption 1
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Source: Study results

Table 4.1 shows the correlation among six variables namely Loyalty, Burnout, Turnover
Intent (TI), Vigor, Dedication and Absorption.
‘N’ in the table represents the number of respondents (i.e. sample size)
 As shown in the table, all six variables have positive significant relationship in
between them. Pearson Correlation is used to find the correlation between them.
Value of Pearson correlation coefficient of Loyalty with Burnout is ‘0.859’, with TI is
‘.334’, with Vigor is ‘.206’, with Dedication is ‘.549’ and with Absorption it is ‘.247’.
All these relationships are significant at 0.01 level except relationship with Vigor is
significant at 0.05 level.
 Value of Pearson correlation coefficient of Burnout with TI is ‘.361’, with Vigor is
‘264’, with Dedication is ‘.594’ and with Absorption is ‘.291’. All these relationships
are positively significant at 0.01 level of significance.
 Pearson correlation coefficient of TI with Vigor is ‘.317’, with Dedication is ‘.375’
and with Absorption is ‘.248’. Further all these relationships are positively significant
at 0.01 level.
 Pearson correlation coefficient of Vigor with Dedication is ‘.647’ and with
Absorption is ‘.641’ and both of these correlations are positively significant at 0.01
level of significance level.
 Value of Pearson correlation coefficient of Dedication is ‘.745’ which is significant at
0.01 level of significant.

38
 Thus from the study of above table, it can be interpreted that all six variables have
inter-relationship in between them. That too, this relationship is positive.

4.2 MULTIPLE REGRESSION: ASSESSING CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN

STUDY VARIABLES:

I. 4.2.1 Extent of relationship between Retention and three variables of Engagement

(Vigor, Dedication and Absorption)

Table 4.2 Multiple regression of study variables

Model Summary
Adjusted R
Model R R Square Square
1 .659a .434 .419
a. Predictors: (Constant), Absorption, Vigor, Dedication

Coefficientsa
Unstandardized Standardized
Coefficients Coefficients
Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.
1 (Constant) 39.374 4.991 7.889 .000
Vigor -.318 .472 -.067 -.674 .502
Dedication 2.695 .349 .886 7.713 .000
Absorptio
-1.182 .454 -.298 -2.606 .010
n
a. Dependent Variable: Retention
Source: Study results

 ‘R’ represents the value of the multiple correlation coefficients between the predictors
and the outcome (Field, 2005). In the table this value is .659. This represents simple
39
 correlations between Retention and other three variables Vigor, Dedication and
Absorption.
 ‘R square’ is a measure of how much of the variability in the outcome is accounted
for by the predictors (Field, 2005). This value is ‘.434’, which means predictors
Absorption, Vigor and Dedication collectively account for 43.4 % of Retention. Rest
may be other factors liable.
 “The adjusted r2” gives an idea of how well the model generalizes and ideally its
value is likely to be the same or very close to, the value of r 2 (Field, 2005). Difference
between r2 and adjusted r2 is .434-.419= .015. It means if the survey would have been
conducted for whole population rather than sample, then we could have attained 1.5%
less variance.

Coefficients of the regression model

The ‘B-values’ in the table 4.1 represent the relationship between overall Loyalty and each
predictor (i.e. satisfaction variables). If the value is positive we can say that there is a positive
relationship between the predictor and the outcome whereas negative coefficient represents a
negative relationship. The b-value also tells us to what degree each independent variable
affects the dependent variables if the effects of all other independent variables are held
constant (Field, 2005).

The ‘beta (β)’ value tells us the number of standard deviations that the outcome will change
as a result of one standard deviation (SD) change in the predictor (Field, 2005). Higher beta
value signifies stronger correlation with the dependent variable. As shown in table, beta value
is maximum for Dedication (.886) followed by -.298 and -.067 for Absorption and Vigor
respectively. These negative values indicate that for one unit change in Absorption and Vigor
value there would be Retention change of .298 and .067 in negative direction. Further, for
one unit change in Dedication value there would be .886 change in Retention variable. But
the interpretation is true only if the other variables are held constant while measuring the
relationship between dependent variables and one of the independent variables. So, from the
results of multiple regression we can infer that Dedication has the highest influence on the
Employee Retention.
The regression model will be following:
Retention = B0 + B1 (V) + B2 (D) + B3 (A) + et

40
Where Retention is the dependent variable, ‘V’ is Vigor, ‘D’ is Dedication, ‘A’ is
Absorption.
B0 is the constant of Retention and B1, B2 and B3 are coefficients of regression. Et stands
for error term and its value is null.
So putting values in the equation, we get:
Retention = 39.374 + (-.067) V + (.886) D + (-.298) A
Further, it is clear from the results in table that Vigor has not significant causal relationship
with Retention. Dedication and Absorption have significant causal relationship with
Retention.

II. 4.2.2 Regression: Causal relationship between Employee Engagement and three
variables of Retention (Loyalty, Burnout and Turnover Intent).
To find this causal relationship, regression table has been shown below:

Table 4.3: Multiple regression between Employee Engagement and three

variables of Employee Retention
Model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square

1 .504a .254 .233

a. Predictors: (Constant), TI, Loyalty, Burnout

Coefficientsa
Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients Coefficients

Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig.

1 (Constant) 21.691 3.312 6.548 .000

Loyalty .045 .418 .017 .107 .915

Burnout .442 .198 .365 2.230 .028

TI .469 .190 .221 2.471 .015

41
 a. Dependent Variable: Engagement
Source: Study Result

 ‘R’ value in the table 4.3 is .504, which represents simple correlation between
Engagement and three variables Loyalty, Burnout and Turnover Intent.
 ‘r2’ value is .254, which means Loyalty, Burnout and Turnover Intent all together
contribute 25.4% for determination of Engagement of any employee.
 ‘Adjusted r2’ is valued at .233. Difference between adjusted r2 and r2 is .254-.233 = .
021. It means if the results would have been taken from the population instead of
sample then, it would have given 2.1% less variance in the results.
 Value of constant B in the table is 21.691.
 Value of standardised coefficients (Beta) are .017 for Loyalty, .365 for Burnout, .221
for TI. It can be interpreted from above data that for one unit change in Loyalty,
Burnout and TI, there would be .017, .365 and .221 change in Engagement level of
employee.
Regression model will be:

Engagement = B0 + B1 (L) + B2 (B) + B3 (TI) + et

 Where ‘Engagement’ is dependent variable, ‘L’ is Loyalty, ‘B’ is Burnout, ‘TI’ is Turnover
Intent.
 ‘B0’ is constant for Engagement and B1, B2, and B3 are standardised coefficients for
Loyalty, Burnout and Turnover Intent respectively. Value of et (error term) is null.
 After placing values in the equation we get:
Engagement = 21.691 + .017 (Loyalty) + .365 (Dedication) + .221 (Absorption)

It can be judged from the table that values of significance for Loyalty, Burnout and Turnover
Intent are .915, .028 and .015 respectively. This suggests that Loyalty is not having causal
relationship with Engagement, but Burnout and Turnover Intent have causal relationship with
Engagement.
4.3 INDEPENDENT SAMPLE T-TEST: ASSESSING DIFFERENCE IN MEAN
SCORES OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR BANK EMPLOYEES:

Shown in table, is the difference in perception of Engagement and Retention of Banking employees in
public and private sector.

42
 Table 4.4: T-test for difference in perception towards Engagement and Retention
in between public and private sector banks
VARIABLES BANK Std. t sig. (2 tailed)
SECTOR N Mean Deviation
Engagement public
55 31.4727 10.54770 .000
-8.006
private 57 46.6842 9.55091 -7.992 .000
Retention public
55 41.1091 16.97784 .000
-7.150
private 57 61.1228 12.36509 -7.110 .000
Source: Study Results

 Table 4.4 clearly shows that there lies a significant difference between perception of
public sector banking employees and private sector banking employees for
Engagement and Retention both. As value of mean for Engagement in public sector
employees is 31.4727 which is significantly lower than value of mean for Retention in
public sector employees which is 46.6842; it can be clearly interpreted that private
sector employees are having better Engagement than public sector employees.

 Again, when we compare means for Retention variable in between these two types of
employees we get again a significant level of difference between public sector
employees’ mean (41.1091) and public sector employees’ mean (61.1228). It is also
clear that private sector employees again seem better in Retention than public sector
employees same as in the case of Engagement. Standard deviation also shows level of
difference between perceptions of two types of employees. More to be mentioned is
that this level of difference between public and private sector banks employees for
both Engagement and Retention is significant at .01 level of significance.

4.4 ANOVA
4.4.1 POST HOC TEST: Assessing Differences in Perception of Bank Employees
Regarding Retention and Engagement:

For this purpose Post hoc test results are analysed as below:

43
 Table 4.5 shows the level of significance of difference between employees’ perception of
different banks towards Retention and Engagement both.
 Retention Variable: SBI bank is has significant difference with all banks except PNB
and Axis bank in case of Retention variable. Difference in perception of employees of
SBI with SBP is very much significant. Mean difference also confirms this finding.
Mean difference of SBI with PNB (7.2) and Axis (-6.17) Bank is lesser as compared
to mean difference with other banks i.e. SBP (31.7), HDFC (-8.17) and ICICI (-9.59)
in case of Retention. SBP bank has significant difference with all banks. Employees
of SBP have scored highest mean in Retention. PNB employees have significant
difference with all banks except SBI bank. HDFC and ICICI bank employees have
significant with SBI, SBP and PNB banks only. But Axis bank have significant
difference with only SBP and PNB banks.
 Engagement Variable: In case of Engagement variable, perfect results have been
obtained. Meaning thereby all public sector banks have significant difference of its
employees’ perception about Engagement with all private sector employees. Also all
public sector banks have no significant difference of perception with other public
sector banks. Again, all private sector banks have no significant difference of
perception with other private sector banks.

Table 4.5: Post Hoc Tests

Dependent Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval

Variable (I) Bname (J) Bname (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound

Retention sbi sbp 31.73109* 3.74699 .000 24.3023 39.1599

pnb 7.20168 3.74699 .057 -.2271 14.6304

hdfc -8.17293* 3.63637 .027 -15.3824 -.9635

*
icici -9.59398 3.63637 .010 -16.8034 -2.3845

44
 axis -6.17293 3.63637 .093 -13.3824 1.0365
*
sbp sbi -31.73109 3.74699 .000 -39.1599 -24.3023

pnb -24.52941* 3.93926 .000 -32.3394 -16.7194

*
hdfc -39.90402 3.83420 .000 -47.5057 -32.3024

icici -41.32508* 3.83420 .000 -48.9267 -33.7234

*
axis -37.90402 3.83420 .000 -45.5057 -30.3024

pnb sbi -7.20168 3.74699 .057 -14.6304 .2271

*
sbp 24.52941 3.93926 .000 16.7194 32.3394

hdfc -15.37461* 3.83420 .000 -22.9763 -7.7729

*
icici -16.79567 3.83420 .000 -24.3973 -9.1940

axis -13.37461* 3.83420 .001 -20.9763 -5.7729

*
hdfc sbi 8.17293 3.63637 .027 .9635 15.3824

sbp 39.90402* 3.83420 .000 32.3024 47.5057

*
pnb 15.37461 3.83420 .000 7.7729 22.9763

icici -1.42105 3.72617 .704 -8.8085 5.9664

axis 2.00000 3.72617 .593 -5.3875 9.3875

icici sbi 9.59398* 3.63637 .010 2.3845 16.8034

*
sbp 41.32508 3.83420 .000 33.7234 48.9267

pnb 16.79567* 3.83420 .000 9.1940 24.3973

hdfc 1.42105 3.72617 .704 -5.9664 8.8085

axis 3.42105 3.72617 .361 -3.9664 10.8085

axis sbi 6.17293 3.63637 .093 -1.0365 13.3824

sbp 37.90402* 3.83420 .000 30.3024 45.5057

*
pnb 13.37461 3.83420 .001 5.7729 20.9763

hdfc -2.00000 3.72617 .593 -9.3875 5.3875

icici -3.42105 3.72617 .361 -10.8085 3.9664

Engagement sbi sbp -1.17647 3.31724 .724 -7.7532 5.4003

pnb -.35294 3.31724 .915 -6.9297 6.2238

hdfc -13.52632* 3.21931 .000 -19.9089 -7.1437

icici -17.31579* 3.21931 .000 -23.6984 -10.9332

axis -16.21053* 3.21931 .000 -22.5931 -9.8279

sbp sbi 1.17647 3.31724 .724 -5.4003 7.7532

pnb .82353 3.48747 .814 -6.0907 7.7378

45
 hdfc -12.34985* 3.39445 .000 -19.0797 -5.6200
*
icici -16.13932 3.39445 .000 -22.8692 -9.4095

axis -15.03406* 3.39445 .000 -21.7639 -8.3042

pnb sbi .35294 3.31724 .915 -6.2238 6.9297

sbp -.82353 3.48747 .814 -7.7378 6.0907

*
hdfc -13.17337 3.39445 .000 -19.9032 -6.4435

icici -16.96285* 3.39445 .000 -23.6927 -10.2330

*
axis -15.85759 3.39445 .000 -22.5874 -9.1278

hdfc sbi 13.52632* 3.21931 .000 7.1437 19.9089

*
sbp 12.34985 3.39445 .000 5.6200 19.0797

pnb 13.17337* 3.39445 .000 6.4435 19.9032

icici -3.78947 3.29881 .253 -10.3297 2.7507

axis -2.68421 3.29881 .418 -9.2244 3.8560

*
icici sbi 17.31579 3.21931 .000 10.9332 23.6984

sbp 16.13932* 3.39445 .000 9.4095 22.8692

*
pnb 16.96285 3.39445 .000 10.2330 23.6927

hdfc 3.78947 3.29881 .253 -2.7507 10.3297

axis 1.10526 3.29881 .738 -5.4350 7.6455

axis sbi 16.21053* 3.21931 .000 9.8279 22.5931

*
sbp 15.03406 3.39445 .000 8.3042 21.7639

pnb 15.85759* 3.39445 .000 9.1278 22.5874

hdfc 2.68421 3.29881 .418 -3.8560 9.2244

icici -1.10526 3.29881 .738 -7.6455 5.4350

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.

Source: Study results

4.4.2 Anova: Difference of Retention and Engagement perception among employees

of all three type of ages (below 30, 30-50 and above 50).
For this purpose Post hoc test results are analysed as below:
Table below shows the level of significance of difference between employees’ perception of
different banks towards Retention and Engagement both.

Table 4.6: Multiple Comparisons

LSD

Dependent Mean 95% Confidence Interval

Variable (I) Age (J) Age Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig. Lower Bound Upper Bound
*
Retention below 30 30-50 11.45596 4.05993 .006 3.4093 19.5026

46
 above 50 19.35573* 6.27261 .003 6.9236 31.7878
*
30-50 below 30 -11.45596 4.05993 .006 -19.5026 -3.4093

above 50 7.89977 5.51087 .155 -3.0226 18.8221

*
above 50 below 30 -19.35573 6.27261 .003 -31.7878 -6.9236

30-50 -7.89977 5.51087 .155 -18.8221 3.0226

*
Engagement below 30 30-50 9.38907 2.81812 .001 3.8037 14.9745
*
above 50 15.35178 4.35400 .001 6.7223 23.9813

30-50 below 30 -9.38907* 2.81812 .001 -14.9745 -3.8037

above 50 5.96270 3.82526 .122 -1.6188 13.5442

above 50 below 30 -15.35178* 4.35400 .001 -23.9813 -6.7223

30-50 -5.96270 3.82526 .122 -13.5442 1.6188

*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Source: Study results

 Retention Variable: In case of Retention, it can be seen from the table that only 30-50
and above 50 age groups have no significant difference in perception towards
Retention. Otherwise all other groups have significant difference in perception
towards Retention. Mean difference is also less in case of 30-50 and above 50 age
group which is 7.89. And this means difference is very less as compared to mean
differences between other age groups.
 Engagement Variable: Both Retention and Engagement variables have got same kind
of results in case of age groups. In Engagement variables also two age groups 30-50
an above 50 have not got significant difference. Rather all other age groups have
significant difference in between them.
CHAPTER 5
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

Following findings and conclusions have been drawn from the report:

 All the variables under study i.e. Loyalty, Burnout, Turnover Intent, Vigor,
Dedication and Absorption are highly correlated. Meaning thereby when one of these
variables changes positively in any employee, each of other also changes positively.
But Burnout and Turnover Intent are two variables who go negative to these all
variables as these are negative in sense. Thus when all variables will move forward in
value; Burnout and Turnover Intent will go backward with good correlation with all

47
 other variables. We can say that when any employee will feel high Loyalty, he will
feel less Burnout and less Turnover Intent.
 Retention has significant causal relationship with two variables of Engagement i.e.
Dedication and Absorption. But not with Vigor. Thus we can interpret that both
Dedication and Absorption variable contribute to Retention factor of employees in
banking sector in Kurukhetra region. But Vigor does not contribute to Retention in
this population.
 Engagement has significant causal relationship with Burnout and Turnover Intent
variables of Retention. This relationship goes in negative direction as both variables
Burnout and Turnover Intent are in negative sense. Meaning thereby if we want to
predict Engagement from Burnout and Turnover Intent we can predict that, but when
Burnout and Turnover Intent of any employee is going down, inversely Engagement
level of that employee will go up. Inverse of above statement is also true. But
Engagement has not significant causal relationship with Loyalty variable. It means
that Loyalty variable doesn’t contribute to Engagement level of employees in banking
sector in Kurukshetra region. Although this seems contradictory with intuitions.
 There is much difference of Engagement and Retention level of banking sector
employees in Kurukshetra between public and private sector employees. Public sector
employees are low in both Engagement and Retention as compared to private sector
employees. This seems congruent with intuitions also.
 Figure 5.1 Comparison of level of Retention in Employees of different banks in
Kurukshetra

ICICI
HDFC
AXIS
SBI
PNB
SBP

Source: Study results

48
  Figure 5.2 Comparison of level of Engagement in Employees of different banks
in Kurukshetra

ICICI
AXIS
HDFC
SBP
PNB
SBI

Source: Study results

CHAPTER 6
SCOPE AND IMPLEMENTATIONS OF THE STUDY

6.1 SCOPE:

This study was highly significant study. This study entails deep and current knowledge about
Engagement and Retention level of both public and private sector banking employees in
Kurukshetra.

This study can be used for following purposes in future:

49
  In this study, only Kurukshetra district was taken as area of survey. Other areas may
also be explored for this useful study. In that way we can measure Engagement and
Retention of employees of Haryana, other states and even in whole India.
 This study was held only in banking sector. In future with the help of this
questionnaire and analytic techniques anyone can study Engagement and Retention of
employees in other sectors e.g. telecommunication sector, IT sector etc.
 Only some of the dimensions of Engagement (i.e. Vigor, Dedication and Absorption)
and Retention (i.e. Loyalty, Burnout and Turnover Intent) were covered in this study.
Other dimensions can also be developed and used in further studies.

6.2 IMPLIMENTATIONS:

Implementations are main part of any report. They tell about what are the implications of the
study? In how many ways this study can be applied anywhere? Considering this; following
are the implementations in face of this study:

 Engagement and Retention are burning issues these days in almost all sectors of
business. If managements of organization come to know the Engagement level of
their employees, they can draw out more from them. If it is known to any company’s
management that employees are less engaged in their company, then, they can take
steps to enhance Engagement and reduce Retention. So this study should be used by
maximum of the companies to enhance commitment of their employees.
 As is clear from the study results, public sector employees are less engaged and more
prone to Retention. We can come to the conclusion that public sector employees do
not put their best in the work. Perhaps that’s why public sector companies are not able
to satisfy their customers in contrast with private sector companies. Contrarily public
sector companies should adopt measures to engage their employees to increase their
productivity.

50
 ANNEXURE

REFERENCES:
 Mak L., Sockel Hy (2001). “A confirmatory factor analysis of IS employee
motivation and Retention”. Information & Management 38, 265-276.
 Schaufeli, W., (2009). “‘The Construct Validity of the Utrecht Work Engagement
Scale: Multisample and Longitudinal Evidence’ J Happiness Stud 10, 459–481
 Panda, B. and Singh, L.P. “Employee engagement in Indian scenerio- a case study of
tata tele services limited (ttsl)” DRIEMS Business Review - Vol. -1 No. – 1, 64.

51
  AON Hewitt Consulting firm (2012), “Trends in Global Employee Engagement”. P.
4-9.
 Kyndt E., Filip D., Michielsen M., & Moeyaert B. “Employee Retention:
Organisational and Personal Perspectives” Vocations and Learning DOI
10.1007/s12186-009-9024-7
 Sheridan, e. (Dec., 1992), “organizational culture and employee retention”. The
Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 35, No. 5, pp. 1036-1056
 Pandey S. and David S. (2013), “A Study of Engagement at Work: What drives
Employee Engagement?” European Journal of Commerce and Management Research
(EJCMR) Vol-2 Issue-7, p 155-161.
 Nazia S. and Begum B., “EMPLOYEE RETENTION PRACTICES IN INDIAN
CORPORATE – A STUDY OF SELECT MNCs” I.J.E.M.S., VOL.4 (3) 2013: 361-
368
 Aralelimath S.S. & Bhagwati V.M. “Employee Engagement: a study of employees of
DCCBs of Maharashtra State” International Journal of Marketing Research, Financial
Services and Management Research vol. 1(5), p. 1-7.
 The Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 35, No. 5 (Dec., 1992), pp. 1036-1056
 http://www.hrzone.com/feature/people/history-employee-Engagement-satisfaction-
sustainability/141048
 The evolution of banking in india, Avishkar – Solapur University Research Journal,
Vol. 2, 2012
 http://managementstudyguide.com/importance-of-employee-Retention.htm
 http://www.mathsisfun.com/data/standard-deviation.html
 http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/qmss/the_ttest/onesample_ttest.html
 http://www.aon.com/attachments/human-capital-
consulting/2012_TrendsInGlobalEngagement_Final_v11.pdf
 http://fiveoclockclub.com/2012/12/some-new-thoughts-on-employee-Engagement-
and-Retention/
 Research Methodology by C.R. Kothari

TABLE:
T-TEST for Difference in perception of Private and Public Sector Bankin Employees

Independent Samples Test

52
 Levene's Test for
Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

95% Confidence Interval of

Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error the Difference

F Sig. t df tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper

Engagement Equal variances

1.276 .261 -8.006 110 .000 -15.21148 1.90007 -18.97697 -11.44600
assumed

Equal variances
-7.992 108.037 .000 -15.21148 1.90346 -18.98445 -11.43852
not assumed
Retention Equal variances
13.200 .000 -7.150 110 .000 -20.01372 2.79930 -25.56128 -14.46615
assumed

Equal variances
-7.110 98.533 .000 -20.01372 2.81482 -25.59926 -14.42817
not assumed

Questionnaire for Employee Engagement and Retention

Personal details:
Employee Name: Sex:
Age: Designation:
Bank Name: Bank location:
NOTE: Please read each statement carefully and decide what way you feel about your job. If you
have never had this feeling, tick(√) “0” (zero) in the space preceding the statement. If you have had
this feeling, indicate how often you feel it by marking a tick to the corresponding number (from 1
to 4) that best describes how frequently you feel that way.

Statements Neve Rarely Sometimes Often Always

r Once a few times a Once a Everyday
month month week

53
1 My values and that of the organization are very similar 0 1 2 3 4
2 This organization inspires the best in me in the way of job 0 1 2 3 4
performance
3 I am really glad that I work for this organization 0 1 2 3 4
4 I would encourage a friend to work for my company 0 1 2 3 4
5 Working in this organization makes me feel depressed 0 1 2 3 4

6 While working in this organization I feel physically 0 1 2 3 4

exhausted
7 While working in this organization I feel emotionally 0 1 2 3 4
exhausted
8 I can’t take it anymore being a member of this organization. 0 1 2 3 4
9 Engaging myself in this organization makes me feel trapped 0 1 2 3 4
1 In this organization I feel worthless 0 1 2 3 4
0
1 I am tired and bored of this organization 0 1 2 3 4
1
1 My organization makes me feel troublesome 0 1 2 3 4
2
1 I am feeling hopeless in this organization 0 1 2 3 4
3
1 In this organization I have a feeling of being rejected 0 1 2 3 4
4
1 I am actively/passively looking for another job outside my 0 1 2 3 4
5 organization
1 I would consider leaving for a company that had excellent 0 1 2 3 4
6 project management
1 I would seriously consider leaving for even a slightly better 0 1 2 3 4
7 position elsewhere
1 I would consider leaving my job for a position where I 0 1 2 3 4
8 could earn more.
1 At my work, I feel that I am bursting with energy 0 1 2 3 4
9
2 I find the work that I do full of meaning and purpose 0 1 2 3 4
0
2 Time flies when I'm working 0 1 2 3 4
1
2 At my job, I feel strong and Vigorous 0 1 2 3 4
2
2 I am enthusiastic about my job 0 1 2 3 4
3
2 When I am working, I forget everything else around me 0 1 2 3 4
4
2 My job inspires me 0 1 2 3 4
5
2 When I get up in the morning, I feel like going to work 0 1 2 3 4
6
2 I feel happy when I am working intensely 0 1 2 3 4

54
7
2 I am proud of the work that I do 0 1 2 3 4
8
2 I am immersed in my work 0 1 2 3 4
9
3 I can continue working for very long periods at a time 0 1 2 3 4
0
3 To me, my job is challenging 0 1 2 3 4
1
3 I get carried away when I’m working 0 1 2 3 4
2
3 At my job, I am very resilient, mentally 0 1 2 3 4
3
3 It is difficult to detach myself from my job 0 1 2 3 4
4
3 At my work I always persevere, even when things do not go 0 1 2 3 4
5 well

Thanks for your co-operation!

55