Page 88 - ASBIRES-2017_Preceedings

Priyangani & Francisco

been collected by the questionnaire through (e).Salary, (f).Job security, (g).Team
the sewing machine operators. members support and (f) Managerial support

3.3 Details of Design and Development of According to the corelation table all P
Data Collection Tools values <0.05, we have enough evidence to
The questionnaire contains two parts. reject H0 at 5% level of significance.
The part A represents the personal details of 5.2 Model Summary
employees and the part B includes questions
to measure the independent variables and Table 1: Model summary
dependent variable. Further, researcher has Model R R Adjusted Std.
2
used five point likert scales to measure the 2 Error of
responses. R the
Estimate
3.4 Data Analysis Strategy
1 .658 .433 .429 .768
First analyze the demographic factors of 2 .737 .543 .535 .693
the respondent. Then correlation analysis
and multiple regression analysis done with 3 .758 .575 .564 .671
the help of SPSS Statistics 17.0. 4 .768 .590 .576 .662

Research function: Y= β0 + β1X1 + β2X2+
β3X3 + β4X4+ β5X5 + β6X6+ β7X7 + β8X8 (1) According to the Table 1, 4 model has
th
the best R value. It means in the 4 model
2 th
4 DATA COLLECTION AND independent variables explain 59.0% of
ANALYSIS variability of the dependent variable.

4.1 Details of Data Collection 5.3 Model Significance
Data for this study were collected from
sewing machine operators those who work H0: The model is not significant
in Orit Apparels Lanka, Embilipitiya. H1: The model is significant
Initially, 120 questionnaires were distributed
to the selected sample size. Table 2: Model significance
Model Sum of Df Mean F Sig.
4.2 Details of Responses Squares Squa
re
All questionnaires were collected from
the sample and the response rate was 100%. 1 Regression 53.27 1 53.27 90.23 .000

Residual 69.66 118 .590

5 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Total 122.92 119
5.1 Hypothesis Testing 2 Regression 66.72 2 33.36 69.44 .000

H0: There is no correlation between Job Residual 56.20 117 .480
Satisfaction and (a).Induction & orientation Total 122.92 119
program, (b).Training & development 3 Regression 70.68 3 23.56 52.31 .000
opportunities, (c).Working conditions,
(d).Treated manner of Supervisor, Residual 52.25 116 .450

(e).Salary, (f).Job security, (g).Team Total 122.92 119
members support and (h) Managerial 4 Regression 72.56 4 18.14 41.42 .000
support
Residual 50.36 115 .438
H1: There is a correlation between Job
Satisfaction and (a).Induction & orientation Total 122.92 119
program, (b).Training & development According to Table 2,All P values 0.000
opportunities, (c).Working conditions, < 0.05, we have enough evidence to reject
(d).Treated manner of Supervisor, H0 at 5% level of significance.

78