job satisfaction career orientation, role conflict and...

Job Satisfaction Career Orientation, Role Conflict and Quality of Work

Life of Women Teachers in Colleges

Please purchase PDF Split-Merge on www.verypdf.com to remove this watermark.

119

CHAPTER V

JOB SATISFACTION, CAREER ORIENTATION,

ROLE CONFLICT AND QUALITY OF WORK LIFE OF

WOMEN TEACHERS IN COLLEGES

5.1. Introduction

In this chapter, to know the level of job satisfaction, career orientation, role

conflict and quality of work life, the hypotheses are formulated. These hypotheses are

verified and tested using the various statistical techniques and inference drawn based on

the results to fulfill the objectives framed.

The objectives of the study that are explained in this chapters are,

1) To analyze the level of job satisfaction among women teachers in colleges.

2) To examine the level of career orientation among women teachers in colleges.

3) To assess the level of role conflict among women teachers in colleges.

4) To know the level of quality of work life among women teachers in colleges.

Before analyzing the data with respect to the objectives framed, tool reliability,

validity and normality of the data should be ensured. This will facilitate any researcher to

apply appropriate statistical tools.


120

5.2. Reliability Test

A reliability analysis is commonly used to identify the internal consistency of the

variables. Cronbach‘s alpha is commonly used to test the reliability and the range of

alpha coefficient value is in between 0 to 1. The higher value indicates the higher

reliability (Hair, et al., 1992). A value more than 0.70 is significantly good measure for

sufficient scale of reliability (Cronbach, 1951, Nunnally, 1987).The following table

exhibits the reliability of four constructs under study.

Table 5.1

Result of Reliability Test

Constructs Cronbach's Alpha

Job satisfaction 0.870

Career orientation 0.773

Role conflict 0.943

Quality of work life 0.952

Source: Primary data.

The above table 5.1 shows that the reliability co-efficient for the construct job

satisfaction is 0.870, for the construct career orientation is 0.773, for the construct role

conflict is 0.943 and for the quality of work life is 0.952 which is closure unity ensures

the reliability of the questionnaire.


121

5.3. Normality Test

The following table gives the descriptive for the four constructs under study.

Table 5.2

Result of Normality Test

Job

Satisfaction

Score

Career

Orientation

Score

Role Conflict

Score

Quality of

Work Life

Score

Mean 40.415 68.588 50.823 109.930

Median 40.000 68.000 54.000 110.000

Mode 45.000 70.000 66.000 130.000

Std. Deviation 7.334 10.708 16.152 23.406

Skewness 0.418 0.160 -0.346 -0.156

Kurtosis 0.217 -0.417 -0.866 -0.726

Source: Primary data

From the table 5.2, it is observed that the mean, median and mode for the

constructs are almost equal and skewness for the constructs is nearer to zero, hence it

confirms asymptotic normality of the data. This enables the researcher to apply

parametric test on the collected sample data.

The construct, job satisfaction consists of 15 items, measured using 4 point scale.

Based on this the overall job satisfaction score can be classified as below.


122

Table 5.3

Classification of Job Satisfaction Score

Overall score Level

15.0 - 37.5 Low

37.5 – 48.25 Moderate

48.25 - 60.0 High


The table 5.3 explains classification of job satisfaction score. The overall score of

the construct job satisfaction is classified as low (15.0 - 37.5), moderate (37.5 - 48.25)

and high (48.25 – 60.0). The mean value of the construct job satisfaction as indicated in

the table 5.2 is 40.415, it is understood that all the respondents have moderate level of

satisfaction towards their jobs.

The construct career orientation consists of 22 items measured using 5 point scale.

Based on this the overall career orientation score can be classified as below.

Table 5.4

Classification of Career Orientation Score

Overall score Level

22 - 66 Low

66 - 88 Moderate

88-110 High



123

The table 5.4 explains classification of career orientation score. The overall score

of the construct career orientation is classified as low (22 - 66), moderate (66 - 88) and high

(88 -110). The mean value of the construct career orientation as indicated in the table 5.2 is

68.588, it is understood that all the respondents have moderate levels of career orientation

The construct role conflict consists of 17 items measured using 5 point scale.

Based on this the overall role conflict score can be classified as below.

Table 5.5

Classification of Role Conflict Score

Overall score Level

17 - 51 Low

51 - 68 Moderate

68 - 85 High


The table 5.5 explains classification of role conflict score. The overall score of the

construct role conflict is classified as low (17 - 51), moderate (51 - 68) and high

(68 - 85). The mean value of the construct role conflict as indicated in the table 5.2 is

50.823, it is understood that all the respondents have low level of role conflict.


124

The construct quality of work life consists of 34 items measured using 5 point

scale. Based on this the overall quality of work life score can be classified as below.

Table 5.6

Classification of Quality of Work Life Score

Overall score Level

34 - 102 Low

102 - 136 Moderate

136 - 170 High


The table 5.6 explains classification of quality of work life score. The overall

score of the construct quality of work life is classified as low (34 - 102), moderate

(102 - 136) and high (136 - 170). The mean value of the construct quality of work life as

indicated in the table 5.2 is 109.930, it is understood that all the respondents have

moderate level of quality of work life.


125

5.4. Z Test and ANOVA

To analyze and find the level of job satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and

quality of work life, the two sample mean test and ANOVA (to compare three or more

number of groups on the basis of their mean values) have been applied appropriately.

Additional Degree Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H01: Both the group of respondents i.e., having additional degree and not having

additional degree have on an average the same level of opinion on job satisfaction, career

orientation, role conflict and quality of work life.

Table 5.7

The Z Test Results of the Constructs Based on Additional

Degree of the Respondents

Constructs Group Mean |Z| Significance Remark

Job satisfaction

Not

having 41.154

2.075 0.039 Significant

Having 39.327

Career

orientation

Not

having 68.320

0.470 0.638 Not Significant

Having 68.929

Role conflict

Not

having 50.611


Having 51.053

Quality of work

life

Not

having 111.805


Having 107.203

Significant at 5 per cent level.


As shown in the table 5.7, the significance for the construct job satisfaction is less

than 0.05, the null hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that both the groups differ in


126

their opinion on the construct job satisfaction. The mean values in the table 5.7 shows

that, respondents without additional degree have higher level of job satisfaction when

compared with the respondents having additional degree.

Since the level of significance for the constructs, career orientation, role conflict

and quality work life are greater than 0.05, the null hypothesis is accepted and it is

concluded that both the groups do not differ in their opinion on the constructs. From the

mean values it is concluded that the two groups have moderate level of career orientation,

role conflict and quality of work life.

Migration Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H02: Both migrant and Non-migrants have on an average same level of opinion on job

satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life.

Table 5.8

The Z Test Result of the Constructs Based on Migration of the Respondents


Job satisfaction

Migrant 39.870

1.285 0.200 Not Significant Non-

migrant 40.978

Career

orientation

Migrant 68.782


migrant 68.387

Role conflict

Migrant 51.816


migrant 49.795

Quality of work

life

Migrant 111.0680


migrant 108.7535




127

The table 5.8 shows that the significance for all the constructs under the study are

greater than 0.05, therefore the null hypothesis is accepted and it is concluded that both

Migrant and Non-migrant respondents do not differ in their opinion on the constructs; job

satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life. By comparing the

mean values of the constructs, it is concluded that both the groups have moderate level of

job satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life.

Type of Family Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H03: Respondents belonging to both nuclear and joint family have on an average the

same level of opinion on job satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and quality of

work life.

Table 5.9

The Z Test Result of the Constructs Based on Type of Family of the Respondents


Job satisfaction Nuclear 41.397

2.701 0.007 Significant Joint 39.057

Career

orientation

Nuclear 67.777 1.524 0.129 Not Significant

Joint 69.721

Role conflict Nuclear 50.018

1.019 0.309 Not Significant Joint 51.983

Quality of work

life

Nuclear 112.247 2.025 0.044 Significant

Joint 106.623




128

The table 5.9 shows that the significance of the constructs, job satisfaction and

quality of work life are less than 0.05. Hence, the null hypothesis is rejected and it is

concluded that both nuclear and joint family respondents differ in their opinion on the

construct- job satisfaction and quality of work life. The mean value in the above table 5.9

shows that respondents belong to nuclear family experience higher level of job satisfaction

and quality of work life compared to the respondents belonging to joint family.

Since, the level of significance of the constructs career orientation and role

conflict under study are greater than 0.05, the null hypothesis is accepted and it is

concluded that respondents belonging to nuclear and joint family do not differ in their

opinion on the constructs, career orientation and role conflict. By comparing the mean

values of the construct it is concluded that the two groups have moderate level of career

orientation and role conflict.

Number of Children Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H04: Both the group of respondents having one child and two & above children have on

an average the same level of opinion on job satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict

and quality of work life.


129

Table 5.10

The Z Test Result of the Constructs Based on the Respondents

Having Number of Children


Job satisfaction

One 41.223

2.409 0.017 Significant Two and

above 39.100

Career

orientation

One 67.715

1.775 0.077 Not

Significant Two and

above 70.009

Role conflict

One 50.301

0.700 0.484 Not

Significant Two and

above 51.672

Quality of work

life

One 111.262

1.235 0.218 Not

Significant Two and

above 107.763



The significance for the construct job satisfaction under the study is less than

0.05, the null hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that respondents having one child

and two & more children differ in their opinion on the construct job satisfaction. The mean

value in the above table 5.10 shows that the respondents having one child have higher level

of job satisfaction than the respondents having two and more children.

The significance for the constructs, career orientation, role conflict and quality of work

life under study are greater than 0.05, the null hypothesis is accepted and it is concluded that


130

respondents having one child as well as two and more children do not differ in their opinion

on the constructs, career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life. Under study

comparing the mean values of the constructs it is concluded that both the groups have moderate

level of career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life.

Present Place Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H05: Respondents from the present place of both city and town have on an average

same level of opinion on Job satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and quality of

work life.

Table 5.11

Z Test Result of the Constructs Based on Present

Place of the Respondents


Job satisfaction Town 39.9710

0.984 0.326 Not Significant City 40.8212

Career

orientation

Town 68.0072 0.881 0.379 Not Significant

City 69.1192

Role conflict Town 55.0435

4.378 0.000 Significant City 46.9669

Quality of work

life

Town 109.1449 0.545 0.586 Not Significant

City 110.649




131

The significance for the construct role conflict is less than 0.05, therefore the null

hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that both the group of respondents who are

presently living in city as well as town, differ in their opinion on the construct of role

conflict. The mean values in the above table 5.11 shows that, respondents who are

presently living in town experience higher level of role conflict than the respondents who

are presently living in city. The reason for having high role conflict may be attributed to

the various constraints faced by the participants who live in the towns. The constraints

may be due to the travel distance, family support and work environment.

The significance for the constructs job satisfaction, career orientation, and quality

of work life under study are greater than 0.05, the null hypothesis is accepted and it is

concluded that respondents presently living in city as well as town do not differ in their

opinion on the constructs job satisfaction, career orientation, and quality of work life.

Under study comparing the mean values of the constructs it is concluded that the

respondents belonging to these two groups have moderate level of job satisfaction, career

orientation, and quality of work life.


132

ANOVA

When there is three or more number of groups that are to be compared on the

basis of their mean values, to compare the groups ANOVA technique is applied. In this

study also the researcher is interested in comparing opinion given on job satisfaction,

career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life on the basis of the respondents‘

profile which are classified into three or more number of groups.

Age Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H06: Respondents belonging to various age groups have on an average same level of

opinion on job satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life.

Table 5.12

The Mean Value of Constructs Based on Age of the Respondents

Age Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality of

Work Life

Less than 30 38.734 69.698 51.698 109.807

30-40 39.957 68.525 51.305 108.652

Above 40 42.613 67.625 49.352 111.761



133

Table 5.13

ANOVA result of the Constructs Based on Age of the Respondents

Construct Sum of

Squares DF

Mean

Square F Sig. Remark

Job

satisfaction

Between

groups 684.353 2 342.176

6.608 0.002 Significant Within

groups 14809.820 286 51.783

Total 15494.173 288

Career

orientation

Between

groups 184.481 2 92.241

0.803 0.449 Not

Significant Within

groups 32841.519 286 114.830

Total 33026.000 288

Role

conflict

Between

groups 281.434 2 140.717

0.538 0.585 Not

Significant Within

groups 74858.566 286 261.743

Total 75140.000 288

Quality of

work life

Between

groups 488.957 2 244.479

0.445 0.642 Not

Significant Within

groups 157301.659 286 550.006

Total 157790.616 288




134

ANOVA result reveals that except job satisfaction, on all other constructs the

respondents do not differ significantly in their opinion.

In the case of job satisfaction, the significant value is less than 0.05, the null

hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that respondents belonging to various age

groups differ significantly in their opinion on job satisfaction.

To find out which age group differs significantly from others Post Hoc Test is

followed.

Table 5.14

Post Hoc Test Result of Job Satisfaction Based on Age

Construct Age (in years) Mean Difference Sig.

Job satisfaction Above

40

Less

than 30 3.87870

* 0.001

30-40 2.65601* 0.025

* The mean difference is significant at 5 per cent level.

From the Post Hoc analysis it is observed that respondents belonging to the age

group above 40 years differ significantly from other two groups of respondents having

age of less than 30 years and between 30-40 years. The magnitude of the mean value says

that respondents who are having age of above 40 years experience higher level of job

satisfaction than the respondents having age of less than 30 years and 30-40 years.

Qualification Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H07: Respondents having different qualifications have on an average same level of



135

Table 5.15

The Mean Value of Constructs Based on Qualification of the Respondents

Qualification Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality of

Work Life

PG 39.373 69.142 52.362 106.423

M.Phil 41.462 70.656 49.701 113.179

Ph.D 43.400 62.600 45.700 120.450


Table 5.16

ANOVA Result of the Constructs Based on the Qualification of the Respondents

Constructs Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Job

satisfaction

Between

groups

627.323 2 313.661


groups

14866.850 286 51.982

Total 15494.173 288

Career

orientation

Between

groups

1777.010 2 888.505


groups

31248.990 286 109.262

Total 33026.000 288

Role

conflict

Between

groups

1565.504 2 782.752


groups

73574.496 286 257.253

Total 75140.000 288

Quality of

work life

Between

groups

7372.442 2 3686.221


groups

150418.174 286 525.938

Total 157790.616 288




136

ANOVA result reveals that the significant value of all the constructs are less than

0.05, the null hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that the respondents having

different qualifications differ significantly in their opinion on the constructs job

satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life.

To find out which qualification group of respondents differs significantly from

other groups, Post Hoc Test is followed.

Table 5.17

Post Hoc Test Result of the Job Satisfaction Based on Qualification

Construct Qualification Mean difference Sig.

Job satisfaction Ph. D PG 4.02637

* 0.004

M.Phil 1.93731 0.372


From the Post Hoc analysis it is observed that the respondents having Ph.D

qualification are significantly different from the respondents with PG qualification.

The magnitude of the mean value says that Ph.D qualified respondents experience high

job satisfaction than the respondents having PG qualification. However M.Phil qualified

respondents and Ph.D qualified respondents have on an average the same level of opinion

towards the construct job satisfaction.

Table 5.18

Post Hoc Test Result of the Career Orientation Based on Qualification

Construct Qualification Mean Difference Sig.

Career orientation

PG M.Phil 1.51386 0.569

Ph. D 6.54286* 0.001

M.Phil

PG 1.51386 0.569

Ph. D 1.51386* 0.000



137

From the Post Hoc analysis it is observed that the respondents having PG

qualification differ significantly from the respondents having Ph.D qualification.

The magnitude of the mean value says that respondents having PG qualification

experience higher level of career orientation than Ph.D qualified respondents. From the

Post Hoc analysis it is also observed that respondents having M.Phil qualification differ

significantly from the respondents having Ph.D qualification. The magnitude of the mean

value says that M.Phil qualified respondents experience higher levels of career

orientation than Ph.D qualified respondents. From this analysis it is found that, PG

qualified as well as M.Phil qualified respondents are having on an average same level of

career orientation.

Table 5.19

Post Hoc test Result of the Role Conflict Based on Qualification


Role conflict PG M.Phil 2.66114 0.477

Ph.D 6.66264* 0.047


Post-Hoc test analysis reveals that the PG qualified respondents differs

significantly in their opinion on level of role conflict they experience when compared to

the respondents having Ph.D qualification. The magnitude of the mean value says that

respondents having PG qualification experience higher level of role conflict than the

Ph.D qualified respondents. However M.Phil and Ph.D qualified respondents experience

on an average the same level of role conflict.


138

Table 5.20

Post Hoc Test Result of The Quality of Work Life Based on Qualification


Quality of work life Ph.D

PG 14.02692* 0.002

M.Phil 7.27090 0.253


From the Post Hoc analysis it is observed that Ph.D qualified respondents differ

significantly in their level of opinion on quality of work life than PG qualified

respondents. The magnitude of the mean value says that respondents with Ph.D

qualification experience high level of quality of work life than the respondents with PG

qualification. However M.Phil and Ph.D qualified respondents on an average experience

same level quality of work life.

Designation Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H08: Respondents having different designations have on an average same level of opinion

on job satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life.

Table 5.21

Mean Value of Constructs Based on Designation of the Respondents

Designation Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality of

Work Life

Assistant

professor

40.029 69.063 51.278 109.244

Associate

professor

41.410 67.461 49.897 113.871

Professor 44.461 63.307 45.307 110.615



139

Table 5.22

ANOVA Result of the Constructs Based on Designation of the Respondents

Constructs Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Job

satisfaction

Between

groups 286.713 2 143.357

2.696 0.069 Not

Significant Within

groups 15207.460 286 53.173

Total 15494.173 288

Career

orientation

Between

groups 465.488 2 232.744

2.044 0.131 Not

Significant Within

groups 32560.512 286 113.848

Total 33026.000 288

Role

conflict

Between

groups 478.021 2 239.010

0.916 0.401 Not

Significant Within

groups 74661.979 286 261.056

Total 75140.000 288

Quality of

work life

Between

groups 723.374 2 361.687

0.659 0.518 Not

Significant Within

groups 157067.242 286 549.186

Total 157790.616 288



ANOVA reveals that the significant value on all the constructs is more than 0.05,

the null hypothesis is accepted. It is concluded that respondents having different

designations, on an average have same level of opinion on the constructs job satisfaction,

career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life.


140

Monthly Income Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H09: Respondents belonging to various income groups have on an average same level of


Table 5.23

Mean Value of Constructs Based on Monthly Income of the Respondents

Income

(In Rs.)

Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality of

Work Life

Less than 15000 38.428 69.235 49.983 107.798

15000-40000 42.213 68.893 51.093 110.173

Above 40000 41.484 67.536 51.663 112.410


Table 5.24

ANOVA Result of the Constructs Based on the Monthly Income of the Respondents

Constructs Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Job

satisfaction

Between

groups 820.717 2 410.359


groups 14673.456 286 51.306

Total 15494.173 288

Career

orientation

Between

groups 161.821 2 80.910

0.704 0.495 Not

Significant Within

groups 32864.179 286 114.910

Total 33026.000 288


141

Constructs Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Role

conflict

Between

groups 156.466 2 78.233

0.298 0.742 Not

Significant Within

groups 74983.534 286 262.180

Total 75140.000 288

Quality of

work life

Between

groups 1129.720 2 564.860

1.031 0.358 Not

Significant Within

groups 156660.896 286 547.765

Total 157790.616 288



ANOVA reveals that except job satisfaction, on all other constructs the

respondents do not differ significantly in their opinion. The significant value of the

constructs career orientation, role conflicts, quality of work life is more than 0.05, the

null hypothesis accepted.


hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that respondents of different income groups

differ significantly in their opinion on the construct job satisfaction.

To find out which income group of respondents differs significantly from others,

post Hoc test is followed.


142

Table 5.25

Post Hoc Test Result of Job Satisfaction Based on Monthly Income

Construct Monthly Income (in Rs.) Mean Difference Sig.

Job

satisfaction

Rs. 15000-

40000

Less than 15000 3.78476* 0.001

Above 40000 0.72912 0.787

Above Rs.

40000

Less than 15000 3.05564* 0.006

15000-40000 -0.72912 0.787

*. The mean difference is significant at 5 per cent level.

From Post Hoc test analysis it is observed that respondents having income

between Rs.15000- 40000 differ significantly from the respondents having income less

than Rs.15000. The magnitude of the mean value says that respondents having income

between Rs.15000-40000 experience high level of job satisfaction than the respondents

having income less than Rs.15000.

It is also revealed from the Post Hoc test that respondents having income above

Rs.40000 differ significantly in their opinion on levels of job satisfaction from the

respondents earning less than Rs.15000. The magnitude of the mean value says that

respondents having income above Rs.40,000 experience higher level of job satisfaction

than the respondents earning less than Rs.15000.

Native Place Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H010: Respondents belonging to different native place groups have on an average


work life.


143

Table 5.26

Mean Value of Constructs Based on the Native Place of the Respondents

Native Place Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality of

Work Life

Village 41.0750 72.0000 52.8750 113.8000

Town 40.6364 67.4545 49.3939 108.0404

City 40.0933 68.4267 51.2200 110.1467


Table 5.27

ANOVA Result of the Constructs Based on the Native Place of the Respondents

Constructs Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Job

satisfaction

Between

groups 37.796 2 18.898

0.350 0.705 Not Significant Within

groups 15456.377 286 54.043

Total 15494.173 288

Career

orientation

Between

groups 596.761 2 298.381


groups 32429.239 286 113.389

Total 33026.000 288

Role

conflict

Between

groups 394.249 2 197.124


groups 74745.751 286 261.349

Total 75140.000 288

Quality of

work life

Between

groups 959.604 2 479.802


groups 156831.012 286 548.360

Total 157790.616 288




144

In the above table 5.27, the test of ANOVA reveals that the significant value of all

the constructs are more than 0.05, therefore the null hypothesis is accepted and it is

concluded that all the respondents belonging to different native place have on an average

same level of job satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life.

Family Size Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H011: Respondents belonging to various family size groups have on an average


work life.

Table 5.28

Mean Value of the Construct Based on the Family Size of the Respondents

Family Size Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality of

Work Life

Up to 3

members 41.785 66.928 49.806 113.336

4-5 members 40.085 69.120 51.170 109.219

Above 5

members 38.660 70.340 51.840 105.260



145

Table 5.29

ANOVA Result of the Constructs Based on Family Size of the Respondents

Constructs Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Job

satisfaction

Between

groups 353.474 2 176.737


groups 15140.699 286 52.940

Total 15494.173 288

Career

orientation

Between

groups 463.330 2 231.665

2.035 0.133 Not

Significant Within

groups 32562.670 286 113.855

Total 33026.000 288

Role

conflict

Between

groups 170.049 2 85.024

.324 0.723 Not

Significant Within

groups 74969.951 286 262.133

Total 75140.000 288

Quality of

work life

Between

groups 2298.924 2 1149.462

2.114 0.123 Not

Significant Within

groups 155491.692 286 543.677

Total 157790.616 288




146

In the table 5.29, the test of ANOVA reveals that except job satisfaction, the

respondents do not differ significantly in their opinion on all other constructs. In the case

of job satisfaction, the significant value is less than 0.05, the null hypothesis is rejected

and it is concluded that respondents belonging to various family size groups differ

significantly in their opinion on job satisfaction.

To find out which family size group differs significantly from others Post Hoc test

is followed.

Table 5.30

Post Hoc Test Result of the Job Satisfaction Based on Family Size

Construct Family Size Mean Difference Sig.

Job satisfaction Up to 3

members

3- 5 members 1.700 0.179

Above 5 members 3.125* 0.037


From Post Hoc analysis it is observed that respondents having family up to

3 members differ significantly from the respondents having family of more than

5 members. The magnitude of the mean value says that respondents having up to

3 members in their family experience higher level of job satisfaction than the respondents

having family of more than 5 members. However respondents having family with

3 - 5 members experience on an average same level of opinion on the job satisfaction.


147

Husband Occupation Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H012: Respondents belonging to various groups of husband occupation have on an

average same level of opinion on job satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and

quality of work life.

Table 5.31

Mean Value of Constructs Based on the Husband Occupation of the Respondents

Husbands’

occupation

Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality of

Work Life

No husband 40.764 63.882 46.588 110.058

Unemployed 52.500 70.500 35.500 132.000

Self employed 38.444 78.222 52.888 104.333

Business 38.419 68.354 49.354 108.774

Clerical 50.000 69.500 47.500 119.500

Technical 39.455 68.443 52.873 108.670

Professional 41.127 68.630 50.651 110.738



148

Table 5.32

ANOVA Result of the Constructs Based on Husband’s

Occupation of the Respondents

Constructs Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Job

satisfaction

Between

groups 784.671 2 130.779


groups 14709.502 286 52.161

Total 15494.173 288

Career

orientation

Between

groups 1224.391 2 204.065

1.810 0.097 Not

significant Within

groups 31801.609 286 112.772

Total 33026.000 288

Role

conflict

Between

groups 1238.310 2 206.385

0.788 0.580 Not

significant Within

groups 73901.690 286 262.063

Total 75140.000 288

Quality of

work life

Between

groups 1703.520 2 283.920

0.513 0.798 Not

significant Within

groups 156087.096 286 553.500

Total 157790.616 288




149

In the table 5.32, the test of ANOVA reveals that except job satisfaction, on all

other constructs the respondents do not differ significantly in their opinion.


hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that the respondent‘s opinion on job satisfaction

differs significantly based on their husband occupation.

To find out which group differ significantly from others Post Hoc Test is followed.

Though ANOVA says there is difference between the groups in their opinion on

job satisfaction, Post Hoc reveals that the difference is not that much significant to

discuss further.

Income from Other Family Members versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H013: Respondents belonging to different groups of respondents having income from

other family members, have on an average same level of opinion on job satisfaction,

career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life.

Table 5.33

Mean Value of the Constructs Based on Income from Other

Family Members of the Respondents

Income of

other Family

Members

(in Rs.)

Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality of

Work Life

Up to 20000 39.744 67.311 52.244 109.844

20000 - 50000 40.910 68.504 51.650 109.439

Above 50000 40.407 70.236 47.802 110.828



150

Table 5.34

ANOVA Result of the Constructs Based on Income from Other

Family Members of the Respondents

Construct Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Job

satisfaction

Between

groups 70.679 2 35.340

0.655 0.520 Not

Significant Within

groups 15423.494 286 53.928

Total 15494.173 288

Career

orientation

Between

groups 354.226 2 177.113

1.550 0.214 Not

Significant Within

groups 32671.774 286 114.237

Total 33026.000 288

Role

conflict

Between

groups 959.371 2 479.685

1.849 0.159 Not

Significant Within

groups 74180.629 286 259.373

Total 75140.000 288

Quality of

work life

Between

groups 91.725 2 45.862

0.083 0.920 Not

Significant Within

groups 157698.891 286 551.395

Total 157790.616 288




151

In the above table 5.34, the test of ANOVA shows that the significant value is

more than 0.05, in all the constructs. Therefore the null hypothesis is accepted and it is

concluded that the respondents do not differ significantly in their opinion on the level of

job satisfaction, career orientation, role conflict and quality of work life.

Previous Work Experience Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H014: Respondents belonging to various groups of previous job experience have on an



Table 5.35

Mean Value of Constructs Based on Previous Job Experience of the Respondents

Previous Job

Experience

(in years)

Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality of

Work Life

Zero 39.857 70.532 51.409 108.039

Upto 4 40.138 67.250 50.416 111.152

Above 4 42.000 65.639 49.754 112.901



152

Table 5.36

ANOVA Result of the Constructs Based on the

Previous Job Experience of the Respondents

Constructs Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Job

satisfaction

Between

groups 206.371 2 103.186

1.948 0.144 Not

Significant Within

groups 15045.468 286 52.977

Total 15251.840 288

Career

orientation

Between

groups 1239.651 2 619.825


groups 31177.903 286 109.781

Total 32417.554 288

Role

conflict

Between

groups 134.421 2 67.211

0.257 0.774 Not

Significant Within

groups 74274.039 286 261.528

Total 74408.460 288

Quality of

work life

Between

groups 1195.358 2 597.679

1.086 0.339 Not

Significant Within

groups 156330.496 286 550.459

157525.854 288



In the above table, the test of ANOVA reveals that except career orientation, on

all other constructs the respondents do not differ significantly in their opinion. In the case

of career orientation, the significant value of the construct is less than 0.05. Hence, the


153

null hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that the respondents differ significantly in

their opinion on the construct career orientation.

To find out which group differs significantly from others, Post Hoc test is followed.

Table 5.37

Post Hoc test Result of the Career Orientation Based on Previous Work Experience

Construct

Previous Work

Experience

(In years)

Mean Difference Sig.

Career orientation Zero Up to 4 3.28247 0.074

Above 4 4.89312* 0.006


From the Post Hoc test analysis in the table 5.37, it is observed that respondents

without previous experience in job differ significantly from the other two groups who are

having previous work experience of up to 4 years and above 4 years. The magnitude of

the mean value says that respondents who are not having previous work experience, have

high level of career orientation than the respondents having previous work experience of

more than 4 years. However the respondents having previous work experience between

1 to 4 years are having same level of career orientation as the respondents who are

without any previous experience.

Current Work Experience Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H015: Respondents belonging to various groups of current job experience have on an




154

Table 5.38

Mean Value of Constructs Based on the Current Work Experience

of the Respondents

Current Work

Experience

Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality of

Work Life

Up to 5 years 39.141 68.116 51.938 109.417

5 - 12 years 43.147 70.558 50.147 110.411

Above 12 years 40.793 67.603 48.482 110.810


Table 5.39

ANOVA result of the constructs based on the current

work experience of the respondents

Constructs Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Job

satisfaction

Between

groups 780.372 2 390.186


groups 14713.801 286 51.447

Total 15494.173 288

Career

orientation

Between

groups 356.571 2 178.285

1.561 .0212 Not

Significant Within

groups 32669.429 286 114.229

Total 33026.000 288

Role

conflict

Between

groups 551.601 2 275.801

1.058 0.349 Not

Significant Within

groups 74588.399 286 260.799

Total 75140.000 288

Quality of

work life

Between

groups 103.600 2 51.800

.094 0.910 Not

Significant Within

groups 157687.016 286 551.353

Total 157790.616 288




155

In the above table 5.39, test of ANOVA reveals that except on job satisfaction, on

all other constructs the respondents do not differ significantly in their opinion.

In the case of Job satisfaction, the significant value is less than 0.05, the null

hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that respondents belonging to different groups

of current work experience differ significantly in their opinion on job satisfaction.

To find out which group of current work experience differ significantly from

others Post Hoc test is followed.

Table 5.40

Post Hoc Test Result of the Job Satisfaction Based on Current Work Experience

Construct Current Job Experience

(in years) Mean Difference Sig.

Job satisfaction 5-12 years Up to 5 years 4.005

* 0.000

Above 12 years 2.353 0.160

*The mean difference is significant at 5 per cent level.

From the Post Hoc test analysis it is observed that respondents having 5-12 years of

current work experience differ significantly from the other group having current work

experience of up to 5 years. The magnitude of the mean value says that respondents having

5-12 years of current work experience, experience high level of job satisfaction than the

respondents having current work experience of up to 5 years of experience. However

respondents having more than 12 years of current work experience have the same level of job

satisfaction as the respondents having 5-12 years of current work experience.


156

Districts Versus Level of Opinion on Constructs

H016: Respondents belonging to various district groups have on an average same level of


Table 5.41

Mean Value of Constructs Based on District of the Respondents

Districts Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality of

Work Life

Mysore 40.664 68.942 47.107 110.757

Mandya 43.333 69.156 58.333 121.686

Hassan 41.090 68.022 47.750 113.772

Chamarajanagara 36.463 67.592 55.870 93.555


Table 5.42

ANOVA Result of the Constructs Based on the District of the Respondents

Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Job

satisfaction

Between

groups 1306.556 3 435.519


groups 14187.617 285 49.781

Total 15494.173 288

Career

orientation

Between

groups 101.698 3 33.899

0.293 0.830 Not significant Within

groups 32924.302 285 115.524

Total 33026.000 288


157

Sum of

Squares DF

Mean


Role

conflict

Between

groups 6600.931 3 2200.310


groups 68539.069 285 240.488

Total 75140.000 288

Quality of

work life

Between

groups 22272.832 3 7424.277


groups 135517.784 285 475.501

Total 157790.616 288



ANOVA reveals that except career orientation, the significant value is less than

0.05 in all other constructs, the null hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that

respondents belonging to different districts differ significantly in their opinion on job

satisfaction, role conflict and quality of work life.

In the case of career orientation, the respondents do not differ significantly in their

opinion.

To find out which group of districts differ significantly from others Post Hoc test

is followed.


158

Table 5.43

Post Hoc Test Result of the Job Satisfaction Based on Districts

Construct District Mean Difference Sig.

Job

satisfaction

Mysore

Mandya -2.669 0.097

Hassan -0.426 0.985

Chamarajanagara 4.201* 0.001

Mandya

Mysore 2.669 0.097

Hassan 2.242 0.412


Hassan

Mysore 0.426 0.985

Mandya -2.242 0.412

Chamarajanagar 4.627* 0.008


From the Post Hoc test, it is observed that respondents belonging to Mysore,

Mandya and Hassan districts differ significantly from the respondents residing in

Chamarajanagar district. The magnitude of the mean value says that the respondents from

Mysore, Mandya and Hassan experiences higher level of job satisfaction than the

respondents from Chamarajanagar.

Table 5.44

Post Hoc Test Result of the Role Conflict Based on Districts

Construct District Mean Difference Sig.

Role conflict

Mandya

Mysore 11.226* 0.000

Hassan 10.583* 0.006

Chamarajanagar 2.462 0.848

Chamarajanagar

Mysore 8.763* 0.003

Mandya -2.462 0.848

Hassan 8.120 0.051



159

From the Post Hoc test it is observed that respondents belonging to Mandya and

Chamarajanagar districts differ significantly from the respondents residing in Mysore and

Hassan district. The magnitude of the mean value says that the respondents from Mandya

and Chamarajanagar experience higher level of role conflict than the respondents from

Mysore and Hassan district.

Table 5.45

Post Hoc Test Result of the Quality of Work Life Based on Districts

Construct Districts Mean Difference Sig.

Quality of

work life

Mysore

Mandya -10.929* 0.013

Hassan -3.015 0.854


Mandya

Mysore 10.929* 0.013

Hassan 7.913 0.293


Hassan

Mysore 3.0155 0.854

Mandya -7.913 0.293



From the Post Hoc test it is observed that respondents belonging to Mysore,

Mandya and Hassan districts differ significantly from the respondents residing in

Chamarajanagara district. The magnitude of the mean value says that the respondents

from Mysore, Mandya and Hassan districts experience higher level of quality of work life

than the respondents from Chamarajanagara. The Chamarajanagara District is the most

backward district in Karnataka State and that may be the contributing factor for low

quality of life among the participants from that district, as there are no access to modern

amenities like it is available in cities.


160

5.5. Factor Analysis

Factor analysis is applied to reduce the complexity of data. A phenomenon may

be influenced by several items. But which particular item will significantly influence,

may be difficult to study. So to reduce the number of items, factor analysis can be

effectively applied.

5.5.1 Factor Analysis on Job satisfaction

Job satisfaction consists of fifteen items. Influence of the items on quality of work life

may be difficult to study; hence to reduce them into few components factor analysis used.

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure (KMO) and Bartlett's Test

To find out whether the data is fit to apply factor analysis K M O and Bartlett's

test is applied on the data.

Table 5.46

KMO and Bartlett's Test on the Construct Job Satisfaction

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. 0.876

Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 1652.596

Degrees of Freedom 105

Sig. 0.000


Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy test value is closer to

1 indicates the sample size is sufficient for applying factor analysis.


161

The Bartlett‘s test of Sphericity ensures overall significance of the correlations in

correlation matrices. The Chi-square significance ensures the significance of correlations.

Hence the test approves the application of factor analysis to the data.

The following is rotated component obtained from factor analysis

Table 5.47

Rotated Component Matrix of Job Satisfaction

Items Component

1 2

The way Employees help one another 0.757 -0.050

The way this college is managed 0.748 0.028

The attention paid to suggestions you make 0.744 0.078

The information you get to do your job 0.736 -0.059

The working conditions here 0.682 0.207

The attention paid to your opinion 0.638 0.194

The teamwork between Employees and other staff 0.627 0.289

The amount of responsibility you have 0.619 0.132

The recognition you get for your work 0.569 0.470

The supplies you use on the job 0.523 0.314

The feedback you get about how well you do your job 0.516 0.255

Amount of variety in your job 0.512 0.316

Your job security 0.026 0.839

Your pay 0.020 0.830

Your fringe benefits 0.220 0.668



162

The items given below are named as WORKING ENVIRONMENT for further

analysis.

1. The way the employee helps one another,

2. The way this college is managed,

3. The attention paid to suggestions you make,

4. The information you get to do your job,

5. The working conditions here,

6. The attention paid to your opinion,

7. The teamwork between Employees and other staff,

8. The amount of responsibility,

9. The recognition you get for your work,

10. The supplies you use on the job,

11. The feedback you get about how well you do your job,

12. Amount of variety in your job,

The items given below are named as MONETARY BENEFIT AND SECURITY

for further analysis

1. Job security,

2. Pay and fringe benefits.

To find the mutual inter relationship between the factors such as pay & security,

working environment and the construct quality of work life, correlation analysis was

adopted. The table 5.47 shows the result of correlation analysis.


163

Table 5.48

Correlation Between Factors of Job Satisfaction and Quality of Work Life

Pay and

Security

Working

Environment

Quality of

Work Life

Pay and security

Pearson Correlation 1 0.345**

0.187**

Sig. (2-tailed 0.000 0.001

N 289 289 289

Working

environment

Pearson Correlation 0.345**

1 0.524**

Sig. (2-tailed 0.000 0.000

N 289 289 289

Quality of work

life

Pearson Correlation 0.187**

0.524**

1

Sig. (2-tailed 0.001 0.000

N 289 289 289

** Correlation significant at 1 per cent level (2-tailed)


The correlation analysis reveals that the two factors of job satisfaction i.e.

working environment and pay & security positively and significantly correlated (.345).

Since these two factors influence each other, to find out how these two factors influence

on quality of work life, the path analysis concept was used. Path analysis gives the

following result.


164

Figure 3 : Path analysis of Quality of Work Life and Job Satisfaction Factors

The path equation is QWL = 0.01 (pay and security) + 0.52 (working environment)

From the path analysis it is understood that taking the impact of pay and security

(0.34), working environment influences on quality of work life more (0.52). Working

environment has more influence on the teachers than monetary benefit and security of the

job. Working environment has positive impact on the quality of work life. The result

shows that when women teachers are satisfied with the working environment, their

quality of work life increases.


165

5.5.2 Factor Analysis of Career Orientation

Career orientation consists of 22 items. Influence of the items on quality of work life

may be difficult to study. So to reduce them into few components factor analysis is used.

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure (KMO) and Bartlett's Test

To find out whether the data is fit to apply factor analysis K M O test is applied

on the data.

Table 5.49

KMO and Bartlett's Test on the Construct Career Orientation

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. 0.735


Degrees of freedom 231

Sig. 0.000


Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy test value is closer to

1 indicates the sample size is sufficient for applying factor analysis.

The Bartlett‘s test of Sphericity ensures overall significance of the correlations in

correlation matrices. The Chi-square significance ensures the significance of correlations.

Hence the test approves the application of factor analysis to the data.

The following is the rotated component obtained from factor analysis


166

Table 5.50

Rotated Component Matrix for Career Orientation

Items Component

1 2 3 4

I would give up my job if I feel that it is

interfering with my family life. 0.664 0.215 -0.240 -0.211

A good housewife pays greater importance to

family life than career 0.637 0.078 -0.066 -0.029

Women are made to make home. 0.545 -0.086 0.166 -0.041

Housewives are more fulfilled and satisfied than

working women. 0.542 0.102 0.429 -0.066

A woman‘s proper place is in the home 0.523 0.189 0.243 0.114

Unless it is absolutely necessary, women should

restrict their activities to home. 0.516 -0.032 0.452 -0.236

A woman is most secure and safe at home only. 0.472 0.391 0.278 0.092

A woman should have the same job opportunities

as a man has. 0.470 0.023 -0.131 .036

I would like to help my husband in his career

rather than having a career of my own. 0.124 0.740 0.116 -0.008

Woman‘s employment comes in the way of

family‘s happiness. -0.211 0.723 0.159 -0.045

For a woman, life divided between house and

employment comes in the way of family‘s

happiness.

0.001 0.716 0.194 -0.244

Having a family is more important to me than

having a career. 0.495 0.528 0.064 .098

A woman‘s most important task in life should be

taking care of her family. 0.347 0.485 -0.062 0.061

A woman who takes up a career becomes

incompetent to run a home 0.229 0.457 0.325 0.146

Today career plays an important role in the life of

a woman. 0.010 0.452 -0.207 -0.087


167

Items Component

Compared to a housewife, a working mother cannot

establish cordial relationship with her children. 0.043 0.161 0.723 0.005

Mother‘s career will affect proper upbringing of

children. 0.143 0.144 0.698 0.008

Family responsibilities are so heavy that a

woman cannot take up a career. 0.088 0.029 0.668 -0.055

Women should rather be concerned with their

household duties than with their career. 0.157 0.405 0.624 -0.100

A working mother can be as good as the one who

stays at home. -0.011 0.017 -0.031 0.879

A working woman can be as good a wife as the

one who stays at home. 0.014 -0.039 0.004 0.867

Women are as competent as men in making

successful career -0.272 -0.089 -0.052 0.563


The items given below are named as FAMILY ORIENTATION for further

analysis,

1. I would give up my job if I feel that it is interfering my family life

2. A good house wife pays greater importance to family life than her career

3. Women are made to make home

4. Housewives are more fulfilled and satisfied than working women

5. A woman‘s proper place is in the home

6. Unless it is absolutely necessary, women should restrict their activities to home

7. A woman is most secure and safe at home only

8. A woman should have the same job opportunity as a man has.


168

The items given below are named as DUAL ORIENTATION for further analyses.

1. I would like to help my husband in his career rather than having a career

of my own,

2. Women‘s employment comes in the way of family‘s happiness

3. For a woman, life divided between house and employment comes in the

way of family‘s happiness

4. Having a family is more important to me than having a career

5. A woman‘s most important task in life should be taking care of her family

6. Woman who takes up a career becomes incompetent to run a home

7. Today, career plays an important role in the life of a woman

The items given below are named as CHILDREN ORIENTATION for further analysis.

1. Compared to a housewife, a working mother cannot establish cordial

relationship with her children

2. Mother‘s career will affect proper upbringing of children

3. Family responsibilities are so heavy that a woman cannot take up a career

4. Women should rather be concerned with their household duties than their

career

The items given below are named as CAREER COMPETENCY for further analysis.

1. A working mother can be as good as the one who stays at home

2. A working woman can be as good a wife as the one who stays at home

3. Women are as competent as men in making successful career.


169

To find the mutual inter relationship between the factors such as family

orientation, dual orientation, children orientation, career orientation and the construct

quality of work life, correlation analysis was adopted. The following table shows the

result of correlation analysis.

Table 5.51

Correlation Between Factors of Career Orientation and Quality of Work Life

Constructs

Quality

of Work

Life

Family

Orientation

Dual

Orientation

Child

Orientation

Career

Competence

Quality of

work life

Pearson

Correlation 1 -0.078 -0.215

** -0.174

** 0.079

Sig. (2-tailed 0.185 0.000 0.003 0.181

N 289 289 289 289 289

Family

Orientation

Pearson

Correlation -0.078 1 0.420

** 0.403

** -0.155

**

Sig. (2-tailed .185 0.000 0.000 0.008

N 289 289 289 289 289

Dual

orientation

Pearson

Correlation -0.215

** 0.420

** 1 .404

** -0.085

Sig. (2-tailed 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.148

N 289 289 289 289 289

Child

Orientation

Pearson

Correlation -0.174

** 0.403

** 0.404

** 1 -0.083

Sig. (2-tailed 0.003 0.000 0.000 0.160

N 289 289 289 289 289

Career

competence

Pearson

Correlation 0.079 -0.155

** -0.085 -0.083 1

Sig. (2-tailed 0.181 0.008 0.148 0.160

N 289 289 289 289 289




170

The correlation analysis reveals that all the factors of career orientation i.e. family

orientation, dual orientation, child orientation and career competency are correlated each

other. Since these four factors influence each other, to find out how these four factors

influence on quality of work life, the path analysis concept is used. Path analysis gives

the following result.

Figure 4: Path Analysis of Quality of Work Life and Career Orientation Factors

The path equation is,

Quality of work life = 0.06 (family orientation) – 0.19 (Dual orientation)

Another path that influences on quality of work life is,

Quality of work life = -0.12 (child orientation) – 0.19 (Dual orientation)


171

From the path analysis it is understood that taking the impact of family

orientation, dual orientation negatively influences quality of work life more. Also by

taking the impact of child orientation, dual orientation negatively influences quality of

work life. From the analysis it is concluded that dual orientation of women teachers has

more influence on the quality of work life. It is found that when married women teachers

orientation as career women and family is more, their quality of work life decreases. It is

also observed that when the women teachers‘ dual orientation is less, their quality of

work life increases.

5.5.3 Factor Analysis of Role Conflict

Role conflict consists of seventeen items. Influence of the items on quality of

work life may be difficult to study. So to reduce them into few components, factor

analysis used.

KMO and Bartlett's Test: To find out whether the data is fit to apply factor analysis,

KMO and Bartlett‘s test is applied on the data.

Table 5.52

KMO and Bartlett's Test on the Construct Role Conflict

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy 0.931


Degrees of freedom 136

Sig. 0.000


The above KMO test approves the application of factor analysis to the data.


172

The following is the rotated component obtained from factor analysis.

Table 5.53

Rotated Component Matrix for Role Conflict

Items Component

1 2 3

I find it difficult to maintain the house. 0.814 0.116 0.332

I find it difficult to establish cordial relationship with

other family members 0.795 0.208 0.204

I find it difficult to establish cordial relationship with

children 0.775 0.241 0.291

I find it difficult to take care of the health of the family

members 0.747 0.358 0.110

I find it difficult to maintain social relations with relatives

and friends 0.720 0.241 0.067

I find it difficult to establish cordial relationship with my

husband 0.686 0.377 0.129

I find it difficult to take care of the elderly in the family 0.616 0.401 0.324

I find it difficult to help children‘s learning 0.146 0.810 0.122

I find it difficult to take care of children‘s basic needs

such as feeding and dressing 0.205 0.769 0.366

I find it difficult to help children in learning 0.382 0.753 0.090

I find it difficult to take care of children‘s emotional

needs 0.359 0.679 0.218

I find it difficult to take care of my husband‘s personal

needs 0.554 0.573 0.092

I find it difficult to take care of children‘s health 0.487 0.571 0.220

I find it difficult to provide recreation to children 0.514 0.524 0.135

I find it difficult to clean the vessels and utensils 0.250 0.021 0.821

I find it difficult to get dresses ready for the family

members 0.107 0.409 0.679

I find it difficult to prepare food to the satisfaction of my

family 0.336 0.433 0.571



173

The items given below are named as FAMILY RESPONSIBILITY for further analysis.

1. I find it difficult maintain the house,

2. I find it difficult to establish cordial relationship with other family members,

3. I find it difficult to establish cordial relationship with children,

4. I find it difficult to take care of the health of the family members,

5. I find it difficult to maintain social relations with relatives and friends,

6. I find it difficult to establish cordial relationship with my husband,

7. I find it difficult to take care of the elderly in the family,

The items given below are named as RESPONSIBILITY AS MOTHER AND

WIFE for further analysis.

1. I find it difficult to help children‘s learning

2. I find it difficult to take care of children‘s basic needs such as feeding and dressing

3. I find it difficult to help children in learning

4. I find it difficult to take care of children‘s emotional needs

5. I find it difficult to take care of my husband‘s personal needs

6. I find it difficult to rake care of children‘s health

7. I find it difficult to provide recreation to children


174

The items given below are named as HOUSE HOLD RESPONSIBILITY for

further analysis.

1. I find it difficult to clean the vessels and utensils

2. I find it difficult to get dresses ready for the family members

3. I find it difficult to prepare food to the satisfaction of my family

To find the mutual interrelationship between the factors such as family

responsibility, responsibility as mother and wife, house hold responsibility and the

construct quality of work life, correlation analysis was adopted. The following table

shows the result of correlation analysis.

Table 5.54

Correlation Between Factors of Role Conflict and Quality of Work Life

Quality

of Work

Life

Family

Responsibility

Responsibility

as Wife and

Mother

House Hold

Responsibility

Quality of

work life

Pearson

Correlation 1 -0.264** -0.238** -0.028

Sig. (2-tailed 0.000 0.000 0.630

N 289 289 289 289

Family

responsibility

Pearson

Correlation -0.264** 1 0.757** 0.602**

Sig. (2-tailed 0.000 0.000 0.000

N 289 289 289 289

Responsibility

as wife and

mother

Pearson

Correlation -0.238** 0.757** 1 0.626**

Sig. (2-tailed 0.000 0.000 0.000

N 289 289 289 289

House hold

responsibility

Pearson

Correlation -0.028 0.602** 0.626** 1

Sig. (2-tailed 0.630 0.000 0.000

N 289 289 289 289




175

The correlation analysis reveals that all the factors of role conflict i.e. family

responsibility, responsibility as wife, mother and house hold responsibilities are

correlated to each other. Since these four factors influences each other to find out how

these four factors influence on quality of work life, the path analysis concept is used.

Since these factors significant to each other, Path analysis gives the following result.

Figure 5. Path Analysis of Quality of Work Life and Factors of Role Conflict


176

The path equation is

Quality of work life = -0.27 (family responsibility) -0.19 (role as wife and mother)

Another path that influences on quality of work life is,

Quality of work life = -0.27(family responsibility) + 0.26 (house hold)

From the path analysis it is understood that taking the impact of family

responsibility, women‘s role as wife and mother negatively influences quality of work

life. Also by taking the impact of family responsibility, house hold responsibility

influences positively on quality of work life. It is clear from the analysis that when the

women teachers give more importance to the role of mother and wife their quality of

work life decreases. Also it is concluded that when the women teachers are performing

well about their family responsibility and able to manage house hold responsibilities,

their quality of work life will increases. The women teachers when they are not able to

manage their role as mother and wife and the houses hold responsibility; their quality of

work life decreases.


177

5.6. Testing of Conceptual Model

5.6.1. Correlation Analysis

The concept correlation helps to find the mutual interdependence between the

variables. As the researcher is interested in find out relationship between the constructs

under study and the impact of role conflict on quality of work life the correlation analysis

was used initially.

Table 5.55

Correlation Between Constructs

Constructs Job

Satisfaction

Career

Orientation

Role

Conflict

Quality Of

Work Life

Job Satisfaction

Pearson

Correlation 1 -0.164** -.240** 0.501**

Sig. (2-tailed) .005 .000 .000

Career

Orientation

Pearson

Correlation -0.164** 1 0.366** -0.182**

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.005 0.000 0.002

Role Conflict

Pearson

Correlation -0.240** 0.366** 1 -0.236**

Sig. (2-tailed) 0.000 0.000 0.000

Quality Of

Work Life

Pearson

Correlation 0.501** -0.182** -0.236** 1

Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .002 .000

**. Correlation is significant at 1 per cent level (2-tailed).



178

From the above correlation analysis it is found that all constructs are significantly

related to each other. Job satisfaction is negatively and significantly correlated with

career orientation and role conflict. Also Job satisfaction is positively and significantly

correlated with quality of work life. Career orientation is positively and significantly

related to role conflict. Also career orientation and quality of work life are negatively and

significantly related to each other. The construct role conflict is negatively and

significantly related to quality of work life. All the constructs are significantly related

with each other. To find out the impact of the constructs such as job satisfaction, career

orientation and role conflict on quality of work life SEM approach is followed.

The constructs, job satisfaction, career orientation and role conflict are taken as

independent variables and the quality of work life is taken as dependent variable.

5.6.2. Structural Equation Model (SEM)

Structural equation model can examine a series of dependence relationships

simultaneously. It is particularly useful in testing the multi equations involving

dependence relationship. Among several variables under study one may be a dependent

variable at one stage and the same may be an independent variable at next stage. To study

and establish this kind of relationships SEM concept is used.

In this study also the correlation analysis reveals inter relationship between the

dependent variables. Hence the following path analysis is established.


179

Figure 6: Path Analysis of Constructs


180

Table 5.56

Model Goodness of Fit Statistics

Goodness of fit statistics Values

Independence AIC 158.93

Model AIC 20.00

Normated Fit Index 0.810

Comparative Fit Index 0.799

Incremental Fit Index 0.838

Relative Fit Index 0.814

Root mean square

Error Approximation 0.121

Goodness of Fit Index 0.817

Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index 0.797

Sources: Primary data

All goodness of fit indices satisfies the test criteria and ensures the model fit.

From the model it is concluded the following,

Constructs job satisfaction and career orientation are negatively correlated.

Constructs job satisfaction and role conflict are negatively correlated and career

orientation and role conflict are positively correlated. Taking the impact of career

orientation, the job satisfaction is highly influence on quality of work life. Though career

orientation and role conflict are positively correlated, taking the impact on the other does

not influence quality of work life positively. So quality of work life of married women

faculty employed in affiliated colleges is highly influenced by job satisfaction taking the

impact of career orientation.


181

The correlation analysis reveals that the role conflict and quality of work life is

negatively correlated (-.236). Again from the path analysis it is revealed that, by taking

the impact of job satisfaction and career orientation, role conflict influences the quality of

work life negatively. Though career orientation and role conflict are positively correlated,

taking the impact of career orientation, role conflict influences quality of work life

negatively.

Hence it is concluded that the different roles of mother, wife and employee affect

the quality of work life of women teachers with at least one child in the affiliated colleges

of University of Mysore.


job satisfaction career orientation, role conflict and...

Documents