Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 12.919
a

df 12 12 1

sided) .375 .256 .242

14.744 1.369 30

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases expected count is .23. Since the value of p is greater than 0.05 therefore null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted i.e. gender and customer and commitment are independent and they have no significant relationship. 12.919
a

df 12 12 1

sided) .375 .256 .242

14.744 1.369 30

Age and commitment

Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 30 30.408
a

df 24 24 1

sided) .172 .207 .168

29.360 1.898

a. 38 cells (97.4%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07. Since the value of p is greater than 0.05 therefore null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted i.e. gender and commitment are independent and they have no significant relationship.

Educational Qualification and commavg

Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 11.644
a

df 12 12 1

sided) .475 .196 .146

15.902 2.112 30

a. 26 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .50.

gender * satavg

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 9.193
a

df 12 12 1

sided) .686 .584 .775

10.361 .081 30

a. 25 cells (96.2%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .23.

Since the value of p is greater than 0.05 therefore null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted i.e. gender and satisfaction are independent and they have no significant relationship.

age * satavg

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 22.580
a

df 24 24 1

sided) .545 .380 .887

25.483 .020 30

a. 38 cells (97.4%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .07.

Since the value of p is greater than 0.05 therefore null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted i.e. age and satisfaction are independent and they have no significant relationship.

educational qualification * satavg

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 11.778
a

df 12 12 1

sided) .464 .189 .659

16.040 .195 30

a. 26 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .50.

Since the value of p is greater than 0.05 therefore null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted i.e. educational qualification and satisfaction are independent and they have no significant relationship.

gender * coerciveavg

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 9.224
a

df 14 14 1

sided) .816 .689 .708

10.957 .140 30

a. 30 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .23.

Since the value of p is greater than 0.05 therefore null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted i.e. gender and coercivebase of powee are independent and they have no significant relationship.

educational qualification * coerciveavg

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 12.533
a

df 14 14 1

sided) .564 .284 .802

16.497 .063 30

a. 30 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .50.

Since the value of p is greater than 0.05 therefore null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted i.e. educational qualification and coercive base of power are independent and they have no significant relationship.

gender * persuasiveavg

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 16.491
a

df 16 16 1

sided) .419 .283 .739

18.733 .111 30

a. 34 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .23.

Since the value of p is greater than 0.05 therefore null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted i.e. gender and persuasive base of power are independent and they have no significant relationship.

age * persuasiveavg

Chi-Square Tests Asymp. Sig. (2Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases a. 13.333
a

df 16 16 1

sided) .648 .303 .708

18.362 .140 30

34 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .50.

Since the value of p is greater than 0.05 therefore null hypothesis is rejected and alternate hypothesis is accepted i.e. age and persuasive base of power are independent and they have no significant relationship.

Correlation
Correlations commavg Spearman's rho commavg Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N 1.000 . 30 satavg .379
*

coerciveavg .393
*

persuasiveavg .314 .091 30

.039 30

.031 30

satavg

Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N

.379

1.000 . 30 .751
**

.751

**

.844

**

.039 30 .393
*

.000 30 1.000 . 30 .853

.000 30 .853
**

coerciveavg

Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N

.031 30 .314 .091 30

.000 30 .844
**

.000 30 1.000 . 30

persuasiveavg

Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N

.000 30

.000 30

*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed). **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

There is significant relationship between employers commitment and employers satisfaction because value of p is
less than 0.05.

There is significant relationship between employers commitment and use of coercive base of power because value
of p is less than 0.05.

There is significant relationship between employers commitment and persuasive base of power because value of p
is less than 0.05.

There is significant relationship between coercive bases of power and employers satisfaction because value of p is
less than 0.05.

There is significant relationship between employers commitment and employers satisfaction because value of p is
less than 0.05.

Regression

Commitment
Variables in the Equation B Step 1
a

S.E. .617 .390 1.537 1.413 2.459

Wald .161 .076 1.969

df 1 1 1

Sig. .688 .783 .161

Exp(B) 1.854 1.477 .032

coerciveavg persuasiveavg Constant

-3.451

a. Variable(s) entered on step 1: coerciveavg, persuasiveavg.

With the use of persuasive base of power employers commitment increase by 1.854 times. With the use of persuasive base of power employers commitment increase by 1.477times.

 Our equation is log (y/1-y)= -3.451+ 0.617x1+0.390X2. where y stands for employers commitment , x1 stands for
coercive bases of power and x2 stands for persuasive bases of power. Satisfaction

Variables in the Equation B Step 1

S.E. 3.131 4.343 8.583

Wald 1.170 4.362 5.544

df 1 1 1

Sig. .279 .037 .019

Exp(B) .034 8.691 .000

coerciveavg persuasiveavg Constant

-3.386 9.071 -20.209

a. Variable(s) entered on step 1: coerciveavg, persuasiveavg.

With the use of persuasive base of power employers satisfaction increase by 0.034 times. With the use of persuasive base of power employers satisfaction increase by 8.691times. Our equation is log (y/1-y)= -20.209- 3.386X1+9.071X2. where y stands for employers satisfaction , x1 stands for
coercive bases of power and x2 stands for persuasive bases of power.

Conclusion and findings Our first hypothesis got rejected because through chi- square test we found that there is not any significant relationship between demographic variables and employee satisfaction and commitment i.e. there are not any significant differences between managers use of power, organisational commitment, and job satisfaction level, by types of bank, gender, age, and education level in state bank of India. Our second hypotheses got accepted because through spearmans correlation and regression test we found that Managers use of power and significantly determine employees organisational commitment level in state bank of india. Our third hypotheses also got accepted because through spearman correlation and binary logistic regression there is a significant relationship between managers use of power and with employees job satisfaction level in state bank of India. Persuasive bases of power generate more satisfaction than coercive base of power because correlation between persuasive base and satisfaction is 0.844 while correlation between coercive base and satisfaction is 0.757 and further regression equation proves it. Coercive bases of power generate more commitment than persuasive base of power because correlation between persuasive base and satisfaction is 0.314 while correlation between coercive base and satisfaction is 0.393 and further regression equation proves it.

The results of the present study provide some insight into how the management of STATE BANK OF INDIA can enhance their employees commitment and job satisfaction levels. To improve managers use of power, , and their relationships with employees commitment and job satisfaction in STATE BANK OF INDIAs in Chandigarh, there have to be changes at the individual and organisational levels. First at the individual level, improving managers expert power would involve basic education and specific job-related training. Managers should also be encouraged to enhance their skills through continuous self-learning. They might also need appropriate job experience to build on this power base. From the quantitative findings, it was revealed that a referent power base was more effective than other power bases in influencing criterion variables. Managers who are deficient in this power base may need to be provided with human relations training. This may enable them to learn to be empathetic to the employees needs and feelings, be able to treat them fairly and ethically, and present their interests to the higher authority when there is a need to do so. Mossholder et al. (1998) suggested that managers need emotional competence training which should focus on the competencies needed most for excellence in a given job or role which should significantly enhance a managers base of referent power. Rahim, Antonioni, and Psenicka

(2001) noted that as managers increase their expert and referent power bases, they would be more efficient in using their legitimate power base.

Chapter 9: Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

228

Second at the organisational level, top management should provide appropriate reinforcement for managers in learning and improving their referent and expert power bases. Recent literature shows that learning organisations are providing ample opportunities to managers for continuous learning to improve managers expert power base. Education and training may be of limited value when it comes to improving referent power base. It may be more appropriate for the management of STATE BANK OF INDIAs to adopt a policy of recruiting managers with vision and charisma who are likely to bring an adequate referent power base. STATE BANK OF INDIAs management may find it useful to establish both formal and informal training procedures that encourage managers in developing power bases that positively affect employees perceptions. In this regard, Keys and Case (1990) suggest that skillsbased power reflecting qualities associated with referent and expert power base may be crucial in sustaining influence. Current appointed or promoted managers of STATE BANK OF INDIAs are more efficient than the former managers. The management should strictly maintain this policy that only efficient employees would be appointed as managers.

For Future Research

Finally, this study raises a number of questions which should be emphasised in future research. First, the relationships discussed in this study were correlational, not causal. Experimental studies are needed to investigate causal links between the bases of managers power and employees organisational outcomes. Second, attempts should be made to incorporate additional endogenous variables, such as motivation, conflictmanagement, and performance of employees. Field experiments could be particularly

Chapter 9: Summary, Conclusions and Recommendations

229

useful in evaluating the effects of enhancing the personal power bases of managers on individual and organisational outcomes. There is also need for scenario-based studies and laboratory studies that control some of the extraneous variables to explore and better understand the effects of managers power as reported in the present study. Third, attempts could be made to obtain measures of exogenous and endogenous variables through longitudinal studies.