“A Comparative Study Of LIC And Private Life Insurance ... · PDF fileA Comparative...

International Journal of Engineering Technology, Management and Applied Sciences

www.ijetmas.comMay 2017, Volume 5, Issue 5, ISSN 2349-4476

321 Ms. PoojaPuri, Dr. Harinder Singh Gill

A Comparative Study of LIC and Private Insurance

Companies

Ms. Pooja Puri Dr. Harinder Singh Gill

Associate Professor/ Research Scholar Professor

Deptt. Of Management Studies Deptt. Of Management Studies Amritsar College of Engg. & Tech,ASR Amritsar College of Engg. & Tech, ASR

\

Abstract:. This study is mainly related to life insurance

business in Indiaand privatization of life insurance

sector. LIC was monopoly in insurance sector till 2000.

The competition has increased after the privatization of

insurance. With the entrance of private player, the

scenario of the insurance business changed. My study

helps to make comparison between the LIC with the new

private life insurance companies on basis of quality of

services, consumer satisfaction, awareness, consumer

preference and their working as a whole.It shows the

customer view point with respect to their company.

(Keywords: Awareness level, Customer satisfaction and

preference, Service quality, Grievances.)

Introduction

Until 1999, the business of life insurance in India

was the monopoly of life insurance corporation of

india (LIC). In 1956 nationalization of insurance

business was a major milestone in the development

of insurance business in India by taking 245 private

insurers business.

The Indian insurance market was thrown open to

private players in the year 1999 and the Insurance

Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA)

was established to regulate the insurance market.

After it‟s opening, the insurance sector has the entry

of a number of private players who captured a

significant market shares in the life insurance

market. The public sector companies have to

leverage upon their strengths to give a tough flight

to the private sector players. Privatization witnessed

dynamic changes in the insurance industry and most

of the private companies are joint ventures with

recognized foreign players across the globe.

Customers are the main pillar of life insurance

business. Every company tries to attract and retain

existing customers to keep their profits high. When

compared life insurance industry in India with

foreign, it achieved only a little because of low

consumer awareness, poor affordability, delayed

customer services, lack of suitable products.

At present, in addition to LIC in public sector, 15

private companies are operating in life business.

Companies like HDFC Standard Life Insurance,

TATA AIG Life Insurance, Allianz Bajaj Life

Insurance, Max New York Life, OM Kotak, Birla

Sun Life Insurance, SBI Life, Aviva Life Insurance,

ING Vysya, MAT Life Insurance, Reliance Life,

ICICI Prudencial, SAHARA Life, SriRam Life,

BharatiAxa Life & AMP Sanmar are doing good

business in Indian Soil.

Review Of Literature

Dr. Harish et al. (2014) studied the product

offerings of largest public sector life insurance

Company of India Life Insurance Corporation of

India and the private giant ICICI prudential life

insurance company Ltd on the aspects of

applicability of SERVQUAL dimensions to current

product offering and to study and compare the

perception of customers in terms of service quality.

The study also attempts to compare perceived

quality of product offerings of the selected life

insurance companies on SERVQUAL dimensions.

MS. BABITA YADAV et al. (2014) Studied

different factors which influence customers policy

buying decision and also analyze the preferences of

customers while life policy investment decision-

making. LIC is the most accepted and popular brand

in life insurance, the market share of private

insurers are gradually increasing with people trust

and better services offered by them are some of the

main findings of the study.




BidyadharPadhi (2013) The paper focused on the

role and performance of private insurance

companies for the period from 2001 to 2012. The

study will reflect the performance of selected

private insurance companies in the areas like

number of policies floated, amount of premium

collected and the annual growth in the respective

areas from 2001 to 2012. LIC of India enjoyed

monopoly in Indian Insurance market for more than

four decades. In 2000 the Insurance sector has

liberalized and Insurance Development Regulatory

Authority has set up. The private players are

allowed to operate in collaboration with the foreign

insurance companies.

BINOD KUMAR SINGH (2010) studied the

behavior of individual or a group of people. The

study of consumer behavior provides marketers to

understand and predict the future market behavior.

In this paper, role of IRDA, role of Indian banks,

role of private insurance companies, function of

insurance company, various factors influencing

consumer behavior, factors influencing buying

decision and model of consumer decisions making

process have been considered. Also, the types of

insurance policy taken by consumer, the total sum

assured of life insurance, the total sum assured of

life insurance for the spouse, the share of public

insurance in insurance sector, share of LIC in life

insurance in insurance sector and the reasons for

invested in life insurance have been studied.

Masood H. Siddiqui at el. (2010) used confirmatory

factor analyses, proposes a six dimensional service-

quality instrument consisting of „assurance‟,

„personalized financial planning‟, „competence‟,

„corporate image‟, „tangibles‟ and „technology‟ in

life insurance. A causal model, using structural

equation modeling, is suggested to investigate the

effects of the proposed service quality instrument

on customer satisfaction („satisfaction with agents‟,

„satisfaction with functional services‟, „satisfaction

with company‟ and finally with „overall

satisfaction‟).

Ajay Suneja at el. (2010) Stated that with

increasing competition, customers have become

very important for insurance companies in India.

The study also compares these factors across

different demographic groups of customers of life

insurance companies. The study has brought out

various factors influencing choice 'of a life

insurance company. These factors are-promotional

activities, image of company, customer

convenience, financial and non-financial facilities,

and premium and procedural formalities.

Objectives of The Study

Check the awareness level of customer‟s

towards insurance Co.

To know about factors which influence the

choice of insurance company?

To explore the various factors influencing

customer investment decision.

To Study the Consumer Preferences Towards

insurance company.

To compare the customers of LIC and private

life insurance in terms of service quality.

To check the level of Customer Satisfaction.

Study the Grievance status in LIC and Private


Research Methodology

1) Sampling Unit: It‟s a comparative study, so for

my study I choose LIC as a public company and

other private companies.

2) Source of Data: Primary & Secondary

3) Sampling Technique: Non-probability

sampling technique was used in this researched.

4) Target Place: Amritsar

5) Sampling Size: Total 100 respondents are taken

as a sample for survey.

6) Statistical Tools and Techniques: Percentage

method, Factor analysis, Chi-Square and

Weighted average.

Limitation

As the main objective of the present research

was to study the public and private life

insurance sector in the Indian context, technical

aspect of electronic CRM technologies was not

covered properly.

The scope of the study in this particular field.

The sample size of present study was relatively

small to generalize the results in the Indian

context.




Response No. of

Respondents

% of

Respondents

LIC 50 50

HDFC 17 17

ICICI 14 14

BAJAJ Allianz 11 11

Aviva India 8 8

Total

100

100

Demographic Profile:

Respondents

Male 79

Female 21

Age

20-25 23

25-30 47

30-35 17

35Above 13

Education

Upto HSC 7

Graduate 63

Post Graduate 3

Professional 27

Occupation

Salaried 34

Business 19

Housewife 8

Students 3

Professional 27

Retired 9

Income

Less Than 2Lac 35

2-3Lac 41

3 Above 24

Data Analysis & Interpretation:

Awareness level of customer‟s towards

insurance companies

Figure:1Have you heard about Private Life

Insurance or LIC

All respondents are aware about the company

whether private or public

Figure:2 Know about the various plans offered by

Insurance Companies

LIC respondents are more aware about the plans

offered by their company as compared to the private

respondents. 90% of the respondents are aware

about the plans offered by LIC. It is 12% more than

the private life insurance company.

Figure:3Media used by your insurance company

100%

0%

Yes No

78%22%

Private

Yes No

90%

10% LIC

Yes NO

123

35

012

35

3 0

2613

2 912 4

28

6

To a great

extend

Somewhat Very little Not at All

Private

Newspaper Social Media

Television Hoardings




As per the survey, Social media is used mostly by

the private life insurance companies to target the

customer. LIC respondent‟s point of view, television

media is used mostly by the company for targeting

the customer.

Factors influencing customer investment

decision.

Figure:4 Consult before making an investment.

Private respondents consult other persons like

relatives, friends and a person having the private

life insurance policy. But LIC respondents take their

own decision at the time of making investment.

Consumer Preferences Towards insurance

company.

Figure:5 Insurance policies are for?

Child

Freq % Valid

Percent

Cumulativ

e Percent

Valid

Yes 94 94.0 94.0 94.0

No 6 6.0 6.0 100.0

Total 100 100 100.0

Adult

Freq % Valid

Percent

Cumulativ

e Percent

Valid

Yes 95 95.0 95.0 95.0

No 5 5.0 5.0 100.0

Total 100 100 100.0

Old_People

Frequen

cy

Percen

t

Valid

Percent

Cumulativ

e Percent

Valid

Yes 98 98.0 98.0 98.0

No 2 2.0 2.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Working_People

Frequen

cy

Percen

t

Valid

Percent

Cumulativ

e Percent

Valid

Yes 98 98.0 98.0 98.0

No 2 2.0 2.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Most of the respondents perceive that all the

categories of insurance policies are made for us.

Figure:6 Private company scheme or LIC did you

invest?

1928

3 0

2915

4 2

36

9 5 0015 9

26

To a great

extend

Somewhat VERY

LITTLE

NOT AT

ALL

LIC

Newspaper Social Media

Television Hoardings

Banker

10%Consult

ant

18%

[CATEG

ORY

NAME]

[PERCE

NTA…

Nobody

28%

Any

Other

30%

Private

Banker

2%

Consulta

nt

14%

Chartere

d

Account

ant

6%

Nobody

46%

Any

Other

32%

LIC




We see that private respondents give preference

firstly to the Endowment Plan of the company and

then after it they like to choose Money back plan of

the company. But LIC respondents give their

preference firstly to the Other plans of the company.

Level of Customer Satisfaction.

Figure:7Satisfied with the policy.

LIC respondents are more satisfied with policy

which they have taken.

Figure:8 Feel after investing in Insurance Plans.

There is no one who feels worse after investing in

LIC. The experiences of the private respondents are

not good.

Grievance status in LIC and Private


Figure: 9 Problem faced.

32%42%

8% 018%

Private

18%10% 12% 8%

52%

LIC

Yes No

90

10

96

4

Private LIC

28%

36%8%

16%12%

Private

Much Better Somewhat Better

Stayed the Same Somewhat Worse

Worse

52%40%

8%

LIC

Much Better Somewhat Better

Stayed the Same

16%

84%

Private

Yes No




84% of the respondents have no problem with the

insurance company. From LIC respondents view

point, the percentage is 94%.

Figure:10Satisfied with the grievance handling

procedure of the Company.

Figure:11 Rate Private Life Insurance by LIC

9% of the respondents rate Excellent to private life

insurance company as compared to the LIC and that

all are private respondents.

Chi-Square Test

H01 (Private)There is no significant relationship

b/w income and investment.

H02 (LIC) There is no significant relationship b/w

income and investment.

Private Respondents

Investment * Income Crosstabulation

Income Total

Less

than

2lac

2-

3lac

Above

3lac

Invest

ment

Upto

1lac

Count 16 13 0 29

Expect

ed

Count

9.9 11.6 7.5 29.0

1lac-

2lac

Count 1 6 5 12

Expect

ed

Count

4.1 4.8 3.1 12.0

2lac-

3lac

Count 0 1 4 5

Expect

ed

Count

1.7 2.0 1.3 5.0

Above

3lac

Count 0 0 4 4

Expect

ed

Count

1.4 1.6 1.0 4.0

Total Count 17 20 13 50

6%

94%

LIC

Yes No

22%

38%26%

10% 4%

Private

Very Satisfied Satisfied

Neutral Dissatisfied

Very Dissatisfied

58%26%

14% 2%

LIC

Very Satisfied Satisfied

Neutral Dissatisfied

9%

25%

25%

35%

6%

Excellent Above Average

Average Below Average

Poor




Expect

ed

Count

17.0 20.0 13.0 50.0

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig.

(2-sided)

Pearson

Chi-Square 34.483a 6 .00

Likelihood

Ratio 41.417 6 .00

Linear-by-

Linear

Association 26.263 1 .00

N of Valid

Cases 50

a. 9 cells (75.0%) have expected count less than 5.

The minimum expected count is 1.04.

CHI-SQUARE value we get is 34.483%.

From the above Chi-square test table, we see that

asymptotic significance value is .00, which show

that the differences are real not due to the chance. It

shows a significant relationship between the income

and investment. It rejected the null hypothesis.

LIC Respondents

Investment * Income Crosstabulation

Income Total

Less

than 2lac

2-3lac Above

3lac

Invest

ment

Upto

1lac

Count 10 12 5 27

Expec

ted

Count

9.7 11.3 5.9 27.0

1lac-

2lac

Count 8 4 1 13

Expec

ted

Count

4.7 5.5 2.9 13.0

2lac- Count 0 5 1 6

3lac Expec

ted

Count

2.2 2.5 1.3 6.0

Above

3lac

Count 0 0 4 4

Expec

ted

Count

1.4 1.7 .9 4.0

Total

Count 18 21 11 50

Expec

ted

Count

18.0 21.0 11.0 50.0

Respondents having the income less than 2lac

invest up to the amount of 2lac in the insurance

company (10- up to 1lac; 8- 1to2lac).

Respondents having the income 2-3lac invest up to

3lac (12- up to 1lac; 4- 1to2lac; 5- 2to3lac).

Respondents having the income above 3lac invest

up to 3lac or above (5- up to 1lac; 1- 1to2lac; 1-

2to3lac; 1- above 3lac).

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-

sided)

Pearson Chi-

Square 23.011

a 6 .001

Likelihood

Ratio 22.600 6 .001

Linear-by-

Linear

Association

5.687 1 .017

N of Valid

Cases 50

a. 8 cells (66.7%) have expected count less than 5.

The minimum expected count is .88.

CHI-SQUARE value we get is 23.011%.

From the above Chi-square test table, we see that

asymptotic significance value is .01, which show

that the differences are real not due to the chance. It

shows a significant relationship between the income

and investment. It rejected the null hypothesis.




Weighted Average Method

RANKING VARIOUS FACTORS

RESPONSIBLE FOR INVESTMENT IN LIFE

INSURANCE PRODUCTS

Ranking

Factors

No. Of Respondents Total

1 2 3 4 5 100

Tax

Benefit

72 18 6 3 1 100

Risk

coverage

& saving

7 46 27 11 9 100

Security

With High

Service

13 4 29 8 46 100

Insurance

Service

1 3 4 30 62 100

Premium

Charges

2 7 12 13 66 100

Now, for analyzing the various factors responsible

for investing in insurance policies, ranking is done

on basis of weighted score TABLE NO.2. scoring is

done as per the scale 1-5weights.

1rank – 5; 2rank – 4; 3rank – 3; 4rank – 2; 5rank – 5

Ranking Of Various Factors

Factors Weighted

Score

Mean Rank

Tax Benefit 457 4.57 1

Risk

coverage &

saving

331 3.31 2

Security

With High

Service

230 2.30 3

Insurance

Service

151 1.51 5

Premium

Charges

166 1.66 4

It is revealed from the table no. 1and table no. 2,

majority of the respondents invest in life insurance

for tax benefit, followed by the risk coverage &

saving, security with high return, premium charges

and insurance services can be ranked as 1st, 2

nd, 3

rd,

4th and 5

th respectively.

Factor Analysis

Factors influenced while choosing insurance

company.

Reliability Analysis-

As depicted in Table, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin

(KMO) measure of sampling adequacy for this

sample was 0.561, which is greater than 0.5,

suggests that the data is adequate for factor analysis.

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of

Sampling Adequacy. .561

Bartlett's Test of

Sphericity

Approx. Chi-

Square 201.433

df 55

Sig. .000

Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.524 11

Rotated Component Matrixa

Component

1 2 3 4 5

Advertiseme

nt

0.85

2

Persuasion

by agents 0.85

Wide

Variety Of

Insurance

`Products

0.84

6

Managemen

t 0.843

Easy

Settlement 0.758

Customer

care

&Redressal 0.738

E-Payment 0.659

Accessibilit

y of offices 0.642




Premium &

Procedural

formalities 0.85

Easy mode

of

depositing

premium 0.721

Financial &

Non-

Financial

Facilities 0.937

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Factor Loading Statement Factor

Loading

C1 Advertisement .852

C1 Persuasion by agents .850

C1 Wide Variety Of Insurance Products .846

C2 Top Management .843

C2 Easy Settlement .758

C3 Customer care &Redressal .738

C3 E-payment .659

C3 Accessibility of offices .642

C4 Premium & Procedural formalities .850

C4 Easy Mode

For

Depositing

Premium

.721

C5 Financial & Non-Financial Facilities .937

COMPONENT1 Promotional Activities

This factors exhibits that the promotional activities

affected mostly in choosing the company by the

consumer.

COMPONENT2 Company Image

Highest loading variable is Top management that is

.843. It means that working of top management in

the company directly affected the choice of a

consumer.

COMPONENT3 Customer Convenience

Highest loading variable is Customer care

&redressal that is .738. It means that customer care

&redressal by the company become an important

variable while choosing the company.

COMPONENT4 Formalities

This factors exhibits that the company formalities

also affect the company choice.

COMPONENT5 Facilities

.This factors exhibits that the company facilities

also affect the company choice, whether it is

financial or non-financial.

Quality Of Service

Private Response


Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling

adequacy for this sample was 0.764, which is

greater than 0.5, suggests that the data is adequate

for factor analysis. The significance value of 0.000

tells us that there is a correlation between variables.

Hence, we reject the null hypothesis and conclude

that the variables are correlated with each other.

This indicates that the factor model, as a model for

data analysis, can be accepted. The reliability

estimate (Chronbach's Alpha) is 0.838 which

indicates acceptable reliability of data.




Bartlett's Test of

Sphericity

Approx. Chi-

Square 156.488

df 21

Sig. .000



.838 7


Component

1 2

When you have problems,

it shows a sincere interest

in solving it.

.850

Promise to do something

certain time, it does so .798

Provides its services at the

time it promise to do so .766

Employees in company

give you prompt services .634

You feel safe in your

transactions .793




Operating hours

convenient to all its

customers

.760

Company gets things right

the first time .674

Extraction Method: Principal Component

Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser

Normalization.

a. Rotation converged in 3 iterations.

Initial Eigen Values

Total % Of

Variance

Cumulative%

1 3.681 52.591 52.591

2 1.069 15.273 67.864

Table indicates that 67.864 per cent of cumulative

variance has been explained by two (2) factors. The

variance reflects considerable contribution of these

factors while choosing a particular company for

obtaining life insurance company in terms of their

service quality. s

Factor Loading

Statement Factor Loading

C1 When you have a

problems, it show

ainterest in solving it.

.850

C1 Promise to do

something certain

time, it does so

.798

C1 Employees in

company give you

prompt services

.634

C2 You feel safe in your

transactions

.793

C2 Company gets things

right the first time

.674

COMPONENT1 Commitment

These factors exhibits that the Commitment attracts

the customer in respect of quality of services.

COMPONENT2 Security

These factors exhibits that the Security attracts the

customer in respect of quality of services.

Quality Of Service

LIC Response


Sampling adequacy for this sample was 0.755. The

significance value is 0.000. The reliability estimate

(Chronbach's Alpha) is 0.834 which indicates

acceptable reliability of data.




Bartlett's Test of

Sphericity

Approx. Chi-

Square

159.04

8

Df 21

Sig. .000



.834 7


Component

1 2

Employees in company

give you prompt services .891

Operating hours

convenient to all its

customers

.796

Provides its services at the

time it promise to do so .793

Promise to do something

certain time, it does so .560

You feel safe in your

transactions .910

Company gets things right

the first time .818

When you have problems,

it shows a sincere interest

in solving it.

.699


Analysis.


Normalization.






Total % Of

Variance

Cumulative

%

1 3.592 51.320 51.320

2 1.290 18.434 69.753


variance has been explained by two (2) factors. The

variance reflects considerable contribution of these

factors while choosing a particular company for

obtaining life insurance company in terms of their

service quality. To interpret the factors, the first

factor has an Eigen value of 3.592. Since this is

greater than 1.0, it explains more variance than a

single variable. The percentage of variance

explained by this factor is 51.320 per cent. The

second factor has an Eigen value of 1.290 and

explains 18.434 per cent of the variance in the

original data.

Factor Loading

Statement Factor

Loading

C1 Employees in company give

you prompt services

.891

C1 Operating hours convenient

to all its customers

.796

C1 Promise its services at the

time it promise to do so

.793

C2 You feel safe in your

transactions

.910

C2 Company gets things right

the first time

.818

COMPONENT1 Time

These factors exhibits that the Time attracts the

customer in respect of quality of services.

COMPONENT2 Security

These factors exhibits that the Security attracts the

customer in respect of quality of services

Overall Satisfaction Factors

Private Response

Sampling adequacy for this sample was 0.536. The

reliability estimate (Chronbach's Alpha) is 0.517

which indicates acceptable reliability of data.


Component

1 2 3

Assurance .803

Tangibles .785

Empathy .846

Technology .710

Personalized_Financial_Pl

anning .818

Corporate_Image .785


Analysis.


Normalization.



Total % Of

Variance

Cumulativ

e%

1 1.831 30.521 30.521

2 1.407 23.455 53.976

3 1.095 18,251 72.227


variance has been explained by three (3) factors.

Factor Loading


C1 Assurance .803

C1 Tangibles .785

C2 Empathy .846

C2 Technology .710

C3 Personalized Financial

Planning

.818

C3 Corporate image .785




LIC Response

Sampling adequacy for this sample was 0.546,

which is greater than 0.5, suggests that the data is

adequate for factor analysis.




Bartlett's Test of

Sphericity

Approx. Chi-

Square 31.888

Df 15

Sig. .007



.524 6


Component

1 2 3

Corporate_Image .914

Tangibles .810

Assurance .744

Personalized_Financi

al_Planning .642

Empathy .546

Technology .908


Analysis.


Normalization.



Total % Of

Variance

Cumulative%

1 1.906 31.773 31.773

2 1.126 18.769 50.541

3 1.052 17.535 68.077


variance has been explained by three (3) factors.

The variance reflects the satisfaction on the basis of

various factors. To interpret the factors, the first

factor has an Eigen value of 1.906. Since this is

greater than 1.0, it explains more variance than a

single variable.


C1 Corporate images .914

C1 Tangibles .810

C2 Assurance .744

C2 Personalized financial

planning

.642

C2 Empathy .546

C3 Technology .908

Conclusion

All respondent are aware about the presence

of company and regarding media used by their

company. LIC respondents are more aware about

the plans offered by their company.

From the survey we see that the customer,

whether it is of LIC or Private company is duly

influenced by the promotional activity, company

image, customer convenience, formalities and

facilities.

Respondents consult other persons like

relatives, friends and a person having the private

life insurance policy. LIC respondents take their

own decision at the time of making investment due

to their faith in the company. Majority of the

respondents invest in life insurance for tax benefit,

followed by the risk coverage & saving, security

with high return, premium charges and insurance

services, whether it is Private or LIC respondents.

Private respondents give their preference

firstly to Endowment Plan of the company and LIC

respondents give their preference to the other plans

of the company. Respondents whether Private or

LIC is clear regarding insurance policies, they

prefer plan according to their need. With the change

in time need also changed.

Quality of service is an important aspect,

Both Private and LIC respondents want security

from their company. Private respondents rate

overall satisfaction in providing services on the




basis of- Assurance, Empathy, Personalized

financial planning. LIC respondents rate overall

satisfaction in providing services on the basis of-

Corporate image, Assurance And Technology.

LIC respondents are more satisfied with

policy which they have taken as compared to

private. The experience of the LIC respondents is

good as compared to the private respondents. There

is no one who feels worse after investing in LIC.

The experiences of the private respondents are not

good. But it does not mean, they feel same for all

private companies. That was its personal experience

for a particular type of insurance company. Rate

given by respondents to private life insurance

company is more to below average.

Private respondents faced more problem as

compared to LIC. Grievance handling is good as

compared to private in LIC and respondents

satisfied with their procedure.

Recommendation

People give a high priority to security of

their investment, therefore the promotion schemes

should concentrate on educating the customers that

Private sector players have a strong financial

backing like that of LIC.

It is seen that till today a large portion of

population is unaware of various insurance plans,

these include educated professionals also.

Therefore, the Private sector insurance companies

should focus on improving awareness and increase

the understanding about insurance plans thus

increasing their scope of sale.

Private Life Insurance Companies should

lay more stress on advertises, both in print as well

as in other media.

To introduce innovative products offering a

right mix of flexibility/risk/return depending, which

will suite the requirement of the customers.

References Indian Journal of Economics & Business, Vol. 9, No.

1, (2010)

Journal of Contemporary Research in Management,

July - December 2007

IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-

JBM)e-ISSN: 2278-487X. Volume 7, Issue 4 (Jan. -

Feb. 2013), PP 45-52

Yadav, Babita and Tiwari, Anshuja (2012).

International Journal of Marketing, Financial

Services & Management Research, Vol.1 (7),

pp.106-123

Khurana, Sunayna (2008), Customer Preferences in

Life Insurance Industry in India,ICFAI University,

Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 6(3), pp. 60-68.

International Journal of Marketing, Financial

Services & Management ResearchVol.1 Issue 7, July

2012

Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for

Marketing (2010)18.

Journal of Radix International Educational and

Research Consortium Volume 1, Issue 11(November

2012)

Ray, Subhasis and Ali, Shahid (2008), "Gap Analysis

Between Customer's Expectation and Current

Provisions of Indian Life Insurance Industry", The

Icfai University Journalof Consumer Behavior,Vol.

III,No.3, pp. 33-46.

McDougall, G.H.G. and Levesque, T. (2000)

Customer satisfaction with services: Putting

perceived value into the equation. Journal of

Services Marketing 14(5): 392–410.

Crosby, L. A. and Stephens, N. (1987) Effect of

relationship marketing on satisfaction, retention, and

prices in the life insurance industry. Journal of

Marketing Research 24(4): 404–411.

Mehta, S.C. and Lobo, A. (2002) MSS, MSA and

Zone of Tolerance as measures of service quality: A

study of the life insurance industry. Second

International Services Marketing Conference,

University of Queensland.

C.S. Rao (2007), “The Regulatory Challenges

Ahead” Journal of Insurance Chronicle, Vol.VII,

issue-X, Oct.2007.

Singh, B. K. and Srivastava, S. (2008), “Consumer

Decision Making-An Empirical Study”, Marketing

Innovations for Reaching Consumers, Wisdom

Publications, 19-29.

Scott, R. (2000) Shaping the future of the life agency

force. Coverage 26(1): 22–26.

Jayawardhena, C. and Foley, P. (2000) Changes in

the banking sector-the case of Internet banking in the

UK. Internet Research 10(1): 19–31.

Overview of Indian insurance sector; academic open

internet journal; ISSN 11311- 4360.Volume 22, and

April 7, 2000.

Business Today, the monitory Group Study on

Insurance I and II, March 22 and April 7, 2000.

“A Comparative Study Of LIC And Private Life Insurance ... · PDF fileA Comparative...

Documents

Transcript of “A Comparative Study Of LIC And Private Life Insurance ... · PDF fileA Comparative...