Analysis With Calculation) With Comment

8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment

1/19

This chapter presents and discusses findings of the research in a systematic way. It starts by

briefly discussing the profiles of the employees. The subsequent three sections present and

discuss findings that relates to research objectives; components of performance of operations

management, components of business development, relationship among the performance of

business development and business development and to find out the fact whether operations

management of Ladbrokes has the ability to develop businesses.

Employee profile:

Gender:

The majority of the employees were representing male 75% and female 25%

Gender Frequency Percentage

Male 23 75%Female 7 25%Total 30 100%

Experience group:

Number of Years Frequency Percentage

1 2 years 2 6.67%3 5 years 4 13.33%6 8 years 8 26.67%

9 11 years 11 36.67%More than 12 years 5 16.66%

Total 30 100%

Position Group:

Level Position Frequency Percentage

Junior Deputy Manager 13 43.33%

Senior

Manager 14 46.66%

Supervisor 2 6.66%

Area Manager 1 3.33%

Total 30 100%

Comment [m1]: I have change that on entire

document junior level manager and senior level

manager


2/19

Components of Operations Management

To identify the components of operations management that influence the business development

of Ladbrokes the author has interviewed the employees of Ladbrokes. The author has also used

previous related literature to determine the components of operations management.

SL Components of Operations Management

1 Service quality & customer-satisfaction

2 Fast delivery time

3 On-time delivery

4 Awareness about operational procedures

5 Resource allocation & utilization

6 Maintain a sound working environment

7 Service quality & customer focus

8 Productivity & efficiency

9 Low cost operations

10 High-performance design

11 Consistent quality management

12 Development speed

13 Motivational & Leadership skill

14 Awareness about operational procedures

15 Creativity & Innovation

Components of Business Development:

To identify the components of Business development the author has used the information given by the

employees of Ladbrokes during the interview. The author has also used previous study about business

development.


3/19

SL Components of Business Development

1 Market share

2 Customer retention & acquisition

3 Customer profitability

4 Product/service profitability

5 New Product development & Product diversification

6 Increased sales & promotional activities

Measuring the Performance of Operations Management of Ladbrokes:

To measure the performance of operations management the author has used 15 statements against which

the employees are requested to mark a rating that will evaluate the performance based on the identified

components of operations management. The employees were asked for a self-assessment of their

performance. The 5 Likert Scale was used to convert their performance in to measurable values in order

to perform a quantitative analysis.

Score criteria were as below:

1- Performance does not meet the criteria.

2- Performance is less than the standard criteria.

3- Performance is meeting the standard criteria.

4- Performance is above the standard criteria.

5- Performance is above the standard criteria and meeting more than expectations.

The 15 statements were sub-divided in to four groups to measure the performance of operations

management based on: Customer base, Procedures & practices, Business & productivity and

Leadership ability . These four groups were again categorized in to more attributes from which it has

become very easy to measure the performance of operations management.


4/19


5/19

Major attributes that describes the measurement of performance management in the context of business

development are customer based, procedures & practices, business & productivity and leadership

behavior. Findings shows that 20.25% score was associated with customer base, 26.08% score associated

with procedure & practices, business & productivity comprised of 33.53 score and leadership behavior

comprised of 20.14% score.Appendix D & E

Table: Performance Management

Performance Criteria

Attributes

Frequency as per Likert

Scale

Mean for

eachcategory

Interpretatio

n

Customers based 1 2 3 4 5

Provide, manage and sustain the

front-line service to customers that

will enhance the companys

positions as well as to encourage

repeat business.

Service quality &

customer-

satisfaction

0 1 8 11 10 4.00

Performance

is above the

standard

criteria

Develop and maintain a working

knowledge of products and

services to support business

operations.

Product & service

knowledge0 3 8 13 6 3.73

Performance

is meeting the

standard

criteria

Identify opportunities to offerappropriate products and services

to meet customer needs and

expectations.

New product orservices

development &

diversification

0 3 9 13 5 3.67

Performanceis meeting the

standard

criteria

Procedures and practices

Manage the use of related

equipment to support the business

plan

Resource

allocation,

utilization & cost

minimization.

0 3 11 9 7 3.67

Performance

is meeting the

standard

criteria

Carry out relevant procedures in

the event of emergency.Awareness about

operational

procedures

0 2 9 12 7 3.80

Performance

is meeting the

standard

criteria

Develop and maintain a health and

safety working environment

Developing &

Maintaining a

safety working

0 2 9 14 5 3.73Performance

is meeting the

standard


6/19

environment criteria

Develop and maintain positive

work environment.

Developing a

customer friendly

working

environment

0 3 10 9 8 3.73

Performance

is meeting the

standard

criteria

Business and productivity

Control of business margin in

order to achieve plan Goal achieving

attitude & effort0 2 13 8 7 3.67

Performance

is meeting the

standard

criteria

Monitor, anticipate and respond to

competitor activity as appropriate.

Review and spot opportunities for

business development.

Selecting

appropriate

courses of actions

to gain

competitive

advantages over

the rivals.

0 1 7 17 5 3.87

Performanceis meeting the

standard

criteria

Implement staff activities to

achieve objectives within the

business plan.

Sound Team work

to achieve

business plan

0 2 8 7 13 4.03

Performance

is above the

standard

criteria

Implementing Human Resources

policies and procedure within the

authority levels

Comply with

human resources

policies & rules

0 4 7 12 7 3.73

Performance

is meeting the

standard

criteria

Lead meetings and group

discussions of the team to solve

problems and make decisions.

Problem solving

& Decision

making skill.

0 0 9 15 6 3.90

Performance

is meeting the

standard

criteria

Leadership Behaviors

Motivates and develops the team.Leadership &

Motivational skill0 1 10 12 7 3.83

Performance

is meeting the

standard

criteria

Aware of attitudes and views of

others and able to adjust approach

accordingly.

Relationship with

the co-workers.0 1 11 11 7 3.80

Performance

is meeting the

standard

criteria

Comes up with creative ideas for

improvements

Creativity &

Innovation0 2 7 13 8 3.90 Performance

is meeting the


7/19

standard

criteria

From the above table it is found that the performance is meeting the standard criteria for the

employees of the operations management of Ladbrokes.

Relationship between Performance of Operations management and business development

in the context of Ladbrokes:

One of the objectives of this research was to find out whether there is a relationship between performance

of operations management and business development. The researcher has conducted a survey among the

employees of Ladbrokes in order to measure their performance and also the employees were asked to give

their view based on their performance and experience whether Ladbrokes has the ability to maximize

profitability and turnover by sustaining the provision of products.

The question was: As a result of your experience, does management performance affects the ability to

maximize profitability and turnover by sustaining the provision of products? The employees were

given opportunity to show their view based on the following scores:

1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree

Strongly Strongly

Disagree Agree

1 2 3 4 5

After collecting the information from questionnaires and interview sheet, the score of performance

measurement and the score of business development was processed and analyzed. The researcher has

developed a structured model, where business development was a dependent variable that depends on the

independent variable performance of operations management.

Business development (Y) Performance of Operations management (X)

Depends on

The score obtained from the business development was indicated by Y and the score obtained from the

performance measurement was indicated by X. The researcher then analyzed the scores and tried to find

out whether there is a relationship between X and Y through the use ofcorrelation of co-efficient (r). In

1890 A.D. Karl Pearson first introduced a formula to measure the relationship between two


8/19

variables. The formula is described in Appendix:F. Karl-Pearson Correlation of co-efficient is used

to find out a relationship between two (2) variables. The value of r is between +1 and -1. Where +1

indicates a positive relation and -1 indicates a negative relation.

After processing and analyzing of data the researcher found the value ofr = +0.91, which indicates that

there exists a positive and strong relationship between Business development and Performance of

Operations Management. The calculation of correlation co-efficient of r is described in Appendix: F.

From the above description it can be concluded that greater performance ofOperations Management

leads to a remarkable and sound Business Development.

Business Development ability of Ladbrokes:

Based on their performance and experience the employees were asked a question to explore their view

whether their performance is in a standard level to develop more business by their organization in East

London.

Total score obtained from the 30 employees was 126. Average Mean was 4.20 which fall in the category

4.20 (Agree). That means the employees view about business development against their performance and

experience was that Ladbrokes will be able to develop their business in East London.

Business DevelopmentFrequency as per Likert

Scale Mean Interpretation

Statement Attributes 1 2 3 4 5

As a result of your experience,

does management performance

affects the ability to maximize

profitability and turnover by

sustaining the provision of

products?

Business

Development

ability0 0 7 10 13 4.20 Agree


9/19

All the employees were divided into 2 groups:

(i) Senior level employee and

(ii) Junior level employee.

The number of senior level employee was 17 & their total score about Ladbrokes Business development

ability was 69. The number of junior level employee was 13 and their total score on business development

was 57.

Employee Category No of Employees Percentage Points (%)

Senior Level Employee 17 54.76

Junior Level Employee 13 45.24

Total 30 100

Business DevelopmentFrequency as per Likert

ScaleMean for

each

category

Interpretation

Employee Category 1 2 3 4 5

Senior Level Employee0 0 4 8 5

4.06Agree

Junior Level Employee0 0 3 2 8

4.38Agree

Now the author will test whether there is any significant difference between the expressions of these 2

groups about the business development ability of Ladbrokes. The expression is measured in terms of

Mean. The mean of score collected from Manager level employees about business development ability of

Ladbrokes was 4.38 and the mean of score collected from Officer level employees about business

development ability of Ladbrokes was 4.06.

t-test was first introduced by W.S. Gosset in 1908 A.D. t-statistics is used to evaluate means

collected from 2 groups when sample size is small, i.e. less than 30. In short, Gosset developed a test

statistic that took into account the greater sampling error associated with small samples. Box, J. F.


10/19

(1987). We use this test for comparing the means of two samples. Generally speaking, the t-test

compares the actual difference between two means in relatio n to the variation in the data,

expressed as the standard deviation of t he difference between the means .

John Berry and Pasi Sahlberg (1996) have used t-statistics in their research to investigate whether there

is any significant difference in ideas of learning between 2 students group. In our research we will use t-

statistics to find out whether there is any significant difference between the comments of Junior level

employees and Senior level employees. The formula of t-statist ics is described in Appendix G.

Employee Category Junior Level Employee Senior Level Employee

Sample Size 13 17

Mean 4.38 4.06

Standard Deviation 0.730.84

Two Hypotheses was constructed, Null Hypothesis and Alternative Hypothesis. In Null Hypothesis it is

assumed that there is no significant difference between these two mean and in Alternative Hypothesis it is

assumed that there exists a significant difference between these two mean.

Construction of Hypothesis:

H ypothesis testingor significance testing is a rule that decides on the acceptance or rejection of the null

hypothesis based on the results of random samples of the population under consideration . The result is

found by using statistical tools.Professor John Berry (2005).

According to SP Gupa A hypothesis which states that there is no difference between assumed and

actual value of the parameter is the null hypothesis . Prabir Roy & M.A. Kalam, (2001)

As per V.K. Kapoor Any hypothesis which is complementary to the null hypothesis is called an

alternative hypothesis. Prabir Roy & M.A. Kalam (2001)

Null Hypothesis

Comment [m2]: Can you please double check

argument on both hypothesis done on proper

academic way. Find out i t from any reliable sourc

like journals, research methodology documents,

other dissertation etc


11/19

H0: There is no significant difference between the mean of senior level employees and junior level

employees.

Alternative Hypothesis

H1: There is a significant difference between the mean of senior level employees and junior level

employees.

T-statistics was used to test these 2 hypothesis as the sample size of junior level employee is n1=13 which

is less than 30 and the sample size of Senior level employee is n2=17 which is also less than 30. After

necessary calculations the value oftwas found t=1.14. On the other hand at 5% level of significance and

at 28 (13+17-2) degree of freedom the table value of t = 1.701 . As calculated value oft=1.14 is less than

the table value of t = 1.701, so Null Hypothesis H0 is accepted. And alternative Hypothesis H1 is

rejected. Appendix G

Null Hypothesis

H0: There is no significant difference between the mean of junior level employees and senior level

employees. (Accepted)

Alternative Hypothesis

H1: There is a significant difference bet ween the mean of junior level employees and senior level

employees. (Rejected)

That means there is no significant difference between the two means. Hence the comments about business

development ability of Ladbrokes obtained from the two groups of Senior level Employees and Junior

level employees dont have any disagreement.

So, from the employees point of view it can be concluded that Ladbrokes has the ability to develop their

business in East London area.

Business Performance Analysis:

The author has taken interview of Ladbrokes management in order to find out the status of some business

performance indicators.

Business Development factors Status

Number of shops Increasing

Number of products Increasing

Product Diversification & new product Increasing


12/19

Implementation

Market share Increasing

Customer retention Increasing

Service quality Increasing

Employee efficiency Increasing

Cost control Optimum

Volume of sales Increasing

Profitability Increasing

Economic Decision Making Skill Improving

Financial condition Increasing

Resource availability Increasing

Creativity & Innovation Increasing

Fig: Business Performance Analysis Table

For security & privacy reasons many information was not disclosed by the management. But It was found

that the status of most of the indicators was sound and in an increasing condition.

Please do a swot analysis hereand make

comments about business development ability of Ladbrokes based on swot

analysis.

Summary:

In this chapter the researcher processed and analyzed the collected data to find out the answers of

the research objectives. The chapter starts by presenting the profiles of the employees of the

Ladbrokes operations management by showing their gender and length of service. The researcher

has identified the components of operations management and the components of business


13/19

development. Then the researcher measured the performance of operations management by using

questionnaires. The author has measured the performance of operations management based on

four criteria: (i) Customer based (ii) Procedures & practices (iii) Business & productivity (iv)

Leadership behavior. A 5 point Likert scale was used to measure the performance. Finding

shows that 20.25% score was associated with customer base, 26.08% score associated with

procedure & practices, business & productivity comprised of 33.53 score and leadership

behavior comprised of 20.14% score. The mean performance of the operations management was

found 3.80 (Performance meets standard criteria). Next the author found a positive relationship

between Business Development and Performance of Operations Management by using the correlation of

co-efficient (r). The value of r was +0.91 which indicates a strong relationship between Business

Development and Performance of Operations Management. Then the author analyzed the comments of

two employee groups: Senior level employees and junior level employees about business development

ability of Ladbrokes using 5 Likert Scale and found a Mean = 4.2 indicate employees have a positive

attitude and standard performance level in business development capability. The Mean of Senior level

employees and junior level employees about business development ability was 4.06 & 4.38 respectively.

The author then tested these two mean by using t statistics and developed Hypothesis to check whether

there is any significant difference between the comments of these 02 (two) groups of employee category

and found that there is no significant difference. In the next section the author has drawn a business

performance analysis of Ladbrokes by measuring the status of the various business factors and found that

all the indicators are in an increasing trend which points out positive business development ability.

Considering the above facts it can be concluded that the performance of operations management of

Ladbrokes is above standard level to develop businesses in East London area


14/19

Reference:

1. Box, J. F. (1987), Guinness, Gosset, Fisher, and small samples. StatisticalScience, 2(1), 4552.

2. Cox, J.F., Blackstone, J.H. and Schleier, J.G. (2003), Managing Operations: A Focus onExcellence.

3. Colin Armistead and Simon Machin (2007), Implications of business process management foroperations management, The Business School at Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, UK.

4. John Berry and Pasi Sahlberg (1996), Investigating pupils ideas of learning, Centre forTeaching Mathematics, University of Plymouth, UK.

5. Lynch, R.L. and Cross, K.F. (1991), Measure up! The Essential Guide to Measuring BusinessPerformance, Mandarin, London.

6. Larry P. Ritzman, Lee J. Krajewski, (2006), Operations Management, Strategy and Analysis.

7. Mahesh C. Gupta and Lynn H. Boyd (2006), Theory of constraints: A theory for operationsmanagement, College of Business, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA.

8. Nottingham University UK. 2010. [online] Available athttp://www.nottingham.ac.uk/nubs/Divisions/OpsMan/Research.html, [Accessed December 03

2010]

9. Porter, L., Oakland, J. and Gadd, K. (1998), ``Unlocking business performance with self-assessment'', Management Accounting, Vol. 76 No. 8, pp. 35-7.

10.Professor John Berry (2005), Quantitative Methods in Education Research, Centre forTeaching Mathematics, University of Plymouth.

11.Prabir Roy & M.A. Kalam, (2001), Business Statistics.

12.Schroeder, R. (2008), Operations Management, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York, NY.


15/19

Appendix D:

Questionnaires

Employee

Category

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

TotalPerformance

ManagementScore(X)

AveragePerformance

ManagementScoreper

Employee

BusinessDevelopment

Score(Y)

1

S

eniorlevelemployee

4 5 4 5 5 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 66 4.40 5

2 3 4 3 5 4 4 3 5 3 5 4 3 4 3 4 57 3.80 4

3 4 5 5 4 4 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 70 4.67 5

4 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 51 3.40 4

5 5 3 4 3 4 2 4 3 4 5 4 3 4 3 3 54 3.60 4

6 5 2 2 3 4 2 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 2 46 3.07 3

7 3 4 3 3 4 3 2 3 4 3 2 3 3 4 3 47 3.13 3

8 2 4 4 5 3 4 5 2 3 5 4 5 4 3 3 56 3.73 4

9 4 3 5 4 5 3 3 4 3 4 5 4 4 3 4 58 3.87 4

10 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 40 2.67 3

11 5 4 4 3 4 3 3 5 4 4 5 4 4 3 5 60 4.00 4

12 4 3 4 4 3 4 5 3 3 4 2 3 4 4 5 55 3.67 4

13 3 4 2 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 2 42 2.80 3

14 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 52 3.47 5

15 3 4 4 3 5 3 3 2 4 5 4 4 5 3 4 56 3.73 4

16 5 4 3 4 3 4 5 4 4 5 3 5 4 3 4 60 4.00 5

17 4 5 3 4 5 4 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 66 4.40 5

18

Juniorlevelemployee

4 3 3 4 3 3 4 5 4 3 3 4 3 4 5 55 3.67 4

19 5 4 4 3 4 5 4 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 4 62 4.13 5

20 5 5 4 5 5 4 5 5 4 4 5 4 5 5 5 70 4.67 5

21 5 4 5 5 4 4 5 4 5 4 5 5 4 4 5 68 4.53 5

22 3 4 2 3 2 4 3 3 4 2 3 4 3 2 4 46 3.07 3

23 4 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 5 5 4 67 4.47 5

24 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 4 3 44 2.93 3

25 5 4 3 3 3 4 5 3 5 5 4 4 3 5 4 60 4.00 5

26 4 3 4 5 4 4 4 3 4 5 3 4 3 4 4 58 3.87 4

27 4 5 4 5 4 5 3 5 4 5 4 4 4 5 5 66 4.40 5

28 5 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 67 4.47 5

29 3 3 4 2 3 4 4 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 4 48 3.20 3

30 5 3 4 4 5 4 3 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 65 4.33 5

Total 120 112 110 110 114 112 112 110 116 118 115 117 115 114 117 1712 114.13 126


16/19

Average

Score3.80 4.20

Appendix E:

Performance

ManagementAttributesFrequency as per Likert Scale fx

Mean for

each

attribute

Mean

for each

category

Customers based: 1 2 3 4 5 3.80

1. Service quality & customer-satisfaction

0 1 8 11 10 120 4.00

2. Product & service knowledge 0 3 8 13 6 112 3.73

3. New product or servicesdevelopment & diversification

0 3 9 13 5 110 3.67

Procedures and practices: 3.73

4. Resource allocation, utilization& cost minimization.

0 3 11 9 7 110 3.67

5. Awareness about operationalprocedures

0 2 9 12 7 114 3.80

6. Developing & Maintaining asafety working environment

0 2 9 14 5 112 3.73

7. Developing a customer friendlyworking environment

0 3 10 9 8 112 3.73

Business and productivity: 3.84

8. Goal achieving attitude &effort

0 2 13 8 7 110 3.67

9

. Selecting appropriate coursesof actions to gain competitiveadvantages over the rivals.

0 1 7 17 5 116 3.87

10. Sound Team work to achievebusiness plan

0 2 8 7 13 121 4.03

11. Comply with humanresources policies & rules

0 4 7 12 7 112 3.73

12. Problem solving & Decisionmaking skill.

0 0 9 15 6 117 3.90

Leadership behaviours: 3.84

13. Leadership & Motivationalskill

0 1 10 12 7 115 3.83

14. Relationship with the co-workers.

0 1 11 11 7 114 3.80

15. Creativity & Innovation 0 2 7 13 8 117 3.90

Average

Mean3.80


17/19

Appendix F:

No. of

Employees

Performance

Management

Score (X)

Business

Development

Score (Y)

X.Y X2

Y2

1 66 5 330 4356 25

2 57 4 228 3249 16

3 70 5 350 4900 25

4 51 4 204 2601 16

5 54 4 216 2916 16

6 46 3 138 2116 9

7 47 3 141 2209 9

8 56 4 224 3136 16

9 58 4 232 3364 16

10 40 3 120 1600 9

11 60 4 240 3600 16

12 55 4 220 3025 16

13 42 3 126 1764 9

14 52 5 260 2704 25

15 56 4 224 3136 16

16 60 5 300 3600 25

17 66 5 330 4356 25

18 55 4 220 3025 16

19 62 5 310 3844 25

20 70 5 350 4900 25

21 68 5 340 4624 25

22 46 3 138 2116 9

23 67 5 335 4489 25

24 44 3 132 1936 9

25 66 5 330 4356 25

26 58 4 232 3364 16

27 66 5 330 4356 25

28 67 5 335 4489 25

29 48 3 144 2304 9

30 65 5 325 4225 25

X = 1718 Y = 126 X.Y = 7404 X2

=100660 Y2

= 548


18/19

Appe

ix G:

Se i

rLevel

E pl

yees

Sa

pleSize,n1=17

Business Devel

pmentSc

re

(

)Mean X x=X-X x

2

1 5 0.94 0.89

2 4 -0.06 0

3 5 0.94 0.89

4 4 -0.06 0

5 4 -0.06 0

6 3 -1.06 1.12

7 3 -1.06 1.12

8 4 -0.06 0

9 4 4.06 -0.06 0

10 3 -1.06 1.12

11 4 -0.06 0

12 4 -0.06 0

13 3 -1.06 1.12

14 5 0.94 0.89

15 4 -0.06 0

16 5 0.94 0.89

17 5 0.94 0.89

T

talSc

re= 69 X2 8.94

x2

S1 = n1 =0.73

Juni

rlevel

Empl

yees

SampleSize,n2=

Business Devel

pment

Sc

re(

)Mean Y y=Y-Y y

2

1 4 -0.38 0.152 5 0.62 0.38

3 5 0.62 0.38

4 5 0.62 0.38

5 3 -1.38 1.92

6 5 0.62 0.38

Comment [m3]:Wherethiseq ation from?

Whose?Why we usingit?Pleaseexplain the

esta lishmentofthisequation

Comment [m4]: How you gettingthiss1fro

theequation and why?


19/19

7 3 4.38 -1.38 1.92

8 5 0.62 0.389 4 -0.38 0.15

10 5 0.62 0.38

11 5 0.62 0.38

12 3 -1.38 1.92

13 5 0.62 0.38

Total Score=57 y2 9.08

y2

S2 = n2 = 0.84

Employee Category Junior Level Employee Senior Level Employee

Sample Size 13 17

Mean 4.38 4.06

Standard Deviation 0.73 0.84

S = (n1-1) S12+ (n2-1) S2

2

n1+n2-2

X - Y n1. n2

t =

S n1 + n2

=0.77

=1.14

Comment [m5]: You need explain a bit of det

and reason of establishment about the formula,

whose formula are they that we are u sing here,

reliability of formula, how this formula useful to

out the figure..etc

Analysis With Calculation) With Comment

Documents

Transcript of Analysis With Calculation) With Comment