Fin Irjmets1636223450
Fin Irjmets1636223450
Fin Irjmets1636223450
70%
60% [VALUE]
50%
40%
30%
[VALUE]
20%
[VALUE]
10%
[VALUE] [VALUE]
0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
50.0%
44%
45.0%
40.0% 38%
35.0%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0% 12.8%
10.0%
5.0% 0.5% 1.5%
0.0%
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
Disagree
90%
77.9%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20% 12%
8%
10% 2.1%
0%
0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
Figure 3: Good relationship with coworkers helps in building good work environment
When asked to the respondents regarding their relationship with coworkers and how it helps to build a
conducive work environment in their respective organization. The results are shown as in figure 3, which is
noticeably shown how whooping 77.9% out of 100% respondents strongly agreed in how their good
relationship with coworkers have contributed to positive work environment, followed by 12% also agreed to it,
whereas 8% respondents had neutral response over the statement. Meager 2.1% respondents disagreed to the
significance of relationship with coworkers at work.
3.4. Good training and development programs helps an employee to contribute to the good work
environment of an organization. (Kum, 2014)
60% 52%
50%
40% 34.5%
30%
20% 12%
10% 1.5%
0%
0%
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
50%
50%
40%
28%
30%
15%
20%
5%
10% 2%
0%
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
80% 76%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20% 13%
10% 6% 5%
0%
0%
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
50.0%
47.5%
45.0%
40.0%
35.0% 33%
30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
15.0% 15%
10.0%
5.0% 1.5% 3%
0.0%
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
53%
60%
50%
40%
30%
18.7%
20% 14%
9.5%
4.8%
10%
0%
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
44%
45%
40% 34.2%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15% 9.2%
8%
10% 4.6%
5%
0%
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly
Disagree Agree
Figure 4.10
50%
44%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25% 22.6%
20% 18%
15% 11.0%
10%
4.4%
5%
0%
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
Disagree
Figure 10: Inappropriate physical working condition contributes to the bad work environment.
From the above figure 10, 44% and 22.6% respondents agreed and strongly agreed that inappropriate working
conditions such as insufficient lightening, ventilation, low air quality, inappropriate temperature, and office
setup affect the work environment negatively. 11% showed neutral response. 18% and 4.4% respondents
disagreed and strongly disagreed respectively.
3.11. I feel I work in an inappropriate working condition (insufficient ventilation, inappropriate
temperature, air quality, congested office setup), which affects my level of performance at work.
Figure 4.11
70.0%
62%
60.0%
50.0% 44%
40.0%
30.0%
0.0%
Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
Disagree
Figure 11: Inappropriate physical work condition influences employees’ work performance negatively
Inappropriate physical working conditions influenced about 58% of the employees who strongly agreed and
agreed. 62% of the employees did not pay much attention to the influence of work condition on their work
performance. Whereas, the rest 33.8% of the employees who respondent to the survey showed disagreement.
3.12 Hypotheses findings and results
Table 4: Correlation Testing on Hypotheses
H1 Work environment has a significant relationship with r = 0.741 (Strong positive) p = 0.000 (p
employee’ performance <0.050) Hence, fail to reject H1
H2 There is a significant impact of training and development on r = 0.595 (Strong positive) p = 0.000 (p
employees’ performance <0.050) Hence, fail to reject H2
H3 There is a significant impact of employee benefits on r = 0.744 (Strong positive) p = 0.000 (p
employees’ performance <0.050) Hence, fail to reject H3
H4 There is a significant impact of physical factors on employees’ r = 0.531 (Strong positive) p = 0.000 (p
performance <0.050) Hence, fail to reject H4
H5 There is a significant impact of workload on employees’ r = 0.533 (Strong positive) p = 0.000 (p
performance <0.050) Hence, fail to reject H5
H6 There is a significant impact of supervisor & coworker’s r = 0.643 (Strong positive) p = 0.000 (p
support on employees’ performance <0.050) Hence, fail to reject H5
The above table 4 it is easily observed that the Pearson r value is greater than 0.000 for all the hypotheses
mentioned above, which indicates that there is positive correlation between work environment as calculate via
selected factors and employee performances. It can also be seen that p value sig (2-tailed) were less than the
0.05 indicating significant correlation between workplace environment via selected factors (training and
development, adequate workload, employees benefit, supervisor/ coworkers support and physical factors) and
employee performances.
This tabulated results proves the significance in relationship of work environment factors chosen for this study
to the employees’ performances ta work. All the independent variables employee benefits, supervisor/
coworkers support, adequate workload, training & development and physical work conditions are significantly
in relationship to the dependent variable employees’ performances. The dominant variable we can see in this
study is the employees’ benefits.
According to the H1 results r=0.741 and p = 0.000 (p <0.050) indicated that a significant correlation existed
between work environment and the employees’ performances after first separately testing the selected factors
and the studying the overall impact, this result was supporting the (BUSHIRI C., 2014) who also conducted the