1
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
Human Resource is the most significant elements in an organization. Without people, the goals of an entity could not be possibly done. Thus, managers and administrators should consider various factors. One of which is diversity of the employees for this is the core area that would eventually produce effective job outcomes. Diversity is a common and important HR issue. Employee diversity is discussed as a complicated yet vital goal to achieve for organizational effectiveness. Diversity among employees is beneficial in several ways, including enhancing the quality of work and representing constituents or clients of various backgrounds. However, achieving workplace diversity is bound to engender conflict. Employers must adhere to hiring, promotion and termination practices that do not discriminate people of different races, culture, beliefs, values, ages or sexual orientations. Considering employee’s diversity is a new way of thinking about maximizing the potential of everyone within the organization. It is basically about providing equality within the organization. Laws are clear that workplace discrimination will not be tolerated. HR personnel must ensure that the policies of the company regarding anti-discrimination are being kept. Diversity is about learning from others who are not the same, about dignity and respect for all, and about creating workplace environments and practices that encourage learning from others and capture the advantage of diverse perspectives. The researchers were inspired to conduct this study knowing that individual carries the baggage of our personal values, experience, beliefs and perceptions with us
2
everywhere. It is also inevitable for us to meet diverse people inside or outside the workplace. We, as students wondered how to handle this kind of situation not only in the workplace but in our school campus as well. By this study, we can acquire new ideas and broaden our knowledge regarding on this matter that will help us to be more informed and to be able to apply these new acquired ideas when being faced with the situation in the near future.
Review of Related Literature and Studies
This chapter presents literatures and previous studies related to gender diversity towards productivity of employees. Gender diversity means the proportion of males to females in the workplace. There seems to be some highly disputed attempts to provide evidence that women’s and men’s brains are subtly different, leading them to function differently, or perhaps, making males and females interested in different aspects of their situated reality. In the past, all women in the workplace were automatically assigned to temporary or part-time or low responsibility jobs because it was understood that their first priority was taking care of their families. Gender diversity is about sexual differences. This includes but is not limited to women receiving lower pay, mothers being penalized for taking care of their families, homosexuals being told, "Don't ask, don't tell," in the military, transsexuals being alienated from mainstream jobs, and men being expected to provide the main source of income for their families (M. J. Joachim, 2009). It is driven by a business need today (Kalpana Morparia 2007). In this way, organizations can be far more successful in bringing gender diversity to the workplace rather than a system which is patronizing —
3
and, therefore, demeaning—or looking to recruit a certain number from each gender to bring parity. For gender diversity to succeed and become a reality, companies need to look at issues not from a stereotypical point of view, but from an employee’s perspective. I am just trying to underline the fact that the need for flexibility at the workplace is not limited to women. It’s true that women need l onger sabbaticals for raising a family or other such commitments, but men, too, expect alternative work practices such as flexible timings, a compressed work week, telecommuting, etc. to pursue education, other interests, or just help out spouse or family. Morparia 2007 concluded that in a talent-scarce economy, what is required is flexible and employee-friendly HR practices and processes to get the maximum out of employees. Creating a culture of inclusion and greater employee involvement with the organization, companies can achieve better productivity and competitive advantage. Based on the business case for diversity in organizations literature, demographically heterogeneous groups (such as those composed of men and women, rather than of only men or of only women) may be best placed to provide a diversity of perspectives that might enhance the development and creation of knowledge. As men and women are members of different groups based on their sex, they might differ somewhat in research interests and methodologies (Addis & Villa, 2003). In Hofstede (2000), the concept of MAS (masculine attitudes and behavior) and it’s opposite – femininity – represent the different ways in which societies deal with implications of sex differences. In his review of the relevant literature in psychology, sociology and political science, Hofstede (2000) found a nearly consistent pattern of men rating advancement and earning power more highly and women rating interpersonal aspects, service and physical environment more highly.
The MAS
4
dimension affects whether the organization will be people oriented, emphasizing the quality of life and the environment (low MAS) or task-oriented (high MAS). Low MAS is related to sympathy for the weak and to social leveling. According to Hofstede, gender roles, as reflected in MAS, are transferred through socialization. Men are taught to be assertive and women to be nurturing.
What is important to note in Hofstede’s argument
is that gender differences are one aspect of the overall cultural differences that exist between human beings. Thus, both national/ethnic and gender differences constitute the socio-cultural factors that influence perceptions and behaviors (Hofstede 2000). In view of this gender difference, it is not surprising that women’s discourse tends to be more tentative and socially oriented in contrast to men, who tend to be more categorical (Preisler, 2002). Furthermore, women show a proclivity to highlight cooperation in their discourse while men tend to be competitive (Coates, 2001). There are a number of studies that show a link between the gender distribution in a company’s management and its profitability. Researchers at Cranfield University in England have found a show a consistent and increasingly high correlation between high market value and the presence of women directors. Researchers study the 100 largest companies on the London Stock Exchange and annually publish the female FTSE index. They showed that 18 of the 20 companies with the highest market capitalization during 2003 had at least one woman director Of the 20 companies with the lowest market capitalization only eight had woman directors (Vinnicombe & Singh, 2003). Mixed teams at all levels are important for producing goods and services that satisfy the customer’s needs and expectations. ―In consumer businesses, the more a company mirrors its markets demographically, the better positioned it is to sense and respond to evolving market needs‖ (Catalyst, 2002).
5
Becoming known as an employer promoting gender diversity can increase the prime source of competitive advantage: people (The Kingsmill Review: London, 2003). To be competitive, it is crucial to recruit the right people from the start and being able to keep them. Studies of young leaders show that both women and men are critical of management’s image today and the conditions that prevail. They want flexible working options and family friendly policies. Companies that do not listen to young managers will be ignored by women and men who demand greater balance in their lives (Popcorn & Marigold, 2005). Adams and Ferreira (2009) analyze data with characteristics of directors and boards from almost 2000 firms in the United States for the period 1996-2003. To address the possible endogeneity of the fraction of female directors, they use the fraction of male board members with connections to female directors in other board positions as instrumental variable. In addition they include firm fixed effects. Besides their finding that gender diverse boards monitor directors more intensively, they also find that diversity has a positive impact on performance in firms that have otherwise weak (external) governance. However, more gender diverse boards are harmful for the performance of firms with strong (external) governance, possibly due to over monitoring. These findings are consistent with each other if internal and external monitoring are substitutes. On average, the effect of gender diversity on firm performance turns out to be negative. This leads Adams and Ferreira to conclude that mandating gender quotas for directors can reduce the value of well- governed firms. Most managers and supervisors at technical companies struggle to achieve and maintain gender diversity. In particular, engineering, scientific, information technology, and oil and gas companies are faced with the problem of recruiting and retaining female
6
employees. Gender-diversity discussions tend to focus on three main concerns: 1) the relationship between corporate profitability and gender diversity, 2) the problem of recruiting and retaining women professionals in technical companies where the corporate culture can be inhospitable, and 3) the number of women entering and graduating from science, technology, engineering, and mathematics programs (Weiss 2003). According to Michaels 2011, Gender diversity affects human resources in many ways: HR must manage gender diversity, provide necessary training and socialization, track the effectiveness of any gender diversity related programs and ensure that an organization has a proper amount of gender diversity. Also, gender diversity must be monitored to ensure that people of both genders are treated fairly and are represented fairly in the workplace. Human resources has the responsibility to communicate that gender diversity should be viewed as an asset, not a hindrance, to an organization. It is HR's role to ensure that this message is known right from the start of someone's interaction with an organization. Addressing this during the job-interview process and employee orientation sets the standards and expectations for gender diversity appreciation within the organization. Unmarried women were likely to quit as soon as they’re married and married women were likely to quit as soon as they became pregnant. Women with children were understood to care more about the children than about work. In addition, there was a widespread belief that women were not as capable as men, either physically or mentally or emotionally. Organizations have been slowly adjusting to these changes, learning to treat women as the equals of men and not as a pool of potential dates. Both discriminating against female employees and treating them in a sexual manner are now
7
against the law. Women should be given the same career opportunities as men; homosexual
couples should be
given the
same
health
insurance
benefits
as
heterosexual couples. However, many managers would counter that organizations are not supposed to change the society. They are supposed to manufacture goods and provide services for money. Their responsibilities are to their stockholders, not women's groups. It might be morally desirable for corporations to give all their profits to the poor, but it would not be responsible action. The application to women is not straightforward since the division of labor by sex divides segments of the labor market, including internal labor markets in the primary sector (Pechman 2003). Greater emphasis on the social phenomena of class struggle and the labor process at the workplace has deepened the analysis of labor market operations, but even this more holistic approach has usually not incorporated gender. The processes of de-skilling jobs and assigning jobs are interrelated, and differential use of male and female workers is an integral part of these processes. In contrast, genders remain an important consideration for organizations around the world, as the roles of men and women continue to be differentiated in all countries. ―Think manager, think male‖ phenomena where male characteristic are seen as appropriate for managers and the reverse for women (Prime, Carter, Karsten & Maznevski 2008). This stereotype of men as managers and women as suitable for supportive roles appears to hold internationally; there seems to be a global perception of female and male characteristic that results in men progressing to higher levels in organizations. Men and women struggle over who will get which jobs, while management and workers struggle over the design of the job structure and working conditions as well
8
as the assignment of workers to jobs. More recent research has shown how the internal labor market structures differ for women from the structures originally described for men. The outward symbol of these different structures by gender is the high degree of sex segregation within firms by title. Men and women have profoundly different labor market experiences within the same firm although firms treat workers in the same job category equally. These include demographic trends; the potential of diversity can be an asset, and marketing considerations. (Gomez, Balkin, Caroy, and Dimick 2008). Today, many organizations realize that employee diversity can actually enhance organizational effectiveness. There are useful changes in internal decision process. Employee Diversity can improve organizational functioning by stimulating greater creativity, improving problem solving and increasing organization’s flexibil ity. With regards to marketing concerns, there concentration on these areas means that they are significant market for the consumer products and services that may differ from other markets.
Theoretical Framework
The theories below relates to the entirety of our study since it highlights the important matters that are being tackled and most especially it provides a greater understanding on how, we as Human Resource Management students and future Human Resource practitioners, to fully grasp the essence of gender sensitivity in the workplace, how to handle issues regarding conflict between employees when things seems to go out of hand, and it also acts as our guideline to help us improve in our chosen profession.
9
Social identity/Categorization Theory has been used to predict and understand how diversity influences individual attitude and behavior (Jackson et al., 2003). To explain the effects of diversity on individual outcomes, the basic argument is that one’s similarity on visible and relatively immutable traits influences feelings of identification (Tsui, Egan, & O’Reilly, 2009). Particularly, sex is one obvious example that can be used to illustrate how self-categorization may increase or decrease the attractiveness of a group to an individual (Hoffman & Hurst, 2006). Individuals will go through a process of self-categorization in which they classify themselves and others into social categories using such attributes as age, race, or gender (Williams & O’Reilly, 2010 ). This process permits a person to define him or herself in terms of a social identity (Tajfel & Turner, 2004), and leads to in-group/outgroup distinctions (Kramer, 2006). Furthermore, individuals desire to maintain a highlevel of self-esteem (Tajfel, 2003) and a positive self-identity (Tajfel & Turner, 2004). To maintain a positive self-identity, individuals may seek to maximize intergroup distinctiveness (Kramer, 2006), and perceive individuals from out-groups as less trustworthy, honest, and cooperative than members of their own group (Tajfel, 2003). Studies based on social identity/categorization theory confirm the negative effects of diversity on group process, finding decreased satisfaction with the group, increased
turnover,
lowered
levels
of
cohesiveness,
reduced
within-group
communication, and higher levels of conflict (Crocker & Major, 2003;). Group processes are related to group performance, which in turn, should be related to firm performance (Frink et al, 2003), Overall, social identity/ categorization theory tend to suggest that gender diversity results in negative performance outcomes.
10
Another common theoretical foundation for studies of diversity rests on the Similarity/Attraction Paradigm (Byrne, 2005). This paradigm argues that people are more attracted to similar others. ―Birds of a feather flock together‖ is a proverb that best summarizes the similarity/attraction paradigm. Members of the same demographic group enjoy easier communication, faster development of rapport, and have a greater perceived likelihood that values and opinions will be validated (Gedees & Konrad, 2003). If individuals can choose freely, there is a strong tendency for them to select a person that is s imilar (William & O’Reilly, 2010). The similarity/attraction paradigm supports the view that when group members have similar attributes, stronger cohesiveness between them will result (Byrne, 2005). Homogeneous groups lead to increased satisfaction and cooperation, and reduce emotional conf licts (Williams & O’Reilly, 2010 ). By contrast, when similarity between members is low; increased or intensified conflict may result, reducing individual satisfaction, and increasing turnover and work pre ssure (Tsui & O’Reilly III, 2010 ). In heterogamous
groups,
differences
between
members
lead
to
decreased
communication, message distortion, and more errors in communication For example, Alagna, Reddy, and Collins (2008) demonstrated that mixed-sex groups reported higher levels of conflict and tension and less friendliness than same sex groups. The distribution of demographic differences in groups and organizations affects processes and performance (Pfeffer, 2003). Homogeneous teams are likely to be more productive than heterogeneous teams because of the mutual attraction between team members with similar characteristics (Horwitz, 2005). Thus, consistent with social
11
identity/categorization theory, the similarity/attraction paradigm argues that gender diversity is associated with negative performance outcomes. Value-in-diversity hypothesis . The value-in-diversity perspective tends to view variation in demographic composition as a positive influence on work group processes (Ancona
&
Caldwell,
2007 ).
The
―value-in-diversity‖
hypothesis
argues
that
heterogeneity positively impacts performance because of the unique cognitive resources that members bring to team (Cox & Blake, 2008). Demographically diverse individuals are expected to have a broader range of knowledge and experience than homogeneous individuals; individuals in diverse groups may have greater access to information networks outside their work group (William & O’Reilly, 2010 ). For this perspective, diversity is valuable when it adds new information. Groups that are composed of a variety of members can have a direct positive impact through the increase in the skills, ability, information, and knowledge that diversity brings (Tziner & Eden, 2003). Kanter (2004) found that the most innovative companies deliberately established heterogeneous teams to capitalize on a multiplicity of views while avoiding the pitfalls of groupthink. Therefore, diverse individuals with varying demographic backgrounds add more dimensions to problem-solving and decision-making processes while promoting creativity and innovation, hence generating more performance (Horwitz, 2005). Clearly, this positive impact of diversity can be expected when the task can benefit from multiple perspectives and diverse kno wledge (William & O’Reilly, 2010 ). Most researchers agree that diversity can provide a wider range of knowledge and skills for problem-solving (eg., Ancona & Caldwell, 2007; Pelled, Eisenhardt, & Xin, 2004).
12
Therefore, value-in-diversity hypothesis suggests a positive relationship between gender diversity and firm performance (Frink et al., 2003).
Conceptual Framework
As shown in figure 1, this study conceptualizes that gender sensitivity in a company can influence the productivity of employees. The empl oyees’ productivity can be affected by the diversity of gender of their co-employees. Company with Employees’ Gender Diverse or Nondiverse
Productivity
Figure 1. The Conceptual Framework Showing the Variables
Statement of the Problem
This study aims to determine the influence of gender sensitivity in terms of employees’ productivity. Specifically, it seeks to answer the following questions: 1. What is the distribution of employees according to: a)
Diverse Gender
b)
Nondiverse Gender?
2. What is the level of production of employees in terms of: a)
Diverse Gender; and
b)
Nondiverse Gender?
13
3. What is the level of customer satisfaction in diverse and non-diverse employees? 4. Is there a significant relationship between employees’ productivity and the nature of beauty salon such as non-diverse and diverse employees?
Hypothesis
There is a significant relationship between gender sensitivity and the employees’ productivity.
Significance of the Study
It is important to study this matter because it enables the organization and the people inside the organization to analyze the capacities and strengths of their workforce which may be helpful on considering the gender sensitivity of employees. The objective of gender sensitivity is to communicate respect for differences. This study will benefit the following: To Students, it would be useful for them in the sense that it will provide them awareness about the effects of gender sensitivity on being productive. To Company , the result of this study would help give emphasis on the importance of gender sensitivity which will eventually be contributory to the productivity of the company. To Employees, they will be more effective and more efficient with their jobs, and they will be able to unfold more of their potentialities. To Other researchers, this serves as a guide in conducting a similar research study and a reference for further works.
14
Chapter 2 METHOD
This chapter details the research design, setting, participants, and the procedure that was used in the study.
Research Design
This study employs the descriptive survey research design. As cited by Mark R. Leary (2010), it is designed to describe the characteristics or behaviors of a particular population in a systematic and accurate fashion. In this study, the design will be used to find out how gender sensitivity can influence employees’ productivity at D’Infinity Salon and Spa and at 2Beb’z Salon.
Setting
The researchers will conduc t a survey at D’Infinity Salon and Spa located at Door 108 Ground Floor Doña Segunda Building, C.M. Recto Street, Davao City and at 2Beb’z Salon inside Imperial Hotel Building, Claveria Street, Davao City. The establishments above mentioned are just part of the growing salon business in Davao City which people made themselves as regular customers due to providing good quality services.
Participants
The people who are currently working on this proposal decided to conduct a survey on the employees of the said parlor establishments to be able to determine how
15
does gender sensitivity influences the effectiveness and efficiency of an employee and what does this gender sensitivity contribute to the company. The
researchers
will
randomly
select
from
the
two
mentioned
parlor
establishments, five (5) employees and ten (10) customers coming from each diverse and non-diverse company.
Procedure
The following will be the steps in conducting the study: 1. The researchers will do a preliminary visit to D’Infinity Salon and Spa and at 2Beb’z Salon to submit an approval letter to conduct a survey. 2. Upon approval, the researchers will organize an interview with the Human Resource Officer in order to determine the numbers of respondents to the survey and are qualified to answer the questions. 3. The copies of questions will be distributed personally to the respondents by the researchers. 4. The survey sheets will be retrieved when the respondents have finished answering the questionnaires. 5. Data collected will be analyzed and will be interpreted accordingly.
16
Chapter 3 RESULTS
This chapter discussed the ________. Herein, the data were presented, analyzed and interpreted.
17
Chapter 4 DISCUSSION
This chapter
18
Chapter 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In this chapter, the researchers presented the conclusion of the study including the recommendations.
19
References
Adams, Ren´ee, and Ferreira , Daniel (2009). Women in the boardroom and their Impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics 94 (2): 291 –309. Addis, E., & Villa, P. 2003. The editorial boards of Italian economics journals: Women, gender and social networking. Feminist Economics, 9(1):75-91. Alagna, S. W., Reddy, D. M., & Collins, D. L. (2008). Perceptions of functioning in mixed-sex and male medical training groups. Journal of Medical Education, 57(10), 801-803. Ancona, D. G., & Caldwell, D. F. (2007). Demography and design: Predictors of new product team performance. Organization Science, 3(3), 321-341. Byrne, D. (2005). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press. Catalyst, 2002. Making Change: Creating a Business Case for Diversity Coates, J. (2001). Women, Men and Languages: Studies in Language and Linguistics, Longman, London. Crocker, J., & Major, B. (2003). Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma. Psychological Review, 96(4), 608-630. Frink, D. D., Robinson, R. K., Reithel, B., Arthur, M. M., Ammeter, A. P., Ferris, G.R., Kaplan, D. M., & Morrisette, H. S. (2003). Gender demography and organization performance: A two-study investigation with convergence. Group & Organization Management, 28(1), 127-147. Geddes, D., & Konrad, A. M. (2003). Demographic differences and reactions to performance feedback. Human Relations, 56(12), 1485-1513. Goessl, Larry (2010). The Benefits of Gender Diversity in the Workplace Web site: http://www.helium.com/items/1750765-the-benefits-of-gender-diversityin-the-workplace Gomez, Luis R., Balkin, David B., Caroy, Robert L., & Dimick, David E. (2008), Managing Workforce Diversity, Prentice-Hall Canada Inc. page 111 Hoffman, C., & Hurst N. (2006). Gender stereotypes: Perception or rationalization? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 197-208. Hofstede, G. (2000), Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work Related Values, SAGE, London, 2000.
20
Horwitz, K. S. (2005). The compositional impact of team diversity on performance: Theoretical considerations. Human Resource Development Review, 4, 219-244. Jackson, E. S., Joshi, A., & Erhardt, L. N. (2003). Recent research on team and organizational diversity: Swot analysis and implications. Journal of Management, 29(6), 801-830. Joachim, M.J., July 8, 2009. The Benefits of Gender Diversity in the Workplace. Wed site: http://www.helium.com/items/1509325-gender-diversity-employerstaffing-company-loyalty-team-work-overcoming-prejudice-respect Kanter, R. M. (2004). The change masters. New York: Simon and Schuster. Kramer, R. (2006). Intergroup relations and organizational dilemmas: The role of categorization processes. In B. Staw and L. Cummings (Eds.), Research inorganizational behavior, Vol. 13: 191-228. Greenwich CT: JAI Press. Leary, M. R. (2010). Introduction to Behavioral Research Methods: Fourth Edition. Michaels, Cadence (January 11, 2011). eHow Contributor, About How Gender Diversity Can Affect Human Resources Morparia, Kalpana (2007) Women at Work | Gender Diversity is a business need. Web site: http://www.livemint.com/2007/11/05010954/Women-at-work----Genderdiver.html Pechman, Joseph A., Brown, Clair (2003). Gender in the Workplace. Brookings Institution. Washington, DC. Page Number 3. Pelled, L., Eisenhardt, K., & Xin, K. (2004). Demographic diversity in work groups: An empirical assessment of linkages to intragroup conflict and performance/ Working Paper. School of Business, University of Southern California. Pfeffer, J. (2003). Organizational demography. Research in Organizational Behavior, 5, 299-357. Popcorn & Marigold (2005). EVElution: Understanding Women – Eight Essential Truths that Work in Your Business and Your Life / 2001 Preisler, B., October 12, 2002. ―The Tentative Female,‖ English Today, pp. 29 -30. Prime, Carter, Karsten & Maznevski (2008) . Manager’s perceptions of women and men leaders. International Journal of cross cultural management page 171 Tajfel, H. (2003). Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21
Tajfel, H. (2003). Social identity and intergroup relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (2004). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology and Intergroup Relations: 7-24: Chicago, Nelson-Hall. The Kingsmill Review: London, 2003 . A review of Women’s Employment and Pay, London 2001 pp 36-37 Tsui, A. S., & O'Reilly III, C. A. (2010). Beyond simple demographic effects: The importance of relational demography in superior-subordinate dyads. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 402-423. Tsui, A. S., Egan, T. D., & O Reilly, C. A., III. (2009). Being different: Relational demography and organizational attachment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(4), 549-579. Tziner, A., & Eden, D. (2003). Effects of crew composition on crew performance: Does the whole equal the sum of its parts? Journal of Applied psychology, 70(1),67-85. Vinnicombe & Singh, 2003. The 2003 Female FTSE Index, Cranfield School of Management Weiss, Kurt K., 2003. Managing Gender Diversity: Five Secrets for a Manager’s Toolkit Web site: http://www.spe.org/twa/print/archives/2008/2008v4n3/twa2008_v4n3_SoftSkills.p df Williams, K., & O’Reilly, C. A. (20 10). Demography and diversity: A review of 40 years of research. In Staw, B., & Sutton, R. (Eds), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 77-140). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
22
Gender Sensitivity Among Employees’ Productivity at D’Infinity Salon and Spa and at 2Beb’z Salon, Davao City
A Thesis Proposal Presented to the Faculty of Arts and Sciences Department
Mijares, Lythel Angelique S. Cardaño, Anne Murray C. Jalalon, Elaissa Kaye S. Digao, John Paul O. Tenajeros, Lyndel L. Tejada, Jenelyn M. Juntilla, Trisha A.
April 2012
23
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
1
1.2 Review of Related Literature
2
1.3 Theoretical Framework
8
1.4 Conceptual Framework
12
1.5 Statement of the Problem
12
1.6 Hypothesis
13
1.7 Significance of the Study
13
Chapter 2. METHOD
2.1 Research Design
14
2.2 Setting
14
2.3 Participants
14
2.4 Procedure
15
Chapter 3. RESULTS Chapter 4. DISCUSSION Chapter 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
16
24
LIST OF TABLES No.
1
Title
The
16
Page
25
LIST OF FIGURE No.
1
Title
The Conceptual Framework of the Study
Page
12
