Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Sample mba final year project

33,098 views

Published on

  • Call In Your Angel Guides - Listen to this empowering free "Miracle Tone" that calls in your angels to help guide, love, support you. Watch as worry disappears and abundance flows into your life. Go here to experience the magic! ➤➤ https://bit.ly/30Ju5r6
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Doctor's 2-Minute Ritual For Shocking Daily Belly Fat Loss! Watch This Video ●●● http://ishbv.com/bkfitness3/pdf
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Do This Simple 2-Minute Ritual To Loss 1 Pound Of Belly Fat Every 72 Hours ➤➤ https://tinyurl.com/bkfitness4u
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • The #1 Woodworking Resource With Over 16,000 Plans, Download 50 FREE Plans... ★★★ http://ishbv.com/tedsplans/pdf
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • ★★ How Long Does She Want You to Last? ★★ A recent study proved that the average man lasts just 2-5 minutes in bed (during intercourse). The study also showed that many women need at least 7-10 minutes of intercourse to reach "The Big O" - and, worse still... 30% of women never get there during intercourse. Clearly, most men are NOT fulfilling there women's needs in bed. Now, as I've said many times - how long you can last is no guarantee of being a GREAT LOVER. But, not being able to last 20, 30 minutes or more, is definitely a sign that you're not going to "set your woman's world on fire" between the sheets. Question is: "What can you do to last longer?" Well, one of the best recommendations I can give you today is to read THIS report. In it, you'll discover a detailed guide to an Ancient Taoist Thrusting Technique that can help any man to last much longer in bed. I can vouch 100% for the technique because my husband has been using it for years :) Here's the link to the report ●●● http://ishbv.com/rockhardx/pdf♣♣ 10 Easy Ways to Improve Your Performance in Bed... ■■■ http://ishbv.com/rockhardx/pdf
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Sample mba final year project

  1. 1. http://www.projectscollege.blogspot.com A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON THE PERFORMANCE OF [COMPANY NAME] ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY WITH ITS INDUSTRIAL COMPETITORS By [STUDENT NAME] (Reg. no. ) Of [COLLEGE NAME] A PROJECT REPORT Submitted to the FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree Of MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION [UNIVERSITY NAME] [PLACE] [YEAR]
  2. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS S.No CHAPTERS PAGE. NO. Abstract I List of tables II List of figures IV CHAPTER – 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Industry Profile 1 1.2 Company Profile 7 1.3 Product Profile 9 CHAPTER – 2: DEVELOPMENT OF MAIN THEME 2.1 Need of the study 13 2.2 Objectives of the study 14 2.3 Scope of the study 15 2.4 Limitations of the study 16 2.5 Review of Literature 17 CHAPTER – 3: ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION 3.1 Research Methodology 21 3.2 Analysis & Interpretation 26 3.3 Findings 72 3.4 Suggestions 76 3.5 Conclusion 77 APPENDIX Questionnaire I Bibliography V
  3. 3. ABSTRACT This project titled as “A Comparative Study on the Performance of [COMPANY NAME] Alliance Insurance Company with its Industrial Competitors” focuses on some of the key issues like competitive position that [COMPANY NAME] holds, the strengths and weaknesses of the company’s insurance schemes, consumer’s awareness, customer’s perception etc. The sample size for this study is 120. The research design carried out for this study is descriptive research. Primary data are collected from the clients of various insurance companies through a structured undisguised questionnaire. Secondary data are gathered from the websites of [COMPANY NAME] and other companies for the purpose of making a comparative analysis. Statistical tools like graphs, interval estimation, chi- square test, H-test, and correlation have been used for the purpose of analysis. The findings of the study were arrived at based on the analysis conducted. Some of the major findings of the study relate to increased necessity of having a general insurance cover, higher reputation enjoyed by [COMPANY NAME] and priority to have auto/car and health insurance cover by majority of the respondents. Some of the suggestions of the study are to make amendments in the premium rates, to maintain the promptness in the claim settlement procedure, to introduce additional insurance covers and create more awareness about the products. The study is been concluded that the performance of [COMPANY NAME] is excellent in comparison with its industrial competitors and that the company has high growth prospects in future years to come.
  4. 4. LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO. TITLE OF TABLE PAGE NO 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7 3.2.8 3.2.9 3.2.10 3.2.11 3.2.12 3.2.13 3.2.14 3.2.15 3.2.16 3.2.17 Age of respondents Gender of respondents Occupation of respondents Number of members in a family Annual income of respondents Necessity of having a general insurance cover No. of general insurance policies held by respondents Are the general insurance policies taken from the same company No. of companies in which respondent is a policy holder Companies enjoying higher reputation amidst customers Awareness among the [COMPANY NAME] customers towards insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] Respondent’s opinion towards customer-centric products offered by [COMPANY NAME] Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] Sources by which the respondent’s became familiar of [COMPANY NAME] Period of insurance cover held by respondents Amount of yearly insurance premium paid by respondents. Respondent’s comment on the yearly insurance 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 35 36 38 40 41 42 43 44 47
  5. 5. 3.2.18 3.2.19 3.2.20 3.2.21 3.2.22 3.2.23 3.2.24 3.2.25 premium paid Satisfactory level of respondents towards the policy taken No. of respondent’s having insurance agents Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by insurance agents Claims rejected by insurance companies Factors that influences customers to choose a particular company in buying an insurance policy Respondent’s satisfactory level towards various features of general insurance policy taken Sources most preferred by respondents to know about an insurance company and its products General Insurance cover that is most favored by respondents 52 57 59 61 62 64 68 69
  6. 6. LIST OF CHARTS CHART NO. TITLE OF CHART PAGE NO 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7 3.2.8 3.2.9 3.2.10 3.2.11 3.2.12 3.2.13 3.2.14 3.2.15 3.2.16 3.2.17 Age of respondents Gender of respondents Occupation of respondents Number of members in a family Annual income of respondents Necessity of having a general insurance cover No. of general insurance policies held by respondents Are the general insurance policies taken from the same company No. of companies in which respondent is a policy holder Companies enjoying higher reputation amidst customers Awareness among the [COMPANY NAME] customers towards insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] Respondent’s opinion towards customer-centric products offered by [COMPANY NAME] Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] Sources by which the respondent’s became familiar of [COMPANY NAME] Period of insurance cover held by respondents Amount of yearly insurance premium paid by respondents. Respondent’s comment on the yearly insurance premium paid 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 35 37 38 40 41 42 43 44 48
  7. 7. 3.2.18 3.2.19 3.2.20 3.2.21 3.2.22 3.2.23 3.2.24 3.2.25 Satisfactory level of respondents towards the policy taken No. of respondent’s having insurance agents Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by insurance agents Claims rejected by insurance companies Factors that influences customers to choose a particular company in buying an insurance policy Respondent’s satisfactory level towards various features of general insurance policy taken Sources most preferred by respondents to know about an insurance company and its products General Insurance cover that is most favored by respondents 53 57 60 61 63 65 68 71
  8. 8. 1.1 INDUSTRY PROFILE Introduction The outlook for the general insurance industry in India is stable as per the financial forecast that has been made. Over the medium and long term, India’s insurance market will continue to experience major changes as its operating environment increasingly deregulates. On the one hand, a mix of new products, new delivery system and a greater awareness of risk will generate growth. On the other hand, the competition is expected to remain intense as private sector insurers and those about to enter India seek to win market share from the more established public sector entities. In 2006-07, India’s general insurance market witnessed a variety of changes as deregulation continued at a hectic pace. With the removal of pricing controls on fire and engineering lies in 2007, insurers have since discounted their rates by 50% or more in their quest to retain or win market share. Furthermore, the number of private insurers is expected to grow as various foreign companies have announced intentions to establish joint ventures. History of Insurance industry In some sense we can say that insurance appeared simultaneously with appearance of human society. In earlier economies, we can see insurance in the form of people helping each other. For example, if a house is burnt, the members of the community help build a new one. Should the same thing happen to one’s neighbour, the other neighbors must come to help? Otherwise, neighbors will not receive help in the future. Insurance in the modern sense, started as a methods of transferring or distributing risk were practiced by Chinese and Babylonian traders as long ago as the 3rd and 2nd millennia BC, respectively. Chinese merchants traveling treacherous river rapids would redistribute their cargo across many vessels to limit the loss due to any single vessel’s capsizing. The Babylonians developed a system which was recorded in the famous Code of Hammurabi, c. 1750 BC, and practiced by early Mediterranean sailing merchants. If a merchant received a loan to fund his shipment, he would pay the lender an additional sum in exchange for the lender’s guarantee to cancel the loan should the shipment be stolen.
  9. 9. Greek monarchs were the first to insure their people and made it official by registering the insuring process in governmental notary offices. They invented the concept of the ‘general average’. Merchants whose goods were being shipped together would pay a proportionally divided premium which would be used to reimburse any merchant whose goods were jettisoned during storm or sinking of the vessel in the sea. The Greeks and Romans introduced the origins of health and life insurance c. 600 AD when they organized guilds called “benevolent societies” which cared for the families and paid funeral expenses of members upon death. Guilds in the middle Ages served a similar purpose. Before insurance was established in the late 17th century, “friendly societies” existed in England, in which people donated amounts of money to a general sum that could be used for emergencies. Separate insurance contracts (i.e., insurance policies not bundled with loans or other kinds of contracts) were invented in Greeks rulers in the 14th century, as were insurance pools backed by pledges of landed estates. These new insurance contracts allowed insurance to be separated from investment, a separation of roles that first proved useful in marine insurance. Insurance became far more sophisticated in post-Renaissance Europe, and specialized varieties developed. Insurance as we know it today can be traced to the Great Fire of London, which in 1666 A.D devoured 13,200 houses. In the aftermath of this disaster, Nicholas Barbon opened an office to insure buildings. In 1680, he established England’s first fire insurance company, “The Fire Office,” to insure brick and frame homes. The first insurance company in the United States underwrote fire insurance and was formed in Charles Town (modern-day Charleston), South Carolina, in 1732. Evolution of insurance industry in India –Important milestones In India, insurance has a deep-rooted history. It finds mention in the writings of Manu (Manusmrithi ), Yagnavalkya ( Dharmasastra ) and Kautilya ( Arthasastra ). The writings talk in terms of pooling of resources that could be re-distributed in times of calamities such as fire, floods, epidemics and famine. This was probably a pre-cursor to modern day insurance. Ancient Indian history has preserved the earliest traces of
  10. 10. insurance in the form of marine trade loans and carriers’ contracts. Insurance in India has evolved over time heavily drawing from other countries, England in particular Year Event 1818 The advent of life insurance business in India with the establishment of the Oriental Life Insurance Company in Calcutta. 1834 Oriental Life Insurance Failure 1850 The advent of General Insurance in India with the establishment of Triton Insurance Company Ltd in Calcutta 1870 The enactment of the British Insurance Act 1907 The Indian Mercantile Insurance Ltd was set up 1912 The Indian Life Assurance Companies Act, 1912 was the first statutory measure to regulate life business. 1928 The Indian Insurance Companies Act was enacted. 1956 Nationalization of Life Insurance Sector and Life Insurance Corporation .The LIC absorbed 154 Indian, 16 non-Indian insurers as also 75 provident societies. 1971 The General Insurance Corporation of India was incorporated as a company 1973  General insurance business was nationalized with effect from 1st January 1973.  107 insurers were amalgamated and grouped into four companies namely: 1) National Insurance Company Ltd., 2) The New India Assurance Company Ltd., 3) The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd 4) The United India Insurance Company Ltd. 1993 The Government set up a committee under the chairmanship of RN Malhotra former Governor of RBI to propose recommendations for reforms in the insurance sector 2000  The IRDA was incorporated as a statutory body in April 2000.  Foreign companies were allowed ownership of up to 26%.
  11. 11. 2000-01 Insurance Industry had 16 new entrants, 10 in Life and 6 in General Insurance 2001-03 Insurance Industry had 5 new entrants, 2 in Life and 3 in General 2003-04 Insurance Industry had 1new entrant, Sahara India Insurance Company Ltd. In Life Insurance category 2004-05 Insurance Industry had 1new entrant, Shri Ram Insurance company Ltd. In Life Insurance category 2005-06 Bharti Axa Life insurance company was granted Certification of Registration in July 2006 Bharti Axa Life insurance company commenced its operations the newest player in the insurance sector. Evolution of Non-Life insurance in India: The boycott of British goods and British institutions, which occurred because of the nationalist movement, encouraged formation of Indian-owned commercial and business houses. By 1907, the Indian mercantile the first of the long lasting general insurance companies to be established with Indian capital, had started functioning five offices, the New India, Vulcan, Jupiter, British India General and the Universal, were established in 1919 almost simultaneously for transacting general insurance business. In 1928, prominent insurance men of Bombay met and formed the Indian insurance companies association to protect the interest of Indian insurers. Leaders of the insurance industry began to organize conferences, educate public on the benefit of insurance, focus attention on the annual remove of national wealth through invisible export’s, and arise public interest in favour of Indian insurance. In 1950, the planning commission was set up to formulate plans for successive five years. This five year plan brought about large scale economic development and increased insurance consciousness among the people. As insurance business increased the number of claims for compensation against losses also naturally increased. Settlement of too many large claims meant a severe demand on the funds of insurance companies. So to prevent this situation the practice of ‘Reinsurance’ was adopted according to which insurers themselves reinsured portions of the insurances they had undertaken. So Indian
  12. 12. insurance companies with their expanding business wanted to reinsure for which they had to seek foreign reinsurance markets. Since the need for conserving foreign exchange was felt in India all the insurers in India as well as foreigners operating in India formed the India Reinsurance Corporation in 1956. This corporation provided reinsurance facilities. It was compulsory for insurers in India to reinsure a fixed percentage of their insurances with the corporation. The Insurance Amendment Act 1950 imposed certain limitations on expenses of management. The general insurance council constituted what was called the tariff committee to control and regulate terms and conditions of business. In 1972, the General Insurance Business (Nationalization) Act 1972 was passed under the provisions of this act. The general insurance corporation of India was established for the purpose of directing, controlling and caring on the general insurance business and all the 106 insurers were merged and grouped into four subsidiaries of the general insurance corporation of India namely:  National Insurance Company Ltd., with its head office at Calcutta.  The New India Assurance Company Ltd., with its head office at Bombay.  The Oriental Insurance company Ltd., with its head office at Delhi.  The United India Insurance Company Ltd., with its head office at Madras. Three Phases of De-Tariffing India’s general insurance industry has undergone de-tariffing in three phases:  1994 -- marine cargo, personal accident, health, banker liability and aviation  2005-06 -- marine hull segment  2007 -- Fire, engineering and motor own damage (OD). However, the de-tariffing did not immediately allow for free pricing. Instead, insurers were required to follow the “file and use” method, whereby they were expected to file a charter of proposed rates, which was then approved by IRDA. The only segment that remains under a tariff regime is the third party motor business, although there has been a large upward revision in this area’s premium rates by regulators
  13. 13. in recent times. Moreover, commercial third party motor business, which has traditionally contributed to adverse claims ratios, has been moved to a common pool, resulting in loss sharing. Insurance sector – moving quickly The Indian insurance sector is rapidly moving towards international standards of free (risk-based) market pricing and new/innovative product offerings. Big changes have occurred over the last seven years, during which the sector was opened to private participation, but with foreign direct investment (FDI) capped at 26%. With the regulator possibly lifting the ceiling on foreign ownership to 49%, the capacities of domestic partners would no longer constrain capital levels for joint ventures. In the private sector, there were nine players with Future Generali the latest entrant as of September 2007. A number of potential new entrants await the necessary approvals. Most private players have tie-ups with international companies to compensate for their lack of experience in insurance. Within the private sector, ICICI Lombard (IL) leads with 12.4% market share for the period April-December 2007. Recently, Reliance General Insurance (RGI) as emerged as the fastest growing player, recording a 150% rise year-on-year in gross direct premium in the first nine months of 2007-08 1.2. COMPANY PROFILE Founded in 1954, [COMPANY NAME] is one of India's leading finance companies. Quality in lending, transparency in transactions, outstanding customer care and an unyielding commitment to being the best, has made [COMPANY NAME] one of the most respected finance companies in India. [COMPANY NAME] is part of the [RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] Group of companies founded by TV
  14. 14. [RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] Iyengar in the early part of last century. In the 1950s, the [RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] group diversified into general insurance with the Madras Motor and General Insurance Company (MMGI). [COMPANY NAME] Limited was started as a subsidiary of MMGI to provide customers with a range of finance and hire-purchase options for Light, Medium & Heavy Commercial Vehicles, Cars, Jeeps, Machinery and Equipment. It has over 50 years of experience in operation, and is recognized as one of the most trusted and respected NBFC's in India. The company continues to enjoy highest credit rating of AAA from leading rating agencies in the country. [COMPANY NAME] has a Nation-wide presence with over 167 branches, 650,000 depositors and nearly 100,000 commercial vehicle and car finance customers. [COMPANY NAME] is one of the most well known and oldest insurance companies in the world, having begun its operations in 1710. With an almost 300 year heritage, RSA is one of the world’s leading multinational quoted insurance groups. It has the capability to write business in over 130 countries and with major operations in the UK, Scandinavia, Canada, Ireland, Asia and the Middle East and Latin America. Focusing on general insurance, it has around 22,000 employees and in 2007, its net written premium were £5.8bn [COMPANY NAME] is a joint venture between [COMPANY NAME] and Royal & Sun Alliance and in April 2000, a letter of undertaking was signed to establish a joint venture insurance company. On 28th August 2000 the license application was submitted to the IRDA and the license was granted to [COMPANY NAME] on 23rd of October 2000 by the IRDA, making it the first private insurer to obtain a license for conducting in the Non-Life segment. [COMPANY NAME] was formally launched as a company on 12th March 2001. Since then the company have been innovating constantly for its customers. Like being the first to offer cashless hospitalisation, the first to offer segment specific business solutions, first
  15. 15. to offer co-branded credit cards, first to introduce industry-specific proposition. Their product range is designed to provide extra cover to a varied range of customers starting from the common man to corporate conglomerates. The company is now in the eighth year of operation. The shareholders of [COMPANY NAME] are as follows:  [COMPANY NAME] and Associates 74%  [COMPANY NAME] London 26% Working from a corporate office in Chennai, [COMPANY NAME] has been carrying out its business in over 150 cities with four fully operational Regional Centers in Chennai, Mumbai, Guargon and Kolkata supported by a network of 35 Branch Offices. Each of these Regional Offices is staffed by a team of insurance professionals responsible for Customer Servicing, Business Development, Underwriting, Operations and Claims Management. Royal [RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] brings the golden heritage and reliability of [COMPANY NAME] (AAA), one of the most respected non-banking financial institution in India, and RSA, one of the oldest and the second largest general insurer in the UK. The coming together of these two financial giants allows them to offer its customers the best global practices in insurance industry, innovation in terms of products and services, and unmatched, personalized customer service. 1.3. PRODUCT PROFILE Marine Insurance
  16. 16. [COMPANY NAME] brings to India a wide range of marine cargo products from various international markets. Their products considerably widen the scope of coverage presently enjoyed by the insured population without necessarily involving a high premium. Burglary insurance Burglary Insurance for machinery, stock in trade, furniture, fixtures & fittings and for goods held in trust or on commission for the insured is responsible. Burglary Insurance covers burglary or housebreaking accompanied by either forcible or violent entry into/exit from the premises and hold-up. Engineering Insurance:  Erection All Risks Insurance The Erection All Risks policy is a comprehensive insurance, which provides complete protection against all types of risks associated with erection, testing, commissioning of machinery, plant and equipment during constructional stage.  Boiler & Pressure Plant Insurance It covers the risk of explosion and collapse of any boiler or other pressure plant in the course of ordinary working.  Contractor's All Risks Insurance All types of civil engineering works, ranging from small buildings to massive dams are exposed to damage from a wide range of causes such as fire, lightning, flood, inundation, storm, cyclone and other accidental damages. It is a comprehensive insurance which provides complete protection against all types of civil construction risks.  Machinery Breakdown Insurance
  17. 17. [COMPANY NAME] extend its hand offering Machinery Breakdown Insurance Cover ably supported by most capable technocrats to throw more light about the mechanical side of all machines. Marine-Cum-Erection Insurance It is developed as a comprehensive product to manage the risk and insurance needs in course of erection as well as during transit. It is a combination of Erection-All-Risks and Marine Insurance to cater to the needs of the client where Marine/Transit insurance is connected with Erection All Risks Insurance of any project. Contractor's Plant & Machinery Contractor's Plant & Machinery is an exclusive all risks policy covering the plant & machinery used by the contractors at the site for various projects. It covers the property whether they are at work or at rest or being dismantled for the purpose of cleaning or overhauling, or in the course of operations or when being shifted within the premises or during subsequent re-erection, but in any case only after successful commissioning. Liability Insurance:  Product Liability Insurance Liability arises from a civil wrong or breach of personal duty imposed by law on a person and owed to his/her fellow citizens. In some countries legal rights and duties are framed in a Civil Code. In others they are not codified but drawn from the precedent of decisions handed down in the courts over the centuries; this is known as "Common Law".  Workmen's Compensation Insurance It provides Insurance against occupational accident or disease to an employee whilst in course of his employment.
  18. 18.  Public Liability Act It provides indemnity against the Insured's liability at law to the public in general (excluding employees) for bodily injury and loss of or damage to property due to the business activities carried on in insured's premises. Business solutions:  Industrial All Risks Policy It’s a wide and comprehensive cover for the large sized business where the assets at all locations of the insured exceed Rs.100 Corers. It is an All Risks Policy covering a wide range of perils such as fire and allied perils, burglary, accidental damage, breakdown as well as business interruption.  Office Shield A flexible policy specifically designed to meet the insurance needs of your modern office, irrespective of the number of locations.  Hotel Shield Tailor-made cover designed to suit the specific needs of the Hotel Industry.  Enterprise Shield. It is a newly devised package providing total insurance solutions for industries. You do not need to analyze and evaluate a large number of insurance policies to insure your business completely.  Education Shield Tailor-made cover designed to suit the specific needs of Education Industry. Traders Shield
  19. 19. It is an attractive policy that provides shopkeepers with a basic insurance package and a further range of optional covers.  All Risks Policy for Portable Equipments It offers an overall solution to cover portable items like laptops, mobiles, cameras and projectors.  Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy It offers cover against fire and allied perils and the perils of nature. The policy can cover building (including plinth and foundation), plant and machinery, stocks, furniture, fixtures and fittings and other contents.  Consequential Loss (Fire) Insurance It provides protection against loss of profits in business due to an interruption in business consequent upon an insured peril covered under the material damage policy. Employee solutions:  Group Personal Accident Policy It is a worldwide cover providing protection for the employees against any accidental injuries sustained by the individuals resulting in death and disablement.  Group Health Health Premium Platinum is a comprehensive health insurance package, designed for the employees of company and their family members.  Workmen's Compensation
  20. 20. Workmen's Compensation provides cover to target clients as required by law in support to project insurances or property insurances. 2.1 NEED OF THE STUDY This study helps the company to identify its competitive position among its industrial competitors by which the company can further improve its performance to enjoy high reputation among clients. This study also helps in making necessary changes in the attributes of the insurance cover offered by the company so that the customers can enjoy the benefits of the insurance cover. The need for the study also arises to identify and offer additional insurance products according to the expectations of the customers.
  21. 21. 2.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY PRIMARY OBJECTIVES  To compare the performance of [COMPANY NAME] with other competitors in the general insurance industry. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES  To identify the position [COMPANY NAME] holds among other private players.  To find out the strengths and weaknesses of the company’s insurance schemes  To study consumer’s awareness towards insurance products  To identify the customer’s perception about the company and its products.
  22. 22. 2.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY This study has a wider scope among the insurance sector. The study which focuses on various aspects such as competitive position of [COMPANY NAME], strengths and weaknesses of insurance covers, customer’s perception, etc also holds good for other companies in the life and non-life insurance segment. The outcome of the study, which are based on the above aspects can be utilized by the marketing department of both life and non-life insurance companies.
  23. 23. 2.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY There were certain limitations in undertaking this research work. As it is understood that the limitations are a part of the project, they have been overshadowed by the benefits of the study.  The survey conducted may not be considered as comprehensive as only limited respondents could be contacted because of the time constraint.  Objectives and the purposes of the study and the questions had to be explained to the respondents and their responses may be biased.  Some of the respondents were reluctant to give their responses.  Only limited sample size had been considered for the study and therefore, the conclusions drawn based on this may not be a reflection of the entire population.
  24. 24. 2.5 REVIEW OF LITERATURE According to the recent report of Lloyd, the Indian insurance market is likely to change in the next few years significantly largely due to regulatory changes. In addition, premium growth is being driven by other factors such as the growing consumer class, increased foreign direct investment, infrastructure development, and an increased awareness of catastrophe exposure. Despite significant positive changes, the insurance market must still face the challenge of poor customer perceptions and the danger that the pace of reform will slow. Several significant structural changes are expected in the insurance market that will influence the country’s development in the medium to long term So far, the entry of a large number of Indian and foreign private companies has led to greater choice in terms of products and services for Indian consumers. A growing realisation of the benefits and importance of sophisticated insurance and reinsurance tools has broadened the pool of potential buyers of insurance. Given this backdrop, the Indian insurance market has experienced considerable growth since its liberalisation in 2000. Over the next three years, the Indian insurance market is likely to see its process of maturation accelerate. Regulatory changes in the four areas– products, market players, distribution and reinsurance – will drive change in the Indian insurance market in the medium term. • Price competition has already begun to increase and is likely to continue to do so for the next 18 to 24months. • The practice of cross-subsidisation is likely to be phased out as risk-based pricing is used increasingly for all products. • As Indian insurers build a profitable portfolio, they are likely to have increased access to the international reinsurance markets.
  25. 25. • Finally, rising demand for insurance is likely to be met by increased capacity as foreign insurers look to access this growing market. As per the recent research by Moody’s – ICRA Global Insurance, the following facts relating to the performance of both private and public sector general insurance companies were made. Private Sector’s Growing Influence The private sector has been steadily growing market share despite the fact that public sector companies have been around for a lot longer. The private insurers enjoy considerable operational flexibility, whereas the public sector companies have been constrained by their traditions and inability to innovate. Market Share – Redistribution Due to the effectiveness of private marketing strategies, the market share of public insurers has consistently declined. Given a faster growth rate, the market share of the private sector is catching that of the public sector and the two will likely converge over the medium term. The private sector share of third party motor business was much lower in the past than that for public firms as the former did not pursue this market because of its negative underwriting margins. However, with the formation of the common third party motor pool, the situation has changed. The losses related to this segment now get shared among all the players, leaving little incentive to avoid this segment. Fire and engineering now broadly contribute a similar proportion of overall business for the private and public sectors. In terms of overall business, the focus has shifted towards the retail segments of motor and health, where good growth is expected. Operational Flexibility The public entities lack the operational flexibility enjoyed by the private players. Their limited capacity to innovate has impacted their ability to tailor and aggressively price
  26. 26. products for large corporations. The private players by contrast have focused on account- level profitability for large corporations and have expanded their shares by cross- subsidizing tariffed products. Client Servicing The public insurers have also been hampered in claims servicing by their process oriented approach and limited operational flexibility. They have been unable to expedite claim settlements through out-of-court negotiations since a large proportion of their claims pertain to the third party motor segment, which is subject to adjudication by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal. The result is a time-consuming and involved process. Strong Infrastructure and Systems Private players are not hindered by their charters or legacy systems and have constructed technologically advanced infrastructure. They started with large investments in technology, which helped them to build robust data management systems. This characteristic enables in turn quick and effective decision-making for pricing and claims settlements, attributes vital to building franchises. On the other hand, public entities have only recently upgraded their systems and have to grapple with transition issues, such as moving from paper to paper-less systems. They are encumbered by legacy systems and fragmented databases, and have not fully used their past claim experiences, something which could give them a strong pricing edge in a de- tariffed environment. Focused Underwriting Strategy The private players, especially during their initial years, have selectively targeted the more profitable lines of the public sector companies for growth. They benefit from the experiences of the public sector as well as their international joint-venture partners. They have drawn talent from public sector companies.
  27. 27. Superior Claim Paying/Processing Capability The combination of superior technology and selective underwriting has allowed the private sector to set high standards for policyholder services, thereby differentiating themselves from public sector insurers. The claim settlement performance of the private sector has also been superior because of the limited amount of third party motor business that they have underwritten. Such claims normally take a longer time to settle. Distribution – Rise of Bancassurance The Indian general insurance industry has historically been dominated by the agency channel, through which 75% of total premium income is sourced. But in recent periods other channels – for example, bancassurance, brokers, corporate agents, direct marketing and direct sales channels -- are gaining importance. Most insurers now have tie-ups with the banks, which act as corporate agents and are remunerated on a commission basis. For example, ICICI Lombard sources a major portion of its business from a tie-up with ICICI Bank. Similarly, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited (BAIL, second largest private player) has tie-ups with large number of banks, which contribute a big share of its total premium income. As of December 31 2007, 267 brokers were registered with IRDA, including 228 direct brokers, 33 composite brokers and 6 reinsurance brokers. In a deregulated environment, the broking community will have plenty of opportunity to become an integral part of the insurance and risk financing process. At this time, low cost channels like tele-sales and the internet are still not developed in India, mainly due to relatively poor knowledge about insurance products and low internet penetration. One conclusion is certain– the Indian non-life market is set to grow dramatically over the next few years. The simplest forecasts suggest that premium income could double in the next few years to reach USD11.6bn in 2010. When the structural changes above are taken into consideration, this growth becomes exponential, with relatively slow growth in 2007 rising to rapid growth by 2010.
  28. 28. 3.1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY RESEARCH DESIGN Research design is the plan, structure to answer whom, when, where and how the subject is under investigation. Here plan is an outline of the research scheme & which the researcher has to work. The structure of the research is a more specific outline and the strategy out, specifying the methods to be used in the connection & analysis of the data. Descriptive Research Design The type of research design used in this study is the descriptive research. The main characteristics of this method is that the researcher has no control over the variables and he can only report what has happened or what is happening. This study which compares the performance of [COMPANY NAME] with its industrial competitors has been undertaken based on the opinions of the consumers. Hence, this research study is categorized as Descriptive Research Method DATA COLLECTION The main source of information for this study is based on the data collection. Data collected are both primary and secondary in nature.  Primary Data Primary data have been directly collected from the clients of [COMPANY NAME] as well from the clients of other insurance companies by survey method through undisguised structured questionnaire. Questions like open ended, close ended, multiple choice, dichotomous and ranking type have been used for the purpose of data collection.  Secondary Data Secondary data have been collected from official website of [COMPANY NAME] and also from other official websites related to general insurance industry
  29. 29. TYPES OF QUESTIONS  Open ended question Open ended question are the type of question used to get suggestion from the respondent in order to give feed back to the organization.  Close ended question Close ended question are the type of questions with a clear declined set of alternatives that confine the respondents to choose one of them.  Multiple choice question It consists of multiple choices in which the respondents can choose more than one  Likert scale It uses 5 point or 7 point scale to elicit respondent’s favour or unfavour towards an object.  Dichotomous question It consists of two choices of answers in which the respondent has to choose one of them.  Ranking In ranking, questions will have the ranking skill, which the respondents are free to rank them according to their preference. SAMPLING Convenience sampling is been used in the study. This type of sampling is basically used when you simply stop anybody in the street who is prepared to stop, or when you wander round a business, a shop, a restaurant, a theatre or whatever, asking people you meet whether they will answer your questions. In other words, the sample comprises subjects who are simply available in a convenient way to the researcher. There is no randomness
  30. 30. and the likelihood of bias is high. You can't draw any meaningful conclusions from the results you obtain. However, this method is often the only feasible one, particularly for students or others with restricted time and resources, and can legitimately be used provided its limitations are clearly understood and stated. SAMPLE SIZE Sample size is the total number of samples selected for the study from the sampling population. Sample size for the study was arrived at 120 by using the formula: n = z2 * p * q e2 n = 1.962 * 0.9143 * .086 0.052 = 120 METHODS / TOOLS OF ANALYSIS Tools used for analysis are: • Chi-square test • Weighted average method • Interval estimation • Karl Pearson’s coefficient of correlation • H-test • Graph • Percentage 1. CHI-SQUARE TEST There may be situation in which it is not possible to make any rigid assumption about distribution of the population from which samples being drawn. This limitation has led to the development of a group of alternative techniques known as non-parametric tests. Chi-square describes the magnitude of the discrepancy between theory and observation.
  31. 31. n χ² = ∑ [(Oi – Ei)2 ] with n-1 degrees of freedom i =1 Ei 2. WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD This method is widely used in finding the weightage given to different attributed by respondents. The respondents assign different weightage to the different ranking and weighted average percentage is found and graphs are plotted. Net score = (weight for column * no. of respondents) Total weight Net score in %age = net score in row Total net score*100 3. INTERVAL ESTIMATION METHOD An estimation of a population parameter given by 2 numbers between when the parameter may be considered to lie is called interval estimation of the parameter. ( p - z √pq ; p + z √pq ) n n p = sample proportion of success q = sample proportion of failure z = standard variance of the confidence level n = no. of sample size 3. KARL PEARSON’S COEFFICIENT OF CORRELATION Correlation analysis helps us in determining the degree of relationship between 2 or more variables. The value of the coefficient of correlation as obtained by the below formula shall always lie between +1 and -1. When r = +1, it means there is perfect positive correlation between the variables. When r = -1, there is perfect negative correlation between the variables and when r = 0, there is no relationship between the two variables. ∑ xy
  32. 32. r = -------------------- _________ √∑x2 - ∑ y2 __ __ x = (X - X) ; y = (Y - Y) 4. H-TEST When more than two random samples are given, H-test is used. It is used to test the null hypothesis that several independent samples come from the same population. H = [12 / (N (N+1)) * (R1 2 / n1 +R2 2 / n2 + R3 2 /n3 + R4 2 / n4 + R5 2 / n5)] – 3 (n + 1) Ri = Sum of ranks of sample i 5. PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS Percentage analysis shows the entire population in terms of percentages. Percentage = No. of respondents *100 Total respondents 6. GRAPHS Graphical method was used in order to represent the factor in various graphical methods like pie-chart, bar diagram and cylinder.
  33. 33. 3.2.1 TABLE SHOWING AGE OF RESPONDENTS S.No Age No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Less than 25 yrs 43 35.83 2 25-35 32 26.67 3 35-45 20 16.67 4 45-55 12 10 5 Above 55 yrs 13 10.83 Total 120 100 Findings: The above table shows that 35.83% of the respondents belong to the age group of less than 25 years, 26.67% fall under the category of 25-35 years, 16.67% belong to the age group of 35-45 years, 10% belong to the age group of 45-55 years and the rest 10.83% above 55 years Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (i.e. 35.83%) of respondents in the age group of less than 25 years and comparatively very lower percentage (i.e. 10%) of respondents in the age group of 45-55 years 3.2.1 CHART SHOWING AGE OF RESPONDENTS Less than 25 yrs 25-35 35-45 45-55 Above 55 yrs 35.83 26.67 10.8310 16.67 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 No. of respondents Age in years 3.2.2 TABLE SHOWING GENDER OF RESPONDENTS
  34. 34. S.No Gender No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Male 81 67.5 2 Female 39 32.5 Total 120 100 Findings: The above table shows that 67.5% of respondents are male and 32.5% are female respondents Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (i.e. 67.5%) of male respondents. 3.2.2 CHART SHOWING GENDER OF RESPONDENTS 67.5 32.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 No.ofrespondents Male Female 3.2.3 TABLE SHOWING OCCUPATION OF RESPONDENTS
  35. 35. S.No Occupation No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Service 25 20.83 2 Govt. employee 16 13.33 3 Business 23 19.17 4 Professional 19 15.83 5 Others 37 30.83 Total 120 100 Findings: The above table shows that 20.83% of respondents belong to the category of services, 13.33% are government employees, 19.17% belong to the category of business, 15.83% are professional and the rest 30.83% belong to other category, which comprises of private sector employee Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (i.e.30.83%) of respondents in the category comprising private sector employees. 3.2.3 CHART SHOWING OCCUPATION OF RESPONDENTS 19.17 15.83 30.83 13.33 20.83 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Service Govt. employee Business Professional Others occupation No.ofrespondents 3.2.4 TABLE SHOWING NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN A FAMILY S.No No. of family members No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 2-4 91 75.83 2 5-8 29 24.17 3 More than 8 - -
  36. 36. Total 120 100 Findings: The above table shows that 75.83% of respondents have 2-4 members in their family and the rest 24.17% of respondents have 5-8 members in their family. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (75.83%) of respondents have 2-4 members in their family 3.2.4 CHART SHOWING NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN A FAMILY 75.83 24.17 0 0 20 40 60 80 No.of respondents 2 to 4 5 to 8 More than 8 No.offamilymembers 3.2.5 TABLE SHOWING ANNUAL INCOME OF RESPONDENTS S.No Annual income No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Less than Rs.2 lakhs 31 25.83 2 Rs.2-5 lakhs 51 42.5 3 Rs.5 -10 lakhs 20 16.67 4 Rs.10-20 lakhs 9 7.5 5 Above Rs.20 lakhs 9 7.5 Total 120 100
  37. 37. Findings: The above table shows that 25.83% of respondents fall under the income category of less than 2 lakhs, 42.5% fall under the category of 2-5 lakhs, 16.67% fall under the income category of 5-10 lakhs, 7.5% in the category of 10-20 lakhs and the rest 7.5% in the income category above 20 lakhs Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (42.5%) of respondents in the income category of 2-5 lakhs and comparatively a very lower percentage (7.5%) of respondents in the income category of 10-20 lakhs and above 20 lakhs 3.2.5 CHART SHOWING ANNUAL INCOME OF RESPONDENTS 16.67 7.5 7.5 42.5 25.83 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Less than Rs.2 lakhs Rs.2-5 lakhs Rs.5 -10 lakhs Rs.10-20 lakhs Above Rs.20 lakhs Annual Income No.ofrespondents 3.2.6 TABLE SHOWING THE NECESSITY OF HAVING A GENERAL INSURANCE COVER S.No Opinion No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) RSA Other companies RSA Other companies 1 Yes 60 60 100 100 2 No - - - - Total 60 60 100 100
  38. 38. Findings: The above table shows that 100% of respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] and 100% who are policy holders with other companies, have responded that it is necessary to have a general insurance cover. Inference: It is inferred that all the respondents surveyed have stated that it is necessary to have a general insurance cover. 3.2.6 CHART SHOWING THE NECESSITY OF HAVING A GENERAL INSURANCE COVER 60 60 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 No.of respondents yes no RSA Other companies 3.2.7 TABLE SHOWING NO. OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES HELD BY RESPONDENTS S.No No. of policies No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 1 62 51.67 2 2-4 41 34.17 3 More than 4 17 14.17 Total 120 100
  39. 39. Findings: The above table shows that 51.67% of respondents hold 1 policy, 34.17% holds 2 to 4 policies and the rest 14.17% holds more than 4 general insurance policies. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (51.67%) of respondents holds 1 general insurance policy. 3.2.7 CHART SHOWING NO. OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES HELD BY RESPONDENTS 51.67 34.17 14.17 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 No.ofrespondents 1 2 to 4 More than 4 No.of policies 3.2.8 TABLE SHOWING WHETHER THE GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES ARE TAKEN FROM THE SAME COMPANY S.No Opinion No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Yes 66 55 2 No 54 45 Total 120 100 Findings: The above table shows that 55% of respondents hold general insurance policy with the same company and 45% of respondents hold it in various other companies.
  40. 40. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (55%) of respondents holds general insurance policy with the same company. 3.2.8 CHART SHOWING WHETHER THE GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES ARE TAKEN FROM THE SAME COMPANY 55 45 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 No.ofrespondents Yes No INTERVAL ESTIMATION: WHETHER THE GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES TAKEN FROM THE SAME COMPANY Formula: No. of respondents who have taken policies from the same company: 66 No. of respondents who have not taken policies from the same company: 54 n pq /2Zp α±
  41. 41. n = sample size = 120 p= Number of yes = 66 = .55 Sample size 120 q = 1-p = 1-.55 = .45 Z 2/α = 1.96 at 95% confidence level __________ Standard error = n pq = .55 * .45 = 0.0454 120 Interval estimation= p n pq 2/Zα± = (0.55 ±1.96(0.0454) = 0.4610>p>0.639 = 46.1%, 63.9% Conclusion Hence, we conclude that the percentage of respondents who have taken policies from the same company lies between 46.1% to 63.9% 3.2.9 TABLE SHOWING NO.OF COMPANIES IN WHICH RESPONDENT IS A POLICY HOLDER S.No No. of companies No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 2 companies 43 79.63 2 2-5 10 18.52 3 More than 5 companies 1 1.85 Total 54 100
  42. 42. Findings: The above table shows that 79.63% of respondents are policy holders in 2 companies, 18.52% of respondents are policy holders in 2-5 companies and the rest 1.85% of respondents are policy holders in more than 5 companies. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (79.63%) are policy holders in at least 2 companies. 3.2.10 CHART SHOWING NO.OF COMPANIES IN WHICH RESPONDENT IS A POLICY HOLDER 79.63 18.51 1.851 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 No.ofrespondents 2 companies 2 to 5 More than 5 companies 3.2.10 TABLE SHOWING COMPANIES ENJOYING HIGH REPUTATION AMIDST CUSTOMERS. S.No Companies No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 [COMPANY NAME] 47 39.17 2 TATA AIG 13 10.83 3 Bajaj Allianz 15 12.5 4 Iffco tokio 8 6.67 5 ICICI 12 10 6 Reliance 14 11.67 7 Others 11 9.17 Total 120 100
  43. 43. Findings: The above table shows that 39.17% of respondents have stated [COMPANY NAME], 10.83% have stated TATA AIG, 12.5% have stated Bajaj Allianz, 6.67% have stated Iffco Tokio, 10% of them have stated ICICI, 11.6% of them have stated Reliance and the rest 9.17% of them have stated other companies like Cholamandalam and Public sector insurance companies Inference: It is inferred that higher reputation amidst customers is enjoyed by [COMPANY NAME] with 39.17% of respondents stating it. 3.2.10 CHART SHOWING COMPANIES ENJOYING HIGH REPUTATION AMIDST CUSTOMERS
  44. 44. Royal Sundaram 39% TATA AIG 11% Bajaj Allianz 12% Iffco tokio 7% ICICI 10% Reliance 12% Others 9% 3.2.11 TABLE SHOWING AWARENESS AMONGST [COMPANY NAME] CUSTOMERS TOWARDS THE INSURANCE SCHEMES OFFERED BY [COMPANY NAME]
  45. 45. S.No Awareness No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Yes 45 75 2 No 15 25 Total 60 100 Findings: The above table shows that 75% of respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME], have stated that they are aware of various insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] and the rest 25% of respondents who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have stated that they are not aware of all the insurance schemes offered by the company Inference: It is inferred that higher percentage (75%) of respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] are aware of various insurance schemes offered by the company. 3.2.11 CHART SHOWING AWARENESS AMONGST [COMPANY NAME] CUSTOMERS TOWARDS THE INSURANCE SCHEMES OFFERED BY [COMPANY NAME] 75 25 Yes No INTERVAL ESTIMATION: AWARENESS AMONGST [COMPANY NAME] CUSTOMERS TOWARDS THE INSURANCE SCHEMES OFFERED BY [COMPANY NAME]
  46. 46. Formula: No. of [COMPANY NAME] customers who are aware of various insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME]: 45 No. of [COMPANY NAME] customers who are aware of various insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME]: 15 n = sample size = 60 p= Number of yes = 45 = .75 Sample size 60 q = 1-p = 1-.75 = .25 Z 2/α = 1.96 at 95% confidence level __________ Standard error = n pq = .75 * .25 = 0.056 60 Interval estimation= p n pq 2/Zα± = (0.75 ±1.96(0.056) = 0.64024>p>0.8598 = 64.02%, 85.98% Conclusion Hence we conclude that the percentage of respondents aware of various insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] lies between 64.02% to 85.98% 3.2.12 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S OPINION TOWARDS [COMPANY NAME]’S OFFERING OF CUSTOMER CENTRIC PRODUCTS S.No Opinion No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Highly agree 5 8.3 n pq /2Zp α±
  47. 47. 2 Agree 48 80 3 Neither agree nor disagree 5 8.3 4 Disagree 2 3.3 5 Highly disagree - - Total 60 100 Findings: The above table shows that 8.3% of respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] highly agree, 80% of them just agree, 8.3% of them neither agree nor disagree and the rest 3.3% of them disagree that [COMPANY NAME] is known for offering customer-centric products. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (80%) of respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have agreed that [COMPANY NAME] is well known for offering customer centric products. 3.2.12 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S AGREEMENT TOWARDS [COMPANY NAME]’S OFFERING OF CUSTOMER CENTRIC PRODUCTS 8.3 0 80 3.3 8.3 0 20 40 60 80 100 Highly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Highly disagree No.of respondents 3.2.13 TABLE SHOWING THE RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE SERVICE OF [COMPANY NAME] S.No Comment No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Excellent 23 38.33 2 Very good 30 50 3 Moderate 7 11.67
  48. 48. 4 Poor - - 5 Very poor - - Total 60 100 Findings: The above table shows that 38.33% of respondents have indicated the service of [COMPANY NAME] as excellent, and 50% of them have stated it as very good and 11.67% of them have indicated it as moderate. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (50%) of respondents have indicated that the service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] as very good. 3.2.13 CHART SHOWING THE RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE SERVICE OF [COMPANY NAME] 38.33 50 11.67 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Excellent Very good Moderate Poor Very poor No.ofrespondents 3.2.14 TABLE SHOWING SOURCES BY WHICH THE RESPONDENTS BECAME FAMILIAR OF [COMPANY NAME] S.No Source of information No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Ads (print, radio, TV) 21 35 2 Insurance agents 14 23.33 3 Friends & Relatives 25 41.67 4 Others - - Total 60 100
  49. 49. Findings: The above table shows that 35% of respondents have indicated advertisement, 23.33% of them have stated insurance agents and 41.67% of them have indicated friends & relatives as means by which they came to know about [COMPANY NAME]. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (41.67%) of respondents has indicated friends and relatives as means by which they came to know about [COMPANY NAME]. 3.2.14 CHART SHOWING SOURCES BY WHICH THE RESPONDENTS BECAME FAMILIAR OF [COMPANY NAME] Others 0% Ads (print, radio, TV) 35% Insurance agents 23% Friends & Relatives 42% 3.2.15 TABLE SHOWING THE PERIOD OF INSURANCE COVER HELD BY RESPONDENTS. S.No Period of insurance cover No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Annual policy 61 50.83 2 1-5 year 35 29.17 3 5-10 year 11 9.17 4 10-15 year 13 10.83 5 Greater than 15 years - - Total 120 100
  50. 50. Findings: The above table shows that 50.83% of respondents hold annual policy, 29.17% of them hold 1-5 year policy cover, 9% of them hold 5-10year policy and 10.83% of them hold 10-15 year policy. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (50.83%) of respondents holds annual policy. 3.2.15 CHART SHOWING THE PERIOD OF INSURANCE COVER HELD BY RESPONDENTS. 50.83 0 9.17 10.83 29.17 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Annual policy 1-5 year 5-10 year 10-15 year greater than 5 years periodofinsurancecover No.of respondents 3.2.16 TABLE SHOWING THE AMOUNT OF YEARLY INSURANCE PREMIUM PAID S.No Yearly premium paid No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Less than Rs.5000 43 35.83 2 Rs.5000-15000 58 48.33 3 Rs.15000-25000 12 10 4 Greater than Rs.25000 7 5.83 Total 120 100 Findings: The above table shows that 35.83% of respondents have been paying insurance premium less than Rs.5000 yearly, 48.330% of them have been paying premium between Rs.5000-15000 yearly, 10% of them have been paying between Rs.15000-25000 as
  51. 51. yearly premium and 5.83% of them have been paying more than Rs.25000 as yearly premium. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (48.3%) have been paying yearly insurance premium between Rs.5000-15000 3.2.16 CHART SHOWING THE AMOUNT OF YEARLY INSURANCE PREMIUM PAID 35.83 48.33 10 5.83 0 10 20 30 40 50 No.of respondents Less than Rs.5000 Rs.5000-15000 Rs.15000-25000 Greater than Rs.25000
  52. 52. APPLYING KARL PEARSON’S CORRELATION COEFFICIENT BY COMPARING ANNUAL INCOME AND THE YEARLY PREMIUM AMOUNT PAID Premium amount Less than Rs.5000 Rs.5000 - 15000 Rs.15000 - 25000 More than Rs.25000 No. of respondents 43 58 12 7 Annual income Less than Rs.2 lakhs Rs.2-5 lakhs Rs.5-10 lakhs Rs.10-20 lakhs Above Rs.20 lakhs No. of respondents 31 51 20 9 9 Premium amount (X) Annual income (Y) 43 31 58 51 12 20 7 9 0 9 ∑ xy r = -------------------- _________ √∑x2 - ∑ y2 __ __ x = (X - X) ; y = (Y - Y) Premium Annual
  53. 53. (X) x x2 income (Y) y y2 xy 43 13 169 31 7 49 91 58 28 784 51 27 729 756 12 -18 324 20 -14 16 72 7 -23 529 9 -15 225 345 0 0 0 9 -15 225 0 ∑X = 120 ∑ x2 = 1806 ∑ Y= 120 ∑ y2 = 1244 ∑ xy = 1264 __ X = 120 = 30 4 __ Y = 120 = 24 5 ∑ x2 = 1806 ; ∑ y2 = 1244 ; ∑ xy = 1264 1264 r = -------------------------- = .8433 _____________ √1806 * 1244 Conclusion: The variables annual income and premium amount paid are positively correlated. Hence, the annual income has an impact on the premium amount paid.
  54. 54. 3.2.17 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE YEARLY PREMIUM PAID S.No Comment No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) RSA Other co. RSA Other Co. 1 Very high - - - 2 High 39 12 65 20 3 Reasonable 21 48 35 80 4 Low - - - 5 Very low - - - Total 60 60 100 100 Findings: The above table shows that 65% of respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have stated that the yearly premium paid, is high and the rest 35% of them have stated it is reasonable. Amongst the respondents, who are policy holders with other companies 20% of them have stated that the yearly premium being paid is high and the rest 80% of them have stated that it is reasonable. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (65%) of policy holders of [COMPANY NAME] feel that the premium paid is high and only 20% of policy holders of other companies have stated it is high 3.2.17 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE YEARLY PREMIUM PAID
  55. 55. 65 35 20 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 veryhigh high reasonable low verylow no.ofrespondents RSA Other Co. APPLYING CHI-SQAURE TEST BY COMPARING THE PERIOD OF GENERAL INSURANCE COVER AND THE PREMIUM RANGE
  56. 56. Period of insurance cover Premium range Very high High Reasonable Low Very low Total Annual policy 0 27 34 0 0 61 1-5 yr 0 10 25 0 0 35 5-10 yr 0 7 4 0 0 11 10-15 yr 0 7 6 0 0 13 >15 yr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 51 69 0 0 120 Ho: There is no significant difference between premium and period of general insurance policy H1: There is a significant difference between premium and period of general insurance policy Table of expected frequency: Expected Value = row total * column total Grand total 0 25.925 35.075 0 0 0 14.875 20.125 0 0 0 4.675 6.325 0 0 0 5.525 7.475 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Formulae: χ² = ∑ [(Oi – Ei)2 ] with n-1 degrees of freedom i =1 Ei Oi Ei (Oi-Ei)2 (Oi-Ei)2 /Ei 0 0 0 0 27 25.925 1.156 0.0446 34 35.075 1.156 .033 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 14.875 23.766 1.6 25 20.125 23.766 1.18
  57. 57. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 4.675 5.406 1.1564 4 6.325 5.406 .855 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 5.525 2.176 .394 6 7.475 2.176 .291 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 5.554 χ²cal = 5.554 χ²0.05 with (n-1) (n-1) = (5-1) (5-1) = 16 χ²0.05 with 16 d.f = 26.3 χ²cal < χ²0.05 Hence, we accept ho Conclusion: We conclude that there is no significant difference between premium and period of general insurance policy.
  58. 58. 3.2.18 TABLE SHOWING THE SATISFACTORY LEVEL OF RESPONDENTS TOWARDS THE POLICY TAKEN S.No Satisfactory level No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) RSA Other cos. RSA Other cos. 1 Highly satisfactory 8 5 13.3 8.3 2 Satisfactory 47 53 78.3 88.3 3 Neither satisfactory nor dissatisfactory 5 2 8.3 3.3 4 Dissatisfactory - - - - 5 Highly dissatisfactory - - - - Total 60 60 100 100 Findings: The above table shows that among policy holders of [COMPANY NAME] 13.3% of them are highly satisfied with the policy taken, 78.3% of them are just satisfied and the rest 8.3% of them are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the policy taken. Among policy holders of other companies, 8.3% of them are highly satisfied, 88.3% of them are highly satisfied and the rest 3.35% of them are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the policy taken.
  59. 59. Inference: It is inferred that among the policy holders of Royal Sundarm, higher percentage (78.3%) of them feel that they are satisfied and 13.3% of them are highly satisfied with the policy taken. Among other policy holders, a higher percentage (88.3%) of them also feels that they are satisfied and 8.3% of them feel that they are highly satisfied with the policy taken. 3.2.18 CHART SHOWING THE SATISFACTORY LEVEL OF RESPONDENTS TOWARDS THE POLICY TAKEN 13.3 8.3 0 0 88.3 3.3 0 0 78.3 8.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 highly satisfactory satisfactory neither satisfactory nor dissatisfactory dissatisfactory highly dissatisfactory no.ofrespondents RSA Other Co.
  60. 60. APPLYING CHI-SQUARE TEST BY COMPARING SATISFACTORY LEVEL TOWARDS GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY TAKEN AND THE YEARLY PREMIUM PAID Premium amount Satisfactory level towards General insurance policy Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Neither satisfactory nor dissatisfactory Dissatisfactory Highly dissatisfactory Total Less than Rs.5000 3 38 2 0 0 43 Rs.5000- 15000 0 57 1 0 0 58 Rs.15000- 25000 7 3 2 0 0 12 More than Rs.25000 3 2 2 0 0 7 Total 13 100 7 0 0 120 Ho: There is no significant difference between yearly premium paid and satisfactory level towards general insurance policy taken H1: There is a significant difference between yearly premium paid and satisfactory level towards general insurance policy taken
  61. 61. Table of expected frequency: Expected Value = row total * column total Grand total 4.6583 35.83 2.5083 0 0 6.283 48.3 3.383 0 0 1.3 10 .07 0 0 .7583 5.83 .4083 0 0 Formulae: χ² = ∑ [(Oi – Ei)2 ] with n-1 degrees of freedom i =1 Ei Oi Ei (Oi-Ei)2 (Oi-Ei)2 /Ei 3 4.6583 2.75 0.5903 38 35.83 4.7089 0.1314 2 2.5083 0.2584 0.1030 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.283 39.48 6.283 57 48.3 75.69 1.57 1 3.383 5.68 1.68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 1.3 32.49 24.99 3 10 49 4.9 2 .07 3.725 53.214 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 .7583 5.025 6.63 2 5.83 14.67 2.5163 2 .4083 2.5335 6.205 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 108.813
  62. 62. χ²cal = 108.813 χ²0.05 with (n-1) (n-1) = (5-1) (4-1) = 12 χ²0.05 with 12 d.f = 21.0 χ²cal > χ²0.05 Hence, we reject ho Conclusion: We conclude that there is a significant difference between yearly premium paid and satisfactory level towards general insurance policy taken.
  63. 63. 3.2.19 TABLE SHOWING NO.OF RESPONDENTS HAVING INSURANCE AGENTS S.No Opinion No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) RSA Other co. RSA Other co. 1 Yes 31 31 51.67 51.67 2 No 29 29 48.33 48.33 Total 60 60 100 100 Findings: The above table shows that 51.67% of respondents among both [COMPANY NAME] and other companies have insurance agents and the rest 48.33% of respondents among both [COMPANY NAME] and other companies do not have an insurance agent. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (51.67%) of respondents among both [COMPANY NAME] and other companies has insurance agents. 3.2.19 CHART SHOWING NO.OF RESPONDENTS HAVING INSURANCE AGENTS 51.67 51.67 48.33 48.33 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 No.ofrespondents yes no RSA Other companies
  64. 64. INTERVAL ESTIMATION: RESPONDENTS HAVING INSURANCE AGENTS Formula: No. of respondents having insurance agents: 62 No. of respondents not having insurance agents: 58 n = sample size = 120 p= Number of yes = 62 = .5166 Sample size 120 q = 1-p = 1-.5166 = .4834 Z 2/α = 1.96 at 95% confidence level ______________ Standard error = n pq = .5166 * .4834 = 0.0456 120 Interval estimation= p n pq 2/Zα± = (0.5166 ±1.96(0.0456) = 0.4272>p>0.606 = 42.72%, 60.6% Conclusion Hence we conclude that the percentage of respondents having insurance agents lies between 42.72% to 60.6% 3.2.20 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE GUIDANCE RENDERED BY INSURANCE AGENTS n pq /2Zp α±
  65. 65. S.No Comment No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) RSA Other cos. RSA Other cos. 1 Excellent 8 2 25.8 6.5 2 Very good 20 16 64.5 51.6 3 Moderate 3 13 9.7 41.9 4 Poor - - - - 5 Very poor - - - - Total 31 31 100 100 Findings: The above table shows that 25.8% of respondents among [COMPANY NAME] and 6.5% of respondents among other companies have indicated that the guidance rendered by their insurance agent is excellent, 64.5% of respondents among [COMPANY NAME] and 51.6% of respondents of other companies have indicated that it is very good and the rest 9.7% of respondents from [COMPANY NAME] and 41.9% of respondents from other companies have indicated that it is moderate. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents from both [COMPANY NAME] (64.5%) and from other companies (51.6%) have indicated that the guidance rendered by their insurance agent is very good. 3.2.20 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE GUIDANCE RENDERED BY INSURANCE AGENTS
  66. 66. 25.8 64.5 9.7 0 0 6.5 51.6 41.9 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 No.ofrespondents RSA OTHER CO. Excellent Very good Moderate Poor Very poor 3.2.21 TABLE SHOWING THE CLAIMS REJECTED BY THE INSURANCE COMPANIES
  67. 67. S.No Claims rejected by insurance companies No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) RSA Other cos. RSA Other cos. 1 Yes 60 60 100 100 2 No - - - Total 60 60 100 100 Findings: The above table shows that 100% of respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] and 100% respondents, who are policy holders with other companies have stated that their claims were not rejected by the insurance companies. Inference: It is inferred that all the respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] as well with other companies have indicated that their claims were not rejected by the insurance companies. 3.2.21 CHART SHOWING THE CLAIMS REJECTED BY THE INSURANCE COMPANIES 100 100 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 No.ofrespondents yes no RSA Other companies 3.2.22 TABLE SHOWING FACTORS THAT INFLUENCES CUSTOMERS TO CHOOSE A PARTICULAR COMPANY IN BUYING AN INSURANCE POLICY
  68. 68. APPLYING WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD Formulae: Average score = [(R1*8 + R2*7 + R3*6 + R4*5 + R5*4 + R6*3 +R7*2 + R8*1)] Total weights Sample calculation: Average score = [(85*8 + 17*7 + 9*6 +5*5 + 0*4 + 1*3 + 2*2 + 1*1)] 36 = 24.61 Influencing factors Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3 Rank 4 Rank 5 Rank 6 Rank 7 Rank 8 Reputation 85 17 9 5 - 1 2 1 Excellent service/Responsiveness 16 68 12 14 5 4 1 - Easy accessibility - 3 2 8 17 44 46 - Good schemes 3 7 19 30 41 17 3 - Low premium rates 6 7 14 24 48 16 5 - Heard of good experience of others 11 3 17 6 4 23 56 - Proper claim settlement 12 14 50 23 13 5 3 - Others - - - - - - 7 113 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Influencing factors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 W.A RANK Reputation 85 17 9 5 - 1 2 1 24.61 1 Excellent service/Responsiveness 16 68 12 14 5 4 1 - 21.7 2 Easy accessibility - 3 2 8 17 44 46 - 10.14 7 Good schemes 3 7 19 30 41 17 3 - 15.5 4 Low premium rates 6 7 14 24 48 16 5 - 15.306 5 Heard of good experience of others 11 3 17 6 4 23 56 - 12.17 6 Proper claim settlement 12 14 50 23 13 5 3 - 18.94 3 Others - - - - - - 7 113 3.53 8
  69. 69. Findings: The above table clearly shows that while selecting a particular insurance company to take a policy, majority of the respondents look out for reputation of the company first, secondly they look out for excellent service/responsiveness of the company, thirdly proper claim settlement of the company followed by good schemes, low premium rates, others good experience, and easy accessibility. Inference: It is inferred that majority of respondents would first look out for the reputation of the company. Hence it is ranked first. 3.2.22 CHART SHOWING FACTORS THAT INFLUENCES CUSTOMERS TO CHOOSE A PARTICULAR COMPANY IN BUYING AN INSURANCE POLICY 24.61 21.7 10.14 15.5 15.306 12.17 18.94 3.53 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Reputation Excellent service/Responsiveness Easyaccessibility Goodschemes Lowpremiumrates Heardofgood experienceofothers Properclaimsettlement Others No.ofrespondents 3.2.23 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S SATISFACTORY LEVEL TOWARDS VARIOUS FEATURES OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY TAKEN S.No Attributes of general insurance cover Highly satisfied Satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Dissatisfied Highly dissatisfied Total
  70. 70. 1 Low premium 9 92 9 10 - 120 2 Claim settlement 26 86 7 1 - 120 3 Larger risk coverage 21 83 13 3 - 120 4 Money back guarantee 7 41 62 10 120 5 Easy access to agents 21 39 58 2 - 120 Total 84 341 149 26 0 600 3.2.23 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S SATISFACTORY LEVEL TOWARDS VARIOUS FEATURES OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY TAKEN
  71. 71. 9 21 7 21 86 83 41 39 9 7 13 62 58 10 1 3 10 20 0 0 0 0 26 92 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Lowpremium Claimsettlement Largerrisk coverage Moneyback guarantee Easyaccessto agents no.ofrespondents Highly satisfied Satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Dissatisfied Highly dissatisfied APPLYING KRUSKAL – WALLIS OR H – TEST TO THE TABLE 3.2.23 Ho: Respondent’s satisfaction level towards all the attributes of general insurance cover
  72. 72. taken is the same H1: Respondent’s satisfaction level towards all the attributes of general insurance cover taken is not the same. Values Ranks Ranks of low premium (R1) Ranks of claim settlement (R2) Ranks of larger risk coverage (R3) Ranks of money back guarantee (R4) Ranks of easy access to agents (R5) 1 1 6.5 13 11.5 5.5 11.5 2 2 20 19 18 15 14 3 3 6.5 4.5 10 17 16 7 4.5 8.5 1 3 8.5 2 7 4.5 9 6.5 9 6.5 10 8.5 10 8.5 13 10 21 11.5 21 11.5 26 13 39 14 41 15 58 16 62 17 83 18 86 19 92 20 Total 41.5 37.5 42.5 46 43.5 R1 = 41.5 ; R2 = 37.5 ; R3 = 42.5 ; R4 = 46 ; R5 = 43.5 Applying the formula for H: H = [12 / (N (N+1)) * (R1 2 / n1 +R2 2 / n2 + R3 2 /n3 + R4 2 / n4 + R5 2 / n5)] – 3 (n + 1) H = [12 / (20 (20+1)) * (41.52 /4 + 37.52 /4 + 42.52 /4 + 462 /4 + 43.52 /4)] – 3 (20+1) = [(12/420) * (2235.75) – 63 H = .8786 At 5% level of significance with (5-1) d.f = 9.49 χ²0.05 = 9.49
  73. 73. Since, 0.8786 < 9.49 We accept Ho. Conclusion Hence, we conclude that the respondent’s satisfaction level towards all the attributes of general insurance cover taken is the same. 3.2.24 TABLE SHOWING THE SOURCES MOST PREFERRED BY RESPONDENTS TO KNOW ABOUT INSURANCE COMPANY AND ITS PRODUCTS S.No Preferred source of information No. Of Respondents Percentage (%) 1 Ads (print, radio & TV) 31 25.83 2 Insurance agents 44 36.67 3 Friends & Relatives 42 35 4 Others 3 2.5 Total 120 100 Findings: The above table shows that 25.83% of respondents would prefer Ads, 36.67% of them prefer insurance agents, 35% of them prefer Friends & relatives, and the rest
  74. 74. 2.5% of them would prefer other sources like company websites, SMS, etc, in order to know about an insurance company and its products. Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (36.67%) have stated insurance agents as the most preferred source. 3.2.24 CHART SHOWING THE SOURCES MOST PREFERRED BY RESPONDENTS TO KNOW ABOUT INSURANCE COMPANY AND ITS PRODUCTS 25.83 35 2.5 36.67 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Ads (print, radio & TV) Insurance agents Friends & Relatives Others No.ofrespondents 3.2.25 TABLE SHOWING GENERAL INSURANCE COVER THAT IS MOST FAVORED BY RESPONDENTS
  75. 75. APPLYING WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD TO THE TABLE 3.2.25 Most favored insurance cover Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3 Rank 4 Rank 5 Rank 6 Rank 7 Rank 8 Auto/car insurance 85 15 4 16 - - - - Health insurance 34 64 9 13 - - - - Hospital cash insurance 2 29 65 17 4 2 1 - Personal accident insurance - 7 38 65 4 6 - - Travel insurance 1 - - 5 22 53 37 2 Householder’s insurance - 4 - 3 77 35 1 - Shopkeeper’s insurance - - 5 - 11 24 72 8 Others - - - - 16 - 7 97
  76. 76. Formulae: Average score = [(R1*8 + R2*7 + R3*6 + R4*5 + R5*4 + R6*3 +R7*2 + R8*1)] Total weights Sample calculation: Average score = [(85*8 + 15*7 + 4*6 + 16*5 + 0*4 + 0*3 + 0*2 + 0*1)] 36 = 24.7 Findings: The above table clearly shows that auto/car insurance is been ranked I by majority of respondents, health insurance ranked II, hospital cash insurance ranked III followed by personal accident insurance, householder’s insurance, travel insurance, 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Most favored insurance cover 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 W.A RANK Auto/car insurance 85 15 4 16 - - - - 24.7 1 Health insurance 34 64 9 13 - - - - 23.306 2 Hospital cash insurance 2 29 65 17 4 2 1 - 19.94 3 Personal accident insurance - 7 38 65 4 6 - - 17.67 4 Travel insurance 1 - - 5 22 53 37 2 9.9 6 Householder’s insurance - 4 - 3 77 35 1 - 12.72 5 Shopkeeper’s insurance - - 5 - 11 24 72 7 8.25 7 Others - - - - 16 - 7 92 4.72 8
  77. 77. shopkeeper’s insurance and other insurance (fire insurance, marine, rural insurance, etc) which are ranked as IV, V, VI, VII and VIII respectively. Inference: It is inferred that auto/car insurance is the most favored insurance cover among majority of respondents. 3.2.25 CHART SHOWING GENERAL INSURANCE COVER THAT IS MOST FAVORED BY RESPONDENTS 24.7 19.94 17.67 9.9 12.72 8.25 4.72 23.306 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Auto/car insurance Health insurance Hospitalcash insurance Personal accident insurance Travel insurance Householder’s insurance Shopkeeper’s insurance Others No.ofrespondents 3.3 FINDINGS
  78. 78.  It is found that there is a higher percentage (i.e. 35.83%) of respondents in the age group of less than 25 years and comparatively very lower percentage (i.e. 10%) of respondent belongs to the age group of 45-55 years.  There is a higher percentage (i.e. 67.5%) of male respondents among the respondents who has taken general insurance cover.  Majority of the respondents (i.e.30.83%), who has taken general insurance cover are private sector employees.  It is found that a higher percentage (75.83%) of respondents have 2-4 members in their family.  It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (42.5%) of respondents in the income category of 2-5 lakhs and comparatively a very lower percentage (7.5%) of respondents in the income category of 10-20 lakhs and above 20 lakhs  It is implied that all the respondents surveyed have stated that it is necessary to have a general insurance cover.  It is evident from the study conducted that majority (51.67%) of the respondents holds at least 1 general insurance policy.  The study discloses that 55% of respondents hold general insurance policy with the same company and the rest 45% of respondents hold it in various other companies.  From the analysis made it is inferred that the percentage of respondents who have taken policies from the same company lies between 46.1% and 63.9%.
  79. 79.  It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (79.63%) are policy holders in at least 2 companies, while18.52% of respondents are policy holders in 2-5 companies and the rest 1.85% of respondents are policy holders in more than 5 companies.  It is inferred that higher reputation amidst customers is enjoyed by [COMPANY NAME] with 39.17% of respondents stating it.  Majority of respondents (i.e., 75%), who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have stated that they are aware of various insurance schemes offered by the company.  It is found that the percentage of respondents aware of various insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] lies between 64.02% and 85.98%  Majority of respondents (i.e., 80%), who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have agreed that [COMPANY NAME] is well known for offering customer centric products.  It is inferred that a higher percentage (50%) of respondents have indicated that the service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] as very good, while 38.33% of respondents have indicated the service of [COMPANY NAME] as excellent, and the rest 11.67% of them have indicated it as moderate.  The study implies that a higher percentage (41.67%) of respondents has indicated friends and relatives, while 35% of respondents have indicated advertisement and the rest 23.33% of them have stated insurance agents as means by which they came to know about [COMPANY NAME]  Among the respondents, who has taken general insurance cover it is inferred that a higher percentage (50.83%) of respondents holds annual policy.
  80. 80.  Among the respondents, who are holding general insurance cover it is found that a higher percentage of respondents (48.3%) have been paying yearly insurance premium between Rs.5000-15000  With the application of Karl Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient it is found that the variables annual income and premium amount paid are positively correlated.  Among the policy holders of [COMPANY NAME], 65% of them feel that the premium being paid is high and among the policy holders of other companies only 20% have stated it as high.  According to the chi – square test conducted, it is found that there is no significant difference between premium and period of general insurance policy.  It is inferred from the study that among the policy holders of Royal Sundarm, higher percentage (78.3%) of them feel that they are satisfied and 13.3% of them are highly satisfied with the policy taken. Among other policy holders, a higher percentage (88.3%) of them also feels that they are satisfied and 8.3% of them feel that they are highly satisfied with the policy taken.  It is found that there is a significant difference between yearly premium paid and satisfactory level towards general insurance policy taken, as per the chi-square test conducted.  The study conducted reveals that a higher percentage (51.67%) of policy holders among both [COMPANY NAME] and other companies has insurance agents.  It is found that the percentage of respondents having insurance agents lies between 42.72% and 60.6%, according to the analysis conducted
  81. 81.  It is found that a higher percentage of respondents from both [COMPANY NAME] (64.5%) and from other companies (51.6%) have indicated that the guidance rendered by their insurance agent is very good.  It is inferred that all the respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] as well with other companies have indicated that their claims were not rejected by the insurance companies.  It is found that while selecting a particular insurance company to take a policy, majority of the respondents look out for reputation of the company first, secondly they look out for excellent service/responsiveness of the company, thirdly proper claim settlement of the company followed by good schemes, low premium rates, others good experience, and easy accessibility.  According to the result of the H-test, it is found that the respondent’s satisfaction level towards all the attributes of general insurance cover taken is the same.  Majority of respondents (36.67%) have stated insurance agents as the most preferred source to know about an insurance company and its products.  It is found that auto/car insurance is been ranked I by majority of respondents, health insurance ranked II, hospital cash insurance ranked III followed by personal accident insurance, householder’s insurance, travel insurance, shopkeeper’s insurance and other insurance covers (fire insurance, marine, rural insurance, etc) which are ranked as IV, V, VI, VII and VIII respectively. 3.4 SUGGESTIONS
  82. 82.  The present scenario demands almost all the customers to have a general insurance cover in order to protect from future uncertainty. The company always has an opportunity to grow and expand its operations in the non-life insurance segment. Hence, the company can seize this opportunity and pay attention to introduce more insurance covers to cater to the needs of various classes of people.  Majority of the respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have felt that the premium being paid is comparatively higher with the premium rates of other insurance companies. Hence, amendments can be made in this regard by offering insurance cover at reasonable premium rates to the customers.  The promptness of claim settlement procedure can be maintained as it is one of the important aspects which would enhance the reputation of the company, as well as build trust in the minds of the customers. Also, it helps to retain existing customers and attract new customers.  The company has to focus more on the auto/car insurance segment and health insurance segment. Majority of the respondents have preference towards auto/car insurance as it is a must to have insurance for their vehicles by law. Therefore, the company has got enough opportunities to earn huge profits from both these segments.  The company can create more awareness about its products among potential customers by means of advertisements and efficient insurance agents, which in turn will help in increasing its customer base. 3.5 CONCLUSIONS
  83. 83. The study was conducted to compare the performance of [COMPANY NAME] with its industrial competitors. The study has been able to accomplish its objectives, by thoroughly analyzing and identifying the competitive position of [COMPANY NAME], strengths and weaknesses of various insurance covers among the clients of various insurance companies, customer’s awareness and perception about the company and its products. The company may highly be benefited by the outcome of this study. The outcome of the study has proved that the performance of the company is outstanding in comparison with other competitors in the non-life insurance segment and that the company has a higher reputation among customers. It is concluded that the company could initiate various steps based on the recommendations given in this report. The company by adopting some of the recommendations, if not all, can further improve its performance and occupy a leading position among other competitors in the non-life insurance market in future years to come.

×