CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

4.0 INTRODUCTION

4.1 Method of Data Analysis

A total of one hundred and nine (109) copies of the questionnaire were administered. A
total of 100 copies were retrieved, given a response rate of 100 %.

Statistics such as frequency count and percentages were put to use in the analysis of
research questions while research hypotheses were tested using correlation analysis and simple
regression analysis. The research hypotheses were tested at 0.05 level of significance. Analysis
was carried out with the aid of Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS).

This chapter covers data analysis, interpretation and discussion of the research findings.
In an attempt to investigate the impact of reward system on employee performance, this section
begins by conducting some preliminary analysis. The Preliminary analysis include the
demographic characteristics of the respondents.

Table 4. 1 : Demographic Characteristics

Table 4.1.1 Descriptive analysis of socio demographic characteristics of respondents

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation

100 1.00 2.00 1.3600 .48242

SEX

100 1.00 4.00 2.9600 1.00423

EDUCATION LEVEL

100 1.00 4.00 2.0600 .88557

AGE

100 1.00 4.00 1.6800 .83943

FACULTY

100
Valid N (listwise)

Source: Output from SPSS 21 (2023)

 This table explicitly shows the descriptive statistics of the socio demographic
characteristics of respondents in terms of the mean and standard deviation. The mean results are
1.36, 2.96, 2.06 and 1.68 respectively for each of the demographic characteristics. The mean
result for gender is 1.36 which means a larger proportion of the respondents are of male gender.
also, the mean result for the educational qualification is 2.96 which shows that the majority of
the respondent have master degree. The mean result of Age is 2.06 which means that a larger
proportion of the respondents are within the age of 29-35 years and the mean result of the
working experience is 1.68 which means that a larger proportion of the respondents have below
two years of working experience.

Frequency Table
SEX

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

MALE 64 64.0 64.0 64.0

Valid FEMALE 36 36.0 36.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Source: Output from SPSS 21 (2023)

EDUCATION LEVEL

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

100 LEVEL 10 10.0 10.0 10.0

200 LEVEL 22 22.0 22.0 32.0

Valid 300 LEVEL 30 30.0 30.0 62.0

400 LEVEL 38 38.0 38.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Source: Output from SPSS 21 (2023)

AGE
 Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative
Percent

BELOW 20 YEARS 28 28.0 28.0 28.0

20-25 YEARS 46 46.0 46.0 74.0

Valid 26-30 YEARS 18 18.0 18.0 92.0

31-35 YEARS 8 8.0 8.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Source: Output from SPSS 21 (2023)

FACULTY

Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative

Percent

EDUCATION 52 52.0 52.0 52.0

MANAGEMENT SCIENCE 32 32.0 32.0 84.0

Valid SCIENCE 12 12.0 12.0 96.0

SOCIAL SCIENCE 4 4.0 4.0 100.0

Total 100 100.0 100.0

Source: Output from SPSS 21 (2023)

This study commenced its empirical analysis by checking for the respondents socio-
demographic characteristics. The results of the descriptive statistics of respondents profile, as
shown in Table 4.1 above revealed that, 18 (36.%) of the participants are female, while 32
(64.%) are male. In terms of education, this study has 19 (38%) Master Degree , 11 (22%) staff
who have undergraduate degree (Bsc. / HND), and 15 (30%) acquire Diploma / NCE certificate
and Secondary/Primary have 5 (10%). On age profile, the majority of the participants (28%)
belong to the age group of to 21-28 years old, followed by the age of 29-35 years that is
represented by 46%, followed by the age of 36 to 45 that is represented by 18%. Those whose
ages above 45 years accounted for 8% of total response. The majority of respondents 26 (52%)
had below 2 years of working experience, followed closely by 16(32%) of the respondents
between 2-5 years of working experience. In addition, 12% had 6 to 9 years working experience
and 4% of the respondents had 10 years above of working experience.
Table 4.2 Hypothesis Testing

Correlations

PONSME ICTSME ADVENTONICT SMES

**
Pearson Correlation 1 .051 .687 .221*

PONSME Sig. (2-tailed) .611 .000 .027

N 100 100 100 100

Pearson Correlation .051 1 -.013 .086
ICTSME Sig. (2-tailed) .611 .899 .396
N 100 100 100 100
**
Pearson Correlation .687 -.013 1 .435**
ADVENTONICT Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .899 .000
N 100 100 100 100
* **
Pearson Correlation .221 .086 .435 1

SMES Sig. (2-tailed) .027 .396 .000

N 100 100 100 100

Table 4.2: Correlation Table

Source: Author

4.2.1 Research Hypothesis: One

H01: Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) does not have meaningful impact on organization
Environment.

From the table 4.2 it can be seen that the Pearson correlation value for the given variables was
calculated to be 0.57. The correlation analysis of the variables shows that there is a positive
moderately strong relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility in the organization
(independent variable) and the subsequent (dependent variable) organization Environment.
Furthermore, the output of the Pearson correlation is +0.57 which means that if one variable
increases, the second variable increases in value accordingly. And vice versa, after decrease in
value of one variable another tends to decrease as well.

Another dimension calculated through the Pearson correlation is the significance value of the
research which is calculated to be 0.692 The analyzed value is greater than 0.05, which testifies
to the fact that there is a statistically significant correlation between Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR) and organization Environment.

According to the Pearson correlation value the researcher will reject the null hypothesis as the
significant value is greater than 0.57 make the conclusion that there is a positive relationship
between Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and organization environment.

4.2.2 Research Hypothesis: Two

Ho2: There is no corporate social responsibility in banking sector and CSR doesn’t in any way
benefit the company and its environment.

From Table 1, it can be seen that the Pearson correlation value for the given variables was
calculated to be 0.224. The correlation analysis of the variables shows that there is a weak
positive correlation between corporate social responsibility in banking sector and organization
environment.

Another dimension calculated through the Pearson correlation is the significance value of the
research which is calculated to be 0.124 The analysed value is greater than 0.05, which testifies
to the fact that there is a statistically significant continuous correlation between corporate social
responsibility in banking sector and organization environment.

According to the Pearson correlation value the researcher will reject the null hypothesis as the
significant value is greater than 0.224 make the conclusion that there is a positive relationship
between corporate social responsibility in banking sector and organization environment.

4.2.3 Research Hypothesis: Three

Ho3: There is no significant relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and
organizational environment

From the table 4.2 it can be seen that the Pearson correlation value for the given variables was
calculated to be 0.57. The correlation analysis of the variables shows that there is a positive
moderately strong relationship between Corporate Social Responsibility in the organization
(independent variable) and the subsequent (dependent variable) organizational Environment.
Furthermore, the output of the Pearson correlation is +0.57 which means that if one variable
increases, the second variable increases in value accordingly. And vice versa, after decrease in
value of one variable another tends to decrease as well.

Another dimension calculated through the Pearson correlation is the significance value of the
research which is calculated to be 0.692 The analyzed value is greater than 0.05, which testifies
to the fact that there is a statistically significant correlation between Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR) and organizational Environment.

According to the Pearson correlation value the researcher will reject the null hypothesis as the
significant value is greater than 0.57 make the conclusion that there is a positive relationship
between Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and organizational environment.

4.3 MODEL SUMMARY

Model Summaryb

Model R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of the

Square Estimate
a
1 .459 .211 .186 .32940

a. Predictors: (Constant), ADVENTONICT, ICTSME, PONSME

b. Dependent Variable: SMES

This table clearly shows the correlation coefficient between reward system and the
employees performance with a result of (r = 0.459) which means that there is a strong positive
relationship between the two variables, with the coefficient of determination (r 2 = 0.211) which
means that 21.1% of the variation in the dependent variable is explained by the independent
variable and 33% of the variation is explained by other variables aside the corporate social
responsibility.

4.4 ANOVA

ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 2.782 3 .927 8.545 .000b

1 Residual 10.417 96 .109

Total 13.198 99

a. Dependent Variable: SMES

b. Predictors: (Constant), ADVENTONICT, ICTSME, PONSME

The table clearly and explicitly shows that the model perfectly explains the relationship between
the variables with a significant value of less than 0.05 (p value = 0.000), the result also shows
that the F critical value is 8.545 which makes the relationship significant.

Coefficientsa

Model Unstandardized Coefficients Standardized t Sig.

Coefficients

B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) .955 .217 4.402 .000

PONSME -.125 .098 -.159 -1.272 .207

1
ICTSME .094 .085 .101 1.111 .269

ADVENTONICT .422 .097 .546 4.363 .000

a. Dependent Variable: SMES

Sources Data Analysis 2021

The results the Corporate Social Responsibility on Banking Sector exerted a negative but in
significant effect with Organization Environment. This means that when the volume of
Corporate Social Responsibility on Banking Sector drops by one unit, it tends to will slow down
the Organization Environment by 0.125 unit.
In addition, the results also showed that there is a positive and significant relationship between
the Government policy on Corporate Social Responsibility and Organization Enivironment. The
implication of the above is that, if Government policy increase by one unit, it will result to or
trigger Organization Enivironment. by 0.094 unit while holding other variables constant

Lastly, the results of the estimate revealed that that there is a positive and significant relationship
between Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Environment. The implication of
the above is that, if Corporate Social Responsibility increase by one unit, it will result to or
trigger Organization Enivironment by 0.422 unit while holding other variables constant.