Leadership Training Program – Impact On Managerial Efficiency

Hypothesis on the Impact of Leadership Training Program on Managers

Question:

Describe about participants in a Leadership Training Program Rated as Better Managers Compared to Those Who do Not?

Leadership training program is actually a major professional training which actually helps individuals to grow the leadership qualities to actually perform on a dignified position with adequate supervision to guide the employees to their dedicated work. But, there is always a question that basically arise that is are the participants in a leadership training program rated as better mangers compared to those who do not. In fact it is a serious and an important aspect that needs major research. It has been prolifically noticed that the there is a vast difference between leaders and management. In every aspect both are different from each other. But managers those who don’t take part in the leadership training program are they not so efficient to those who take part. This study actually states the basic needs and wants of comparing the better managers (Burns, 1978). The article clearly explains every single details about the how leadership training actually differentiate the managers those who have not taken the training program. Experience also plays a key role making managers a prolific leader who can actually take the leader’s role to boost the employee’s motivation and morale and help them to dedicate them towards their work. So, the module clearly states each and every pros and cons that is needed in the managerial sector and will potentially clear out the major doubts on better managers. It actually cooperates and significantly executes major roles and procedures of how without the help of leadership training program better managers are also made by experience. Experience is one major factor that increases the potential of an individual rather than training procedures and the potential of being a leader cum manager without the training program is stated in this module.

A Hypothesis is a research made on a given topic. It is of different nature based on the requirement of the research conducted by the researcher. It can be of descriptive in nature or may be of quantitative in nature. In other words it is said to have an analysis done on a given topic. Here in this report a hypothesis is done on a given topic of Participants in a leadership training program rated better managers from those who do not participates in the leadership. For completing this hypothesis several studies were made and questionnaires were prepared to collect data regarding the given topic. A fictitious data set is prepared that shows how fifty employees of several organizations were interview and several different results were formulated from the employees (Flynn & Stack, 2006). The employees interviewed were of several positions in the organizations ranging from employee level to management level. For conducting this hypothesis a fictional topic was chosen that raised several questions regarding the usefulness of the leadership training program for the managers to be expert in their field and compete people of the same rank in performing a better duty. The entire report is discussed in a descriptive manner and a statistical analysis is done in the section later on.

Research Design

The study or report deals with the main question that how the leadership training program is helpful for the students to become efficient managers (Tracy, 2014). The entire study in the report deals with the questionnaires presented to the employee and managers of few organizations. The main questions that are discussed in this report are as follows:

How often are the training members chosen as a manager?
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?
Personal skill development Scheme
Is the Study useful?
How this study is useful for the students?
Is Leadership training program helpful?
Effect of leadership program on the managers.
Effect of Leadership program on the company.

Research design is the blue print of the report that is made on a research study. It is a method of representing the research in a report manner. Different methods of research are done. Some of them are descriptive research, explanatory and exploratory research. In this report the descriptive method is use to represent the report because it requires a huge base of knowledge to complete this research work (Giuliani & Kurson, 2002). The report represents how the data are collected and how it is used to complete the analysis as required completing the hypothesis.

Data collection is one of the most important methods of a hypothesis. It increases the knowledge base of the research to complete the required work. In this method the secondary data collection technique is used to collect data to increase the knowledge base (Safire & Safir, 1990). The data set prepared for completing the research is fictitious in nature but deals with a real world’s issue. For completing the research several questions were prepared based on the given topic and fifty cases were taken in consideration as samples for creating variables to complete the analysis.

Data analysis is the most complicated task for any researcher. It is the most difficult part of any research. In completing this study the variables from the data set are used to complete the statistical analysis to get the outcome of the research on the given topic (Krueger, 2004). For conducting the statistical analysis SPSS software is used were the variables are represented in tables and the statistical analysis is done with the help of the data set. Here, in this report the correlation between the variables are found and the results are represented in tabular form and with the help of graphs.

Every research work has certain limitation. A researcher needs to follow the guidelines that are related to the research work. The most important limitation of a research work is the time constraint for completing the work. The time must be kept in mind while conducting a research study.

Data analysis is the most important part of any study done on a particular topic. It is important make the analysis as per the requirement to get correct result for the variables collected from the data set. For completing the analysis in this report SPSS software is used and the data are manipulated from the data set to complete the analysis. The analysis done on the data set is given below:

Descriptive Statistics
	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
Age	50	1	4	2.24	.938
Sex	50	1	2	1.28	.454
Salary	50	2	4	2.90	.839
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	50	1	5	2.38	1.086
Is Leadership training program helpful?	50	1	5	2.68	1.096
Effect of leadership program on the managers	50	1	5	2.74	.922
Effect of Leadership program on the company	50	1	5	2.60	.969
Effect of leadership program on the industry	50	1	5	2.72	1.031
How this study is useful for the students	50	1	5	2.88	1.118
Effects on the employees	50	1	5	2.26	1.084
Are the Subject useful?	50	1	4	2.32	.891
Help in communication	50	1	4	2.44	.907
Personal skill development Scheme	50	1	5	2.76	1.041
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	50	1	5	2.46	1.164
How often are the training members choosen as a manager?	50	1	5	2.62	1.048
Valid N (listwise)	50

Crosstabs

Age * Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program

Crosstab

Count

	Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Age	20-30	3	3	5	4	0	15
30-40	2	6	1	1	0	10
40-50	6	8	6	2	1	23
50-60	1	0	0	1	0	2
Total	12	17	12	8	1	50

Chi-Square Tests
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	10.869^a	12	.540
Likelihood Ratio	11.716	12	.469
Linear-by-Linear Association	.608	1	.436
N of Valid Cases	50

a. 16 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .04.

Symmetric Measures
	Value	Asymp. Std. Error^a	Approx. T^b	Approx. Sig.
Interval by Interval	Pearson’s R	-.111	.153	-.777	.441^c
Ordinal by Ordinal	Spearman Correlation	-.121	.152	-.848	.401^c
N of Valid Cases	50

Data Collection

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

c. Based on normal approximation.

Age * Is Leadership training program helpful?

Crosstab

Count

	Is Leadership training program helpful?	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Age	20-30	2	4	4	4	1	15
30-40	2	3	4	1	0	10
40-50	3	9	8	2	1	23
50-60	0	0	0	1	1	2
Total	7	16	16	8	3	50

Chi-Square Tests
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	13.410^a	12	.340
Likelihood Ratio	11.036	12	.526
Linear-by-Linear Association	.014	1	.907
N of Valid Cases	50

a. 18 cells (90.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .12.

Symmetric Measures
	Value	Asymp. Std. Error^a	Approx. T^b	Approx. Sig.
Interval by Interval	Pearson’s R	.017	.161	.116	.909^c
Ordinal by Ordinal	Spearman Correlation	-.003	.156	-.021	.983^c
N of Valid Cases	50

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

c. Based on normal approximation.

Age * Effect of leadership program on the managers

Crosstab

Count

	Effect of leadership program on the managers	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Age	20-30	1	6	5	2	1	15
30-40	1	3	3	3	0	10
40-50	0	12	9	2	0	23
50-60	0	0	0	1	1	2
Total	2	21	17	8	2	50

Chi-Square Tests
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	20.508^a	12	.058
Likelihood Ratio	15.992	12	.192
Linear-by-Linear Association	.266	1	.606
N of Valid Cases	50

a. 16 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .08.

Symmetric Measures
	Value	Asymp. Std. Error^a	Approx. T^b	Approx. Sig.
Interval by Interval	Pearson’s R	.074	.164	.512	.611^c
Ordinal by Ordinal	Spearman Correlation	.046	.152	.320	.750^c
N of Valid Cases	50

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

c. Based on normal approximation.

Age * Effect of Leadership program on the company

Crosstab

Count

	Effect of Leadership program on the company	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Age	20-30	6	5	4	0	0	15
30-40	0	1	7	1	1	10
40-50	0	11	7	4	1	23
50-60	0	0	2	0	0	2
Total	6	17	20	5	2	50

Chi-Square Tests
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	27.455^a	12	.007
Likelihood Ratio	30.165	12	.003
Linear-by-Linear Association	6.972	1	.008
N of Valid Cases	50

a. 16 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .08.

Symmetric Measures
	Value	Asymp. Std. Error^a	Approx. T^b	Approx. Sig.
Interval by Interval	Pearson’s R	.377	.106	2.822	.007^c
Ordinal by Ordinal	Spearman Correlation	.342	.127	2.522	.015^c
N of Valid Cases	50

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

c. Based on normal approximation.

Salary * Personal skill development Scheme

Crosstab

Count

	Personal skill development Scheme	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Salary	10000-20000	2	2	8	7	1	20
20000-30000	3	7	4	1	0	15
30000-40000	2	3	6	4	0	15
Total	7	12	18	12	1	50

Chi-Square Tests
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	10.513^a	8	.231
Likelihood Ratio	11.258	8	.188
Linear-by-Linear Association	1.386	1	.239
N of Valid Cases	50

a. 12 cells (80.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .30.

Symmetric Measures
	Value	Asymp. Std. Error^a	Approx. T^b	Approx. Sig.
Interval by Interval	Pearson’s R	-.168	.138	-1.182	.243^c
Ordinal by Ordinal	Spearman Correlation	-.183	.143	-1.287	.204^c
N of Valid Cases	50

a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.

b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

c. Based on normal approximation.

Regression

Model Summary

Model

R Square

Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

.393^a

.155

-.120

.480

a. Predictors: (Constant), How often are the training members chosen as a manager?, Effect of leadership program on the managers, Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program, Effect of Leadership program on the company, Help in communication, Are the Subject useful?, How this study is useful for the students, Is Leadership training program helpful?, Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?, Effects on the employees, Effect of leadership program on the industry, Personal skill development Scheme.

ANOVA^a
Model	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	1.559	12	.130	.564	.856^b
Residual	8.521	37	.230
Total	10.080	49

a. Dependent Variable: Sex

b. Predictors: (Constant), How often are the training members choosen as a manager?, Effect of leadership program on the managers, Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program, Effect of Leadership program on the company, Help in communication, Are the Subject useful?, How this study is useful for the students, Is Leadership training program helpful?, Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?, Effects on the employees, Effect of leadership program on the industry, Personal skill development Scheme

Coefficients^a
Model	Unstandardized Coefficients	Standardized Coefficients	T	Sig.
B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	1.016	.722		1.406	.168
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	-.040	.073	-.096	-.549	.586
Is Leadership training program helpful?	.105	.068	.255	1.544	.131
Effect of leadership program on the managers	.073	.084	.148	.870	.390
Effect of Leadership program on the company	-.009	.073	-.020	-.128	.899
Effect of leadership program on the industry	.010	.075	.022	.127	.900
How this study is useful for the students	-.034	.067	-.084	-.512	.612
Effects on the employees	.017	.074	.041	.232	.818
Is the Subject useful?	-.046	.080	-.091	-.579	.566
Help in communication	.010	.078	.020	.127	.899
Personal skill development Scheme	-.070	.078	-.160	-.894	.377
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	.044	.065	.112	.670	.507
How often are the training members choosen as a manager?	.040	.068	.092	.588	.560

a. Dependent Variable: Sex

T-Test One-Sample Statistics
	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
Age	50	2.24	.938	.133
Sex	50	1.28	.454	.064
Salary	50	2.90	.839	.119
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	50	2.38	1.086	.154
Is Leadership training program helpful?	50	2.68	1.096	.155
Effect of leadership program on the managers	50	2.74	.922	.130
Effect of Leadership program on the company	50	2.60	.969	.137
Effect of leadership program on the industry	50	2.72	1.031	.146
How this study is useful for the students	50	2.88	1.118	.158
Effects on the employees	50	2.26	1.084	.153
Are the Subject useful?	50	2.32	.891	.126
Help in communication	50	2.44	.907	.128
Personal skill development Scheme	50	2.76	1.041	.147
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	50	2.46	1.164	.165
How often are the training members choosen as a manager?	50	2.62	1.048	.148

One-Sample Test
	Test Value = 0
t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower
Age	16.885	49	.000	2.240	1.97
Sex	19.956	49	.000	1.280	1.15
Salary	24.438	49	.000	2.900	2.66
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	15.498	49	.000	2.380	2.07
Is Leadership training program helpful?	17.288	49	.000	2.680	2.37
Effect of leadership program on the managers	21.022	49	.000	2.740	2.48
Effect of Leadership program on the company	18.975	49	.000	2.600	2.32
Effect of leadership program on the industry	18.656	49	.000	2.720	2.43
How this study is useful for the students	18.210	49	.000	2.880	2.56
Effects on the employees	14.737	49	.000	2.260	1.95
Are the Subject useful?	18.417	49	.000	2.320	2.07
Help in communication	19.020	49	.000	2.440	2.18
Personal skill development Scheme	18.744	49	.000	2.760	2.46
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	14.941	49	.000	2.460	2.13
How often are the training members chosen as a manager?	17.684	49	.000	2.620	2.32

One-way ANOVA
	Sig.
Age	Between Groups	.120
Within Groups
Total
Salary	Between Groups	.824
Within Groups
Total
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	Between Groups	.214
Within Groups
Total
Is Leadership training program helpful?	Between Groups	.062
Within Groups
Total
Effect of leadership program on the managers	Between Groups	.829
Within Groups
Total
Effect of Leadership program on the company	Between Groups	.898
Within Groups
Total
Effect of leadership program on the industry	Between Groups	.378
Within Groups
Total
How this study is useful for the students	Between Groups	.355
Within Groups
Total
Effects on the employees	Between Groups	.918
Within Groups
Total
Are the Subject useful?	Between Groups	.606
Within Groups
Total
Help in communication	Between Groups	.774
Within Groups

ANOVA
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F
Help in communication	Total	40.320	49
Personal skill development Scheme	Between Groups	.691	1	.691	.633
Within Groups	52.429	48	1.092
Total	53.120	49
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	Between Groups	.650	1	.650	.474
Within Groups	65.770	48	1.370
Total	66.420	49
How often are the training members choosen as a manager?	Between Groups	1.093	1	1.093	.996
Within Groups	52.687	48	1.098
Total	53.780	49

ANOVA
	Sig.
Help in communication	Total
Personal skill development Scheme	Between Groups	.430
Within Groups
Total
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	Between Groups	.494
Within Groups
Total
How often are the training members chosen as a manager?	Between Groups	.323
Within Groups
Total

Here in this report data analysis is done on the variables manipulated from the fictitious data set that helps to complete the statistical analysis on the given topic. All data and reports are presented in tabular form to make it easier to understand for the readers. Graphical representation of the data and results are also provided along with the results to make it understandable and interesting for the audience. Here in the analysis section the dependent variables are compared with the independent variables to find the correlation among the variables. The mean, standard deviation, regression analysis is done with the help of the variables and the results are represented in the analysis section. It can be seen that how the T-test have been conducted with the variables and an ANOVA analysis is also done in the above section. The above section deals with the statistical analysis of the data manipulated from the fictitious data set. It shows how the data are interrelated with each other and how they are different from each other to solve the problem arises in the questionnaires. All types of required statistical analysis is been done in the report to meet the requirement of the given topic.

Data Analysis

Conclusion

The module clearly states about the does and don’t that are basically need to be prolific manager at an executive or administrative level. Training is always not important in acquiring to be the best manager in any level. If we see on a wider basis we can easily conclude that rather than training experience also plays a key and significant role in becoming a major and well established manager to carry out or to carry forward the tasks that are incorporated in an organization. Basically managers are good leaders. Managers play a key role in establishing the firm’s orientation along with its main motive, aim and objectives. These prolific features can only be identified and taken into consideration when an individual as a manager has wide perspective of thinking to grow (Lawriwsky, 1984). The tactics, strategies, implementation of plan are all leadership qualities that actually a good manager persists which actually help them to execute major projects, works on wider basis thinking about the growth of the organization. Leadership tactics are essential in every sector. The leadership role must be well performed to bring out the major necessities from an employee making the employee motivated to keep its focus and dedication towards the work. A manager can easily acquire the leadership quality by gaining experience from different fields and sector. A manager can easily be a leader by prolifically boosting up the employees morale and motivate them and help them in their major works to help them to achieve the goal along with the organizational objectives and specific goals. Leadership and management are quite different from each other in the organizational structures to execute great plans and objectives. But it is not necessary for a manager to take any professional or any prolific training to become a dignified leader. Sometimes even experience also matters and counts which actually makes individuals better manager cum leaders without a leadership training program.

References

Burns, J. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Flynn, J., & Stack, M. (2006). The role of the preceptor. New York: Springer Pub.

Giuliani, R., & Kurson, K. (2002). Leadership. New York: Hyperion.

Krueger, G. (2004). Enterprise restructuring and the role of managers in Russia. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.

Lawriwsky, M. (1984). Corporate structure & performance. London: Croom Helm.

Safire, W., & Safir, L. (1990). Leadership. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Tracy, B. (2014). Leadership. New York: American Management Association.

Descriptive Statistics
	N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	Std. Deviation
Age	50	1	4	2.24	.938
Sex	50	1	2	1.28	.454
Salary	50	2	4	2.90	.839
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	50	1	5	2.38	1.086
Is Leadership training program helpful?	50	1	5	2.68	1.096
Effect of leadership program on the managers	50	1	5	2.74	.922
Effect of Leadership program on the company	50	1	5	2.60	.969
Effect of leadership program on the industry	50	1	5	2.72	1.031
How this study is useful for the students	50	1	5	2.88	1.118
Effects on the employees	50	1	5	2.26	1.084
Are the Subject useful?	50	1	4	2.32	.891
Help in communication	50	1	4	2.44	.907
Personal skill development Scheme	50	1	5	2.76	1.041
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	50	1	5	2.46	1.164
How often are the training members choosen as a manager?	50	1	5	2.62	1.048
Valid N (listwise)	50

Crosstabs

Age * Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program

Crosstab

Count

	Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Age	20-30	3	3	5	4	0	15
30-40	2	6	1	1	0	10
40-50	6	8	6	2	1	23
50-60	1	0	0	1	0	2
Total	12	17	12	8	1	50

Chi-Square Tests
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	10.869^a	12	.540
Likelihood Ratio	11.716	12	.469
Linear-by-Linear Association	.608	1	.436
N of Valid Cases	50

Symmetric Measures
	Value	Asymp. Std. Error^a	Approx. T^b	Approx. Sig.
Interval by Interval	Pearson’s R	-.111	.153	-.777	.441^c
Ordinal by Ordinal	Spearman Correlation	-.121	.152	-.848	.401^c
N of Valid Cases	50

Age * Is Leadership training program helpful?

Crosstab

Count

	Is Leadership training program helpful?	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Age	20-30	2	4	4	4	1	15
30-40	2	3	4	1	0	10
40-50	3	9	8	2	1	23
50-60	0	0	0	1	1	2
Total	7	16	16	8	3	50

Chi-Square Tests
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	13.410^a	12	.340
Likelihood Ratio	11.036	12	.526
Linear-by-Linear Association	.014	1	.907
N of Valid Cases	50

Symmetric Measures
	Value	Asymp. Std. Error^a	Approx. T^b	Approx. Sig.
Interval by Interval	Pearson’s R	.017	.161	.116	.909^c
Ordinal by Ordinal	Spearman Correlation	-.003	.156	-.021	.983^c
N of Valid Cases	50

Age * Effect of leadership program on the managers

Crosstab

Count

	Effect of leadership program on the managers	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Age	20-30	1	6	5	2	1	15
30-40	1	3	3	3	0	10
40-50	0	12	9	2	0	23
50-60	0	0	0	1	1	2
Total	2	21	17	8	2	50

Chi-Square Tests
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	20.508^a	12	.058
Likelihood Ratio	15.992	12	.192
Linear-by-Linear Association	.266	1	.606
N of Valid Cases	50

Symmetric Measures
	Value	Asymp. Std. Error^a	Approx. T^b	Approx. Sig.
Interval by Interval	Pearson’s R	.074	.164	.512	.611^c
Ordinal by Ordinal	Spearman Correlation	.046	.152	.320	.750^c
N of Valid Cases	50

Age * Effect of Leadership program on the company

Crosstab

Count

	Effect of Leadership program on the company	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Age	20-30	6	5	4	0	0	15
30-40	0	1	7	1	1	10
40-50	0	11	7	4	1	23
50-60	0	0	2	0	0	2
Total	6	17	20	5	2	50

Chi-Square Tests
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	27.455^a	12	.007
Likelihood Ratio	30.165	12	.003
Linear-by-Linear Association	6.972	1	.008
N of Valid Cases	50

Symmetric Measures
	Value	Asymp. Std. Error^a	Approx. T^b	Approx. Sig.
Interval by Interval	Pearson’s R	.377	.106	2.822	.007^c
Ordinal by Ordinal	Spearman Correlation	.342	.127	2.522	.015^c
N of Valid Cases	50

Age * Effect of leadership program on the industry

Crosstab

Count

	Effect of leadership program on the industry	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Age	20-30	0	6	5	2	2	15
30-40	0	5	2	1	2	10

Salary * Personal skill development Scheme

Crosstab

Count

	Personal skill development Scheme	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Salary	10000-20000	2	2	8	7	1	20
20000-30000	3	7	4	1	0	15
30000-40000	2	3	6	4	0	15
Total	7	12	18	12	1	50

Chi-Square Tests
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	10.513^a	8	.231
Likelihood Ratio	11.258	8	.188
Linear-by-Linear Association	1.386	1	.239
N of Valid Cases	50

Symmetric Measures
	Value	Asymp. Std. Error^a	Approx. T^b	Approx. Sig.
Interval by Interval	Pearson’s R	-.168	.138	-1.182	.243^c
Ordinal by Ordinal	Spearman Correlation	-.183	.143	-1.287	.204^c
N of Valid Cases	50

Salary * Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?

Crosstab

Count

	Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	Total
Strongly Agree	Agree	Neutral	Disagree	Strongly Disagree
Salary	10000-20000	3	12	3	0	2	20
20000-30000	4	2	4	3	2	15
30000-40000	3	6	4	2	0	15
Total	10	20	11	5	4	50

Chi-Square Tests
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	11.492^a	8	.175
Likelihood Ratio	14.938	8	.060
Linear-by-Linear Association	.036	1	.849
N of Valid Cases	50

Symmetric Measures
	Value	Asymp. Std. Error^a	Approx. T^b	Approx. Sig.
Interval by Interval	Pearson’s R	.027	.125	.188	.851^c
Ordinal by Ordinal	Spearman Correlation	.062	.131	.429	.670^c
N of Valid Cases	50

Regression

Model Summary

Model

R Square

Adjusted R Square

Std. Error of the Estimate

.393^a

.155

-.120

.480

ANOVA^a
Model	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
1	Regression	1.559	12	.130	.564	.856^b
Residual	8.521	37	.230
Total	10.080	49

Coefficients^a
Model	Unstandardized Coefficients	Standardized Coefficients	T	Sig.
B	Std. Error	Beta
1	(Constant)	1.016	.722		1.406	.168
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	-.040	.073	-.096	-.549	.586
Is Leadership training program helpful?	.105	.068	.255	1.544	.131
Effect of leadership program on the managers	.073	.084	.148	.870	.390
Effect of Leadership program on the company	-.009	.073	-.020	-.128	.899
Effect of leadership program on the industry	.010	.075	.022	.127	.900
How this study is useful for the students	-.034	.067	-.084	-.512	.612
Effects on the employees	.017	.074	.041	.232	.818
Are the Subject useful?	-.046	.080	-.091	-.579	.566
Help in communication	.010	.078	.020	.127	.899
Personal skill development Scheme	-.070	.078	-.160	-.894	.377
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	.044	.065	.112	.670	.507
How often are the training members choosen as a manager?	.040	.068	.092	.588	.560

T-Test One-Sample Statistics
	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Std. Error Mean
Age	50	2.24	.938	.133
Sex	50	1.28	.454	.064
Salary	50	2.90	.839	.119
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	50	2.38	1.086	.154
Is Leadership training program helpful?	50	2.68	1.096	.155
Effect of leadership program on the managers	50	2.74	.922	.130
Effect of Leadership program on the company	50	2.60	.969	.137
Effect of leadership program on the industry	50	2.72	1.031	.146
How this study is useful for the students	50	2.88	1.118	.158
Effects on the employees	50	2.26	1.084	.153
Are the Subject useful?	50	2.32	.891	.126
Help in communication	50	2.44	.907	.128
Personal skill development Scheme	50	2.76	1.041	.147
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	50	2.46	1.164	.165
How often are the training members choosen as a manager?	50	2.62	1.048	.148

One-Sample Test
	Test Value = 0
t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Lower
Age	16.885	49	.000	2.240	1.97
Sex	19.956	49	.000	1.280	1.15
Salary	24.438	49	.000	2.900	2.66
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	15.498	49	.000	2.380	2.07
Is Leadership training program helpful?	17.288	49	.000	2.680	2.37
Effect of leadership program on the managers	21.022	49	.000	2.740	2.48
Effect of Leadership program on the company	18.975	49	.000	2.600	2.32
Effect of leadership program on the industry	18.656	49	.000	2.720	2.43
How this study is useful for the students	18.210	49	.000	2.880	2.56
Effects on the employees	14.737	49	.000	2.260	1.95
Are the Subject useful?	18.417	49	.000	2.320	2.07
Help in communication	19.020	49	.000	2.440	2.18
Personal skill development Scheme	18.744	49	.000	2.760	2.46
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	14.941	49	.000	2.460	2.13
How often are the training members choosen as a manager?	17.684	49	.000	2.620	2.32

One-Sample Test
	Test Value = 0
95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
Upper
Age	2.51
Sex	1.41
Salary	3.14
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	2.69
Is Leadership training program helpful?	2.99
Effect of leadership program on the managers	3.00
Effect of Leadership program on the company	2.88
Effect of leadership program on the industry	3.01
How this study is useful for the students	3.20
Effects on the employees	2.57
Are the Subject useful?	2.57
Help in communication	2.70
Personal skill development Scheme	3.06
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	2.79
How often are the training members choosen as a manager?	2.92

One-way ANOVA
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F
Age	Between Groups	2.136	1	2.136	2.502
Within Groups	40.984	48	.854
Total	43.120	49
Salary	Between Groups	.036	1	.036	.050
Within Groups	34.464	48	.718
Total	34.500	49
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	Between Groups	1.851	1	1.851	1.589
Within Groups	55.929	48	1.165
Total	57.780	49
Is Leadership training program helpful?	Between Groups	4.166	1	4.166	3.655
Within Groups	54.714	48	1.140
Total	58.880	49
Effect of leadership program on the managers	Between Groups	.041	1	.041	.047
Within Groups	41.579	48	.866
Total	41.620	49
Effect of Leadership program on the company	Between Groups	.016	1	.016	.017
Within Groups	45.984	48	.958
Total	46.000	49
Effect of leadership program on the industry	Between Groups	.846	1	.846	.792
Within Groups	51.234	48	1.067
Total	52.080	49
How this study is useful for the students	Between Groups	1.093	1	1.093	.872
Within Groups	60.187	48	1.254
Total	61.280	49
Effects on the employees	Between Groups	.013	1	.013	.011
Within Groups	57.607	48	1.200
Total	57.620	49
Are the Subject useful?	Between Groups	.217	1	.217	.270
Within Groups	38.663	48	.805
Total	38.880	49
Help in communication	Between Groups	.070	1	.070	.083
Within Groups	40.250	48	.839

ANOVA
	Sig.
Age	Between Groups	.120
Within Groups
Total
Salary	Between Groups	.824
Within Groups
Total
Are they were member of the Leadership Training Program	Between Groups	.214
Within Groups
Total
Is Leadership training program helpful?	Between Groups	.062
Within Groups
Total
Effect of leadership program on the managers	Between Groups	.829
Within Groups
Total
Effect of Leadership program on the company	Between Groups	.898
Within Groups
Total
Effect of leadership program on the industry	Between Groups	.378
Within Groups
Total
How this study is useful for the students	Between Groups	.355
Within Groups
Total
Effects on the employees	Between Groups	.918
Within Groups
Total
Are the Subject useful?	Between Groups	.606
Within Groups
Total
Help in communication	Between Groups	.774
Within Groups

ANOVA
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F
Help in communication	Total	40.320	49
Personal skill development Scheme	Between Groups	.691	1	.691	.633
Within Groups	52.429	48	1.092
Total	53.120	49
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	Between Groups	.650	1	.650	.474
Within Groups	65.770	48	1.370
Total	66.420	49
How often are the training members choosen as a manager?	Between Groups	1.093	1	1.093	.996
Within Groups	52.687	48	1.098
Total	53.780	49

ANOVA
	Sig.
Help in communication	Total
Personal skill development Scheme	Between Groups	.430
Within Groups
Total
Are Participants of leadership programs better Mangers?	Between Groups	.494
Within Groups
Total
How often are the training members chosen as a manager?	Between Groups	.323
Within Groups
Total

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ Leadership Training Program – Impact On Managerial Efficiency ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer