Chapter 3

Operational Definitions

Structure

Introduction

3.1 Operational agents

3.1 Job performance

3.3 Assertiveness

3.4 Job satisfaction

3.5 Job involvement

3.6 ·Demographic variables

3.6.1 Age

3.6.2 Experience

3.6.3 Qualification

3.6.4 Region of engagement

Chapter 3 Operational Definit~ons

Introduction

A concept expresses an abstraction by generalisation from particulars.

A construct is a concept. But construct has the added meaning, however,

of having been deliberately and consciously invented or adopted for a

scientific purpose. An operational definition assigns meaning to a construct

or a variable by specifying the activities or "operations" necessary to

measure it. There are in general, two kinds of "operational definition" in

research studies: (i) measured operational definition, and (ii) experimental

operational definition. A measured operational definition describes how a

variable will be measured. An experimental operational definition spells out

the details (operations) of the investigator's manipulation of variable. No

operational definition can ever express the rich and diverse aspects of

human prejudice (Kerlinger, 1995).

3.1 Operational agents

Life Insurance Corporation is a nationally acclaimed financial

organisation contributing substantially to the national economy. Though

UC of India is having many agents, only few of them are contributing

consistently to the growth of the organization. In this study Operational

agents are defined as those agents who are actively engaged and

contributing to the achievement of financial targets of Life Insurance

Corporation of India for at least three years. Only those agents who were

operational, having contributed to the organization, in the years 1997-

1998, 1998-1999, and 1999-2000 comprise the database.

3.2 Job performance

Job performance or work performance is a special case of

psychological measurement that provides quantitative descriptions of the

extent to which individuals demonstrate (Ghiselli, 1964). Work performance

(3.1)

measurement involves the methods or procedures that provide

quantitatively the extent to which employees demonstrate certain work

behaviours and the result of those behaviours (Landy and Farr, 1983).

According to Mackinney (1967) performance is a multidimensional variable,

people high on one measure may not be high on another, and such

standings may change over time. This finding suggested some important

questions concerning implications of this complexity. There is still a

controversy amongst the industrial psychologists that these dimensions

should be combined in order to reach an overall judgement whether the

dimensions should be analyzed separately or not. Some prominent

psychologists (Dunnette, 1963; Guion, 1961; Ghiselli, 1964) claimed low

interrelations among the different performance variables and concluded

that these were conceptually different aspects, not perfect indicants of the

same underlying variable, a variable that might be called overall job

performance. Performance of an individ.ual, documented through the

system of performance appraisal, a continuous line function, which, if

performed objectively, exerts motivational impacts on individuals (Dwivedi,

1990). With regards to performance, Ramusson (1999) identified the traits

essential to be successful in sales and the top individual strengths

identified included: ego strength, assertiveness, willingness to take risks,

sociable and abstract reasoning, healthy sense of skepticism, creativity and

empathy. Decenzo and Robins (1995) related performance to personal

data, performance index and performance appraisal. They defined

performance as "effective and efficient work which also considers personal

data such as measures of accidents, turnover, absence and tardiness",

performance index as "a measure to determine if an executive's salary is

commensurate with the organization's performance," and performance

appraisal as "a formal process in an organization whereby each employee

is evaluated to determine how he or she is performing". Performance

management is central to gaining competitive advantage, and it is the

means through which managers ensure that employees' activities and

(3.2)

output are congruent with the organization's goal (Noe et al, 1994). Eppler

et al (1998) highlighted the necessity of measuring performance that

existed in all spheres, investigated the effect of two personal

characteristics: self-monitoring (the propensity of a person to regulate their

behaviours in order to present a more desirable self-image) and

adaptiveness (the capability of a sales person to make appropriate changes

across sales interactions and within an interaction) to comment that

predisposition to practise adaptive selling resulted higher sales in case of

personal selling. The outcome of sales career is always probabilistic but

personality of salespeople influences the salesperson's job performance

(Lorge, 1999).

Job performance of the insurance agent is the conglomeration of

quantitative bases like number of policie~ sum assured, first premium

income etc. and qualitative judgements; some of which are

communication skill, degree of emotional stability, problem solving

ability, and dependability etc.

The performance of the agents of UC of India has been measured by

administering a questionnaire on Development Officers (for agents

recruited by them) and Branch Manager or Assistant Branch Managers

(Sales) for Direct agents.

The salespersons (agents) of UC of India, who widely differ in their

performance level, have been be categorised by percentile cut off, as High

performer (JP _High), Moderate performer (JP _Mod) and Low performer

(JP _Low).

Performance: Score range (00 to 80) Measured Score range

Performance level Grade Minimum Maximum

Low performer JP_Low 39 52

Moderate performer JP_Mod 53 66 High performer JP_High 67 80

(3.3)

low performers are those agents whose scores are between 39 and

52, obtained based on percentile cut Qff of the performance scores of an the agents constituting the sample. The agents, whose scores Ue between

53 and 66, are Moderate performing agents. The High performers are

those whose scores range from 67 and 80.

3.3 Assertiveness

Assertiveness is social boldness. Assertiveness is a personality trait

(Salter, 1949) possessed by some person and not by someone. Wolpe

(1958) and lazarus (1966) redefined assertiveness as expressing "personal

rights and feelings" and opined that every body could be assertiveness in

some situations, and totally ineffective in some other. A person is assertive,

when he stands up for his rkJhts in such a way that the rights of others are

not violated. Again Bowles ('2001) defined assertiveness as a positive and

constructive way of relating to other people that respects others' needs,

wants, and rights as well as one's own needs, wants, and rights.

Assertiveness is standing up for oneself without denying the rights of

others, expressing oneself honestly and firmly without hurting,

manipulating or putting others down (Alberti and Emmons, 1991).

Schimmel (1976) described assertiveness as an antidote to fear, shyness,

passivity, and even anger, and so there is an astonishingly wide range of

situations in which assertiveness appears as appropriate. To speak up,

make requests, ask. for favours and generally insist that one's rights be

respected as an equal human being, and to overcome the fears and self·

depreciation are the composites of assertiveness. Assertive rights, as

emphasised by Jakubouski (1978) are to act in ways that promotes dignity

and self·respect without violating others' rights1 to be treated with respect.

The right to say "No' and not feel guilty, to experience and express ones

feelings, to take time to accomplish, to slow down for thinking, to change

one's mind, to ask for what one wants, to ask for information, to make

(3.4)

mistakes, to think good about oneself, are the various cornerstones of

assertiveness.

Assertiveness is social boldness, nothing more than compelling self

assurance, and it means an ability and willingness to easily speak up

for oneself, and make one's viewpoint heard and known, without

trampling on the rights of others.

Rathus 30-item Assertiveness Schedule has been used to measure the

assertiveness of the agents.

The sample, for using statistical tools e.g. Chi-square tests, Analysis

of Variance (ANOVA), has been divided in three categories, namely, High

assertive (Ass_High), Moderately assertive (Ass_Mod) and Low assertive

(Ass_Low) by percentile cut off of the assertiveness score.

Assertiveness: Score range(- 90 to+ 90) Measured Score range

Assertiveness level Grade Minimum Maximum

Low Assertiveness Ass_Low -30 + 02

Moderate Assertiveness Ass_Mod + 03 + 35

High Assertiveness Ass_High + 36 + 68

Low assertive agents are those, whose scores are between -30 and

+ 2, obtained based on percentile cut off of the assertiveness scores of the

total sample size. The agents whose scores lie between +03 and +35 are

Moderate assertive agents. The High assertive are agents whose scores are

within + 36 to +68.

3.4 Job satisfaction

Job satisfaction is any combination of psychological and

environmental circumstances that causes a person truthfully to say, "I am

satisfied with my job" (Hopcock, 1935). Behavioural scientist, Smith

(1955), viewed job satisfaction as the employee's judgement of "how well

he is on the whole or the whole is satisfying his vigorous needs". Job

satisfaction is an attitude which results from balancing and summation of

(3.5)

many specific likes and dislikes, experienced in connection with the job and

its evaluation, might rest largely upon one's success or failure in the

achievement of personal objectives and also upon the perceived

combination of the job and company towards this end (Bullock, 1952).

Lawler (1973) observed job satisfaction as a measure of the quality of work

life in organizations and further opined that the importance of job

satisfaction was worth understanding even if it did not relate to job

performance. Herzberg (1959) focused his attention on the individual, and

after analyzing the personality, range of expectations and need of the

employees concluded job satisfaction as a function of the extent to which a

worker felts his "needs" were satisfied.

Borrow (1964) expressed his view on job satisfaction, as the verbal

expression of an incumbent's evaluation of his job whereas Locke (1969)

felt job satisfaction as a pteasurable or positive emotional state resulting

from the appraisal of one's job or job experiences. Blum and Naylor (1968)

explained job satisfaction as a general attitude that resulted from many

specific attitudes in three areas like specific job factors, individual

characteristics and group relationships outside the job. Smith, Kendal and

Hulin (1969) expressed job satisfaction as feelings or affective responses to

facets of the situations . associated with perceived differences between

'what is expected' and 'what is experienced'. Pestonjee (1973) defined and

explained job satisfaction as summations of employee's · feelings in four

important areas viz. the job, management, personal adjustment and social

relations. The first two areas encompass factors directly connected with the

job (intrinsic factors) and the other two are presumed to have bearing on

extrinsic job satisfaction.

Job satisfaction is the fulfillment of the requirements of an

individual by the work environment and it is a feeling of the person

spread over four areas viz. job, management, personal adjustment and

social relations in the work place. Job satisfaction is just a constellation

of attitudes about the job, that is, the extent to which people like vs.

(3.6)

dislike the various aspects of work. Job satisfaction is explained by nine

facets like pay, promotion, supervision, fringe benefits, contingent

rewards, operating procedure, coworkers, nature of work and

communication.

The level of job satisfaction has . been measured by using Paul

Spector's 36-item, five options per item, nine facets, Job satisfaction scale,

that covers directly or indirectly all the points emphasised by different

research scholars.

For performing statistical tests e.g. Chi-square, ANOVA tests the

scores of job satisfaction have been divided into three categories namely

Highly job satisfied (JSS_High), Moderately job satisfied (JSS_Mod) and

Low job satisfied (JSS_Low) by percentile cut off.

Job satisfaction score range ( +36 to +216) Measured Score range

Job satisfaction level Minimum Maximum

Low Job satisfaction JSS_Low 123 144

Moderate Job satisfaction JSS_Mod 145 166

High Job satisfaction JSS_High 167 188

Low job satisfied agents score between 123 and 144. The agents,

whose scores lie between 145 and 166, are Moderate job satisfied agents.

The Highly job satisfied are those agents, whose scores range from 167 to

188.

3. 5 Job involvement

Job involvement is the degree to which a person's work performance

resulting from the function of individual job interaction affects his self­

esteem (Lodahl and Kejner, 1965). Prof. Kanungo (1979) viewed job

involvement as "a generalized cognitive state of psychological identification

with the work in so far as the work is perceived to have the potentiality to

satisfy one's salient needs and expectations". Ego-involvement is the

situation when a person 'engages the status-seeking motives' while seeking

self-esteem as well as esteem of others (Allport, 1947). Contextually, Guion

(3.7)

(1958) defined morale as ego-involvement in one's job. It is worth

mentioning that attitudinal frame of reference in which a man perceives his

job to be so important to himself, to his company, and to the society that

he can't tolerate his superior's "blunders". Occupational involvement is a

commitment to a particular set of task area where successful role

performance is regarded as an end in itself and not a means to some other

end. Hence with this type of commitment, self-esteem gets tested through

performance in a particular occupational role and in terms of an evaluation

of intrinsic, rather than extrinsic, products of role performance (Faunce,

1959). Job involved persons always do not look forward for any

materialistic gain from their involvement.

French and Kahn (1962), and Gurin, Veroff and Feld (1966) have

dealt with the interrelationship, interdependence and interaction of self­

esteem, job involvement, and performance. They viewed job involvement

in terms of the degree to which performance affected self-esteem. A

person is ego-involved in a job or task to whatever extent his self-esteem

is affected by his perceived level of performance and also involvement

exists when person's feelings of esteem are increased by good

performance and decreased by bad performance, as was stated by Vroom

(1962). However, Siegel (1969) stated that job involvement could possibly

be due to value orientation toward work learned early in the course of

socialisation and internalized as determinants of behaviour. Involvement in

a job is primarily a function of how much the job can satisfy one's salient

needs and hence in this respect, determination of job involvement is more

situational (EIIoy, Everett and Flynn 1995).

Job involvement is the degree to which a person's work

performance resulting from the function of individual job interaction

affects his self-esteem. Job involvement is the cognitive state of

psychological identification with the work, the commitment to a

particular set of tasks, assigned or chosen, which a person accomplish,

gets his needs and expectations satisfied and thus derive pleasure.

(3.8)

To measure the job involvement, the 20-item scale (four options per

item) developed by Lodahl and Kejner (1965) has been used which covers

the salient points discussed by various academicians research scholars in

their valuable works.

The job involvement scores of the samples have been arrayed, and

divided by percentile . cut off into three categories namely Highly job

involved (JI_High), Moderately job involved (JI_Mod) and Low job involved

(JI_Low) for applying statistical tests.

Job involvement: Scale range ( 20 to 80) Measured Score range

Job involvement level Grade Minimum Maximum

Low Job involvement JI_Low 47 56

Moderate Job involvement JI_Mod 57 66

High Job involvement JI_High 67 76

The agents who scored between 47 and 56 are Low job involved

agents. The agents, whose scores lie between 145 and 166, are Moderate

job involved agents. The Highly job involved agents are those, whose

scores range from 67 to 76.

3.6 Demographic variables The sample comprises both male and female, qualified differentially,

age ranging from 22 to 67 years, experience from 3 to 41 years, engaged

in Urban and Rural areas. Gender, age, experience, qualification, region of

engagement are the demographic variables associated with this study.

3.6.1 Age

Age range (22 to 67 years) Age range

Classification Grade Minimum Maximum

Low age group Age_Low 22 30

Medium age group Age_Mod 31 40

High age group Age_High 41 67

(3.9)

According to age, ranging from 22 to 67 years/ the agents have been

classified in three groups viz. Low age group, Medium age group and High

age group.

3.6.2 Experience

According to experience the agents have been classified in three

groups.

Experience range ( 3 to 41 years) Experience range

Grouped as per Experience Grade Minimum Maximum

Low Experience group Expn_Low 3 7

Medium Experience group Expn_Mod 8 12

High Experience group Expn_High 13 >

The sample for this study includes only operational agents i.e. the

agents who have contributed to the growth of the business of UC of India

for the last three years. It has also been observed that the many agents

are initially opting for this profession as a stopgap arrangement. It has

revealed, from the agents' database, that until about seven years of being

in the business of UC most of the agents do not hesitate to change the

career. Thus the Low Experience group (Expn_Low) extends from three

years to seven years.

After this stage the agents mostly settle in this profession, generally

drop the intention of switching over and hence continue. They form the

Medium Experience group (Expn_Med) that extends from eight years to

twelve years.

After twelve years the agents start receiving extrinsic motivation and

also start thinking of recruiting helping hands for extending secretarial

assistance such that they can concentrate on creating new market. The

agents, whose length of experiences are minimum thirteen years, are

defined for this study as High Experience group (Expn_High).

(3.10)

3.6.3 Qualification

The qualifications of the agents of UC of India vary widely, from just

School Final, Higher Secondary to Honours Graduate and PostGraduate.

Three categories viz. Under Graduate (UG), Graduate (Grad) and beyond

graduations (G_Pius) have been made.

Qualification of the agents Category Grade

School Final or equivalent, Higher Under UG Secondary or equivalent Graduate

BA, B.Sc. or B. Com. Graduate Grad

BA (Hon), B.Sc. (Hon), B.Com. (Hon), BA Beyond G_Pius with PG Diploma, MA, M.Sc., M.Com. Graduation

3.6.4 Region of engagement

This case study is for the district 24 Parganas (North), West Bengal.

There are total thirteen Branches under the administrative jurisdiction of

the Calcutta (Kolkata) Suburban Divisional Office (KSDO) of UC of India.

For this case study, the branches have been classified as Urban and Rural.

aassification has been done based on number of villages, number of Gram

Panchayat, Panchayat Samity, and urban and rural populations.

The agents, who were selected as sample of this study, were

segregated as agents engaged in rural and urban agents depending on

their association with the branches in the district.

(3.11)