Colegio de Montalban: Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data

COLEGIO DE MONTALBAN
Kasiglahan Village, San Jose, Rodriguez, Rizal
Chapter 4
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter deals with the presentation, analysis and interpretation of
findings with regards to Problems encountered by INSPIRO RELIA Inc. In
headhunting process as part of their recruitment tool in their site in España,
Quezon City.
Problem No.1: What is the profile of respondents in terms of?
1.1 Age;
1.2 Sex;
1.3 Civil status; and
1.4 Length of service?
Table 1.1
Demographic profile of the respondents in terms of Age
Age Frequency Percent Rank
21 – 25 years old 10 50% 1
26 – 30 years old 10 50% 1
Total 20 100%
Table 1.1 presented the demographic profile of the respondents in terms
of age. This shows the age frequency, percentage distribution and rank from
highest to lowest, wherein 1 is the highest and a higher number is lower in rank.
Out of 20 respondents, 10 or 50% belong to the group 21 – 25 years old;
and 10 or 50% belong to the group 26 – 30 years old.
This implies the number of respondents is equal in numbers in terms of
age.
Table 1.2
Demographic profile of the respondents in terms of Sex
Sex Frequency Percent Rank
Male 3 15% 2
Female 17 85% 1
Total 20 100%
of sex. This shows the age frequency, percentage distribution and rank from
highest to lowest, wherein 1 is the highest and a higher number is lower in rank.
Out of 20 respondents, 3 or 15% belong to the male group;; and 17 or
85% belong to the female group
This implies the female group is greater than the male respondents.
Table 1.3
Demographic profile of the respondents in terms of Civil Status
Civil Status Frequency Percent Rank
Single 15 75% 1
Married 5 25% 2
Total 20 100%
of civil status. This shows the age frequency, percentage distribution and rank
from highest to lowest, wherein 1 is the highest and a higher number is lower in
rank.
Out of 20 respondents, 15 or 75% belong to the single group;; and 5 or
25% belong to the married group
This implies the single group is greater than the married respondents.
Table 1.4
Demographic profile of the respondents in terms of Length of Service
Length of
Frequency Percent Rank
Service
1 year below 4 20% 2
2 – 3 years 14 70% 1
4 – 5 years 2 10% 3
5 years above 0 0% 4
Total 20 100%
of years of service. This shows the age frequency, percentage distribution and
rank from highest to lowest, wherein 1 is the highest and a higher number is
lower in rank.
Out of 20 respondents, 4 or 20% belong to the 1 year below length of
service, 14 or 70% belong to 2 -3 years length of service, 2 or 10% belong to the
4 – 5 years length of service, and 0 or 0% belong to. the 5 years and above
length of service.
This implies that the majority of the respondents belong to the 2 – 3 years
length of service.
Problem No. 2: What are the problems encountered by the talent acquisition of
INSPIRO RELIA Inc. in recruitment process? In terms of:
2.1 Recruitment Method
2.2 Recruitment Timeline
2.3 Recruitment Approach

Table 2.1
Mean distribution of the responses of the respondents in Recruitment

Method
Recruitment method WM Rank Interpretation

1. Headhunting is not
effective in providing 1.7 5 Strongly
huge numbers of Disagree
applicant hiring
2. It is difficult to acquire
suitable applicants 1.8 4 Strongly
through headhunting Disagree
3. Headhunting can cause
negative outplacement 3.75 2 Moderately
of the applicants Agree
4. Headhunting limits the
chances of hiring good 3.05 3 Agree
and competitive
applicants
5. Headhunting results to
so called “Ghosting” of 5.0 1 Strongly Agree
applicants
Moderately
Composite Mean 3.06
Agree
Table 2.2 presents the mean distribution of the responses by the
respondents in problems in recruitment method. The table shows the indicators
of the recruitment method weighted mean, rank, and verbal interpretation.
The respondents moderately agree in the indicators of recruitment method
in the composite mean of 3.06
The indicators in recruitment method listed as follows based from the
weighted mean given by the respondents;

1. Headhunting results to so called “Ghosting” of applicants with weighted
mean of 5.0, verbal interpretation of strongly agree and it ranked 1.
2. Headhunting can cause negative outplacement of the applicants with
weighted mean of 3.75, verbal interpretation of moderately agree and it
ranked 2.
3. Headhunting limits the chances of hiring good and competitive applicants
with weighted mean of 3.05, verbal interpretation of agree and it ranked 3.
4. It is difficult to acquire suitable applicants through headhunting with
weighted mean of 1.8, verbal interpretation of disagree and it ranked 4.
5. Headhunting is not effective in providing huge numbers of applicant hiring
with weighted mean of 1.7, verbal interpretation of strongly disagree and it
ranked 5;
Implication:
The top 3 indicators of recruitment method has the highest interpretation.
It is noticeable that the weighted mean is above the lower limit of agreement.
And these are; Headhunting results to so called “Ghosting” of applicants,
Headhunting can cause negative outplacement of the applicants, and
Headhunting limits the chances of hiring good and competitive applicants.

Table 2.2

Timeline
Recruitment timeline WM Rank Interpretation

1. Headhunting exerts too
much time and effort in 4.00 1 Strongly Agree
recruiting applicants
2. Headhunting cannot
provide proper pre- 2.10 4 Disagree
employment screening
3. It takes time to hire an
applicant through 3.95 2 Moderately
headhunting Agree
sluggish finding of the 3.35 3 Moderately
right and suitable Agree
applicant
5. Headhunting process
cannot provide 1.90 5 Disagree
systematic process in
recruiting applicants
Moderately
Composite Mean 3.03
Agree
respondents in problems in recruitment timeline. The table shows the indicators
of the recruitment timeline weighted mean, rank, and verbal interpretation.
The respondents moderately agree in the indicators of recruitment timeline
in the composite mean of 3.03

The indicators in recruitment timeline listed as follows based from the
1. Headhunting exerts too much time and effort in recruiting applicants with
weighted mean of 4.0, verbal interpretation of strongly agree, and it
ranked 1.
2. It takes time to hire an applicant through headhunting with weighted mean
of 3.95, verbal interpretation of moderately agree, and it ranked 2.
3. Headhunting results to sluggish finding of the right and suitable applicant
with weighted mean of 3.35, verbal interpretation of moderately agree, and
it ranked 3.
4. Headhunting cannot provide proper pre-employment screening with
weighted mean of 1.95, verbal interpretation of disagree, and it ranked 4.
5. Headhunting process cannot provide systematic process in recruiting
applicants with weighted mean of 1.95, verbal interpretation of disagree,
and it ranked 5.
Implication:
The top 3 indicators of recruitment timeline has the highest interpretation.
It is noticeable that the weighted mean is above the lower limit of agreement. And
these are; Headhunting exerts too much time and effort in recruiting applicants, It
takes time to hire an applicant through headhunting, and Headhunting results to
sluggish finding of the right and suitable applicant.

Table 2.3

Approach
Recruitment approach WM Rank Interpretation

easily acquire in any 4.45 1 Moderately
type of target location Agree
for external recruitment
7. Data driven recruitment
is not effective tool in 3.45 3 Moderately
headhunting Agree
8. It is difficult to engaged
qualified applicants 2.00 5 Disagree
through headhunting
create an efficient 2.30 4 Disagree
recruiting process
disregarding fairly 3.50 2 Moderately
recruitment of the Agree
applicants
Moderately
Composite Mean 3.14
Agree
respondents in problems in recruitment approach. The table shows the indicators
of the recruitment approach weighted mean, rank, and verbal interpretation.
The respondents moderately agree in the indicators of recruitment
approach in the composite mean of 3.14
The indicators in recruitment approach listed as follows based from the

1. Headhunting cannot easily acquire in any type of target location for
external recruitment with weighted mean of 4.45, verbal interpretation of
moderately agree, and it ranked 1.
2. Headhunting results to disregarding fairly recruitment of the applicants
with weighted mean of 3.5, verbal interpretation of moderately agree, and
it ranked 2.
3. Data driven recruitment is not effective tool in headhunting with weighted
mean of 3.45, verbal interpretation of moderately agree, and it ranked 3.
4. Headhunting cannot create an efficient recruiting process weighted mean
of 2.3, verbal interpretation of disagree, and it ranked 4.
5. It is difficult to engage qualified applicants through headhunting with
weighted mean of 2.0, verbal interpretation of disagree, and it ranked 5.
Implication:
The top 3 indicators of recruitment timeline has the highest interpretation.
It is noticeable that the weighted mean is above the lower limit of agreement. And
these are; Headhunting cannot easily acquire in any type of target location for
external recruitment, Headhunting results to disregarding fairly recruitment of the
applicants, and Data driven recruitment is not effective tool in headhunting.
Problem No. 3: Is there any significant difference on the problems encountered
by the company as viewed by the talent acquisition when they group according to
their sex profile?

Table 3.1
Significant Difference in the responses of the respondents in Recruitment
method by the company according to sex profile.
5% DF = (N1+N2) – 2 = 18
Standard
Profile (Sex) Frequency Mean Interpretation
Deviation
Male 3 3.06 0.48 Moderately

Agree
Female 17 3.00 0.33 Moderately

Agree
Total 20
T-Test
Computed T - Ratio 0.26 Value 2.101 Not Significant
Decision: Accepts the Null Hypothesis
Table 3.1 presents, Significant difference in the responses of the
respondents in recruitment method by the company according to sex profile, the
table shows the profile variable, frequency, mean, standard deviation, computed
T – ratio, T – Test value, verbal interpretation, and decision to accept the null
hypothesis.
Out of 20 Talent Acquisition tested, they are 3 respondents belong to the
Male group, with weighted mean of 3.06, standard deviation of 0.48 and verbal
interpretation of moderately agree; and 17 respondents belong to the Female
group with weighted mean of 3.00, standard deviation of 0.33 and verbal
interpretation of moderately agree.
The result shows an observed difference in the mean of the two group.
The mean of male is equally to the female. However, the difference does not
warrant any significance as indicated in the T-ratio of 0.26, which within the
acceptable range of 2.101; The male respondents give a better rate to the
problems encountered by the company than the female respondents.
Therefore the Null Hypothesis, “There is no significant difference on
the problems encountered by the company as viewed by the talent acquisition
when they group according to their sex profile”, is accepted.
Table 3.2
timeline by the company according to sex profile.
5% DF = (N1+N2) – 2 = 18
Standard
Deviation

Agree

Agree
Total 20
T-Test
respondents in recruitment timeline by the company according to sex profile, the
table shows the profile variable, frequency, mean, standard deviation, computed
T – ratio, T – Test value, verbal interpretation, and decision to accept the null
hypothesis.

Table 3.3
approach by the company according to sex profile.
5% DF = (N1+N2) – 2 = 18
Standard
Deviation

Agree

Agree
Total 20
T-Test
respondents in recruitment approach by the company according to sex profile,
the table shows the profile variable, frequency, mean, standard deviation,
computed T – ratio, T – Test value, verbal interpretation, and decision to accept
the null hypothesis.

Colegio de Montalban: Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Colegio de Montalban: Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Colegio de Montalban: Presentation, Analysis and Interpretation of Data

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

COLEGIO DE MONTALBAN

Kasiglahan Village, San Jose, Rodriguez, Rizal

PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA

This chapter deals with the presentation, analysis and interpretation of

findings with regards to Problems encountered by INSPIRO RELIA Inc. In

headhunting process as part of their recruitment tool in their site in España,

Problem No.1: What is the profile of respondents in terms of?

1.3 Civil status; and

1.4 Length of service?

Demographic profile of the respondents in terms of Age

Age Frequency Percent Rank

21 – 25 years old 10 50% 1

26 – 30 years old 10 50% 1

Table 1.1 presented the demographic profile of the respondents in terms

Out of 20 respondents, 10 or 50% belong to the group 21 – 25 years old;

and 10 or 50% belong to the group 26 – 30 years old.

This implies the number of respondents is equal in numbers in terms of

Demographic profile of the respondents in terms of Sex

Sex Frequency Percent Rank

Table 1.2 presented the demographic profile of the respondents in terms

Out of 20 respondents, 3 or 15% belong to the male group;; and 17 or

85% belong to the female group

Demographic profile of the respondents in terms of Civil Status

Civil Status Frequency Percent Rank

Table 1.3 presented the demographic profile of the respondents in terms

Out of 20 respondents, 15 or 75% belong to the single group;; and 5 or

25% belong to the married group

Demographic profile of the respondents in terms of Length of Service

Table 1.4 presented the demographic profile of the respondents in terms

Out of 20 respondents, 4 or 20% belong to the 1 year below length of

service, 14 or 70% belong to 2 -3 years length of service, 2 or 10% belong to the

INSPIRO RELIA Inc. in recruitment process? In terms of:

2.1 Recruitment Method

2.2 Recruitment Timeline

2.3 Recruitment Approach

Mean distribution of the responses of the respondents in Recruitment

Recruitment method WM Rank Interpretation

Table 2.2 presents the mean distribution of the responses by the

respondents in problems in recruitment method. The table shows the indicators

of the recruitment method weighted mean, rank, and verbal interpretation.

The respondents moderately agree in the indicators of recruitment method

in the composite mean of 3.06

The indicators in recruitment method listed as follows based from the

weighted mean given by the respondents;

1. Headhunting results to so called “Ghosting” of applicants with weighted

mean of 5.0, verbal interpretation of strongly agree and it ranked 1.

2. Headhunting can cause negative outplacement of the applicants with

weighted mean of 3.75, verbal interpretation of moderately agree and it

3. Headhunting limits the chances of hiring good and competitive applicants

with weighted mean of 3.05, verbal interpretation of agree and it ranked 3.

4. It is difficult to acquire suitable applicants through headhunting with

weighted mean of 1.8, verbal interpretation of disagree and it ranked 4.

5. Headhunting is not effective in providing huge numbers of applicant hiring

with weighted mean of 1.7, verbal interpretation of strongly disagree and it

The top 3 indicators of recruitment method has the highest interpretation.

And these are; Headhunting results to so called “Ghosting” of applicants,

Headhunting can cause negative outplacement of the applicants, and

Headhunting limits the chances of hiring good and competitive applicants.

Mean distribution of the responses of the respondents in Recruitment