CHAPTER 6: DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS OF RESEARCH
6.11 Demographic information
174 6.10.9 Comparative fit index
Comparative fit index (CFI) compares both the proposed and Null model in respect of their performance. It is an improved NFI (Bentler and Chou, 1987; Hu and Bentler, 1999). Hu and Bentler (1999) proposed a cut-off close to 0.95 values as acceptable. The greater the values of CFI between 0-1, the better the model and considered a good fit. In this study, CFI was closer to one (1), and therefore considered a perfect fit.
6.10.10 Tucker Lewis index
According to Tucker and Lewis (1973), the Tucker Lewis index (TLI) is viewed as the same as the NFI, and is used to contrast the values of chi-square as confirmed by Mulaik, James, Van Alstine, Bennet, Lind and Stilwell (1989). Mulaik et al. (1989) highlighted that for a fit to a good fit; it must have values that are closer to one (1). The model that has a high value indicates a fit that is better than a model with a value that is lower.
6.10.11 Root mean square error of approximation
The purpose of root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) is to show whether the model has good fit or not. Furthermore, RMSEA utilisation is in respect of supporting or not supporting hypothesised models, especially those with a larger sample size (Hu and Bentler, 1999). The proposed RMSEA value of<0.06 is deemed to have a good fit. Therefore, RMSEA in this study was for the purpose to aid the researcher in accepting or rejecting the hypotheses.
6.10.12 Root mean square residual
The purpose of the root mean square residual index (RMR) is to determine whether the model has a good fit. The root mean square residual index is the square root of the mean of residuals that are not standardised. Hu and Bentler (1999) proposed that a value of greater than 0.02 for a good fit. This study produced a figure of 0.2, which indicated a good model fit.
175 6.11.1 Employer of respondents
Figure 6.1: Employer of respondents
Figure 6.1: The sample comprises of 41 respondents from the Limpopo provincial legislature and 49 from the Mpumalanga provincial legislature, translated into 46% and 54%
respectively. The results indicate that Mpumalanga has more employees than Limpopo.
6.11.2 Level of employment of respondents
Figure 6.2: Level of employment of respondents
Figure 6.2 indicates that most of the respondents, 68%, are junior employees, followed by senior employees, 19% and senior management, at 7%, with middle management, at 6%, the least represented. The results are in line with most organisations, where the number of junior employees exceeds those of management. The hierarchy at the bottom is large.
However, the higher it goes, the smaller it becomes.
46%
54%
Employer of respondents (n=90)
Limpopo
Mpumalanga
68%
6%
19%
7%
Level of employment of respondents (n=90)
Junior employee Middle management
Senior employee/Supervisor Senior Manager
176 6.11.3 Gender analysis of respondents Figure 6.3: Gender analysis of respondents
Figure 6.3 indicates that the sample comprised of 61 female and 39 male respondents, which translated into 61% and 39% respectively. This is an indication that the sample was predominantly female, and therefore that there is an imbalance in gender representation.
6.11.4 Age group of respondents
Table 6.1: Age group of respondents
Age group of respondents (n = 90)
N Valid 90
Missing 0
Mean 34.267
Median 47
Std. deviation 11.071
Minimum 21
Maximum 68
Table 6.1 shows that the youngest respondents in the study were between the ages of 21 and 30 and the oldest respondents were in the age group 61 years and older. The mean age of the respondents was 34.267 (SD = 11.071).
The average age group of respondents was 31 to 40 years and a conclusion is that the sample mean age was representative of the average age of employees in the selected provincial legislatures.
61%
39%
Gender of respondents (n=90)
Female Male
177
The results indicate that most employees, if they were to stay in, or if provincial legislatures retained them; they have a long way to go to ascend the hierarchy. Therefore, this presents an opportunity for provincial legislatures to develop the means to retain these employees.
6.11.5 Frequency of age group of respondents
Table 6.2: Frequency of age group of respondents
Frequency of age group of respondents (n = 90)
Valid Age group Frequency Percent Valid % Cumulative %
21-30 years 37 41 41 41
31-40 years 28 31 31 72
41-50 years 16 18 18 90
51-60 years 8 9 9 99
61 years and above 1 1 1 100
Total 90 100
Table 6.2 indicates that most respondents are between the ages of 21 and 30 years (41%) and the least number of respondents are 61 years of age and above (1%). This represents a workforce that is in the middle of their respective age groups, and therefore the provincial legislatures will have the services of these employees for a very long time if retained.
6.11.6 Years of service of respondents
Figure 6.4: Years of service of respondents
Figure 6.4 shows that the number of respondents with between 1 and 5 years of service comprise 40%, the least number of respondents have 16 years of service or more, 9% have 11 to 15 years’ service, and 33% of respondents have between 6 and 10 years’ service,
9%
40%
8%
33%
10%
Years of service of respondents (n=90)
11-15 years 1-5 years
16 years and above 6-10 years
Below 1 year
178
while 10% have less than 1 year service. The results indicate that most employees have between 1 to 5 years of service at provincial legislatures. This may furthermore mean that employees mostly spend between 1 and 5 years at legislatures.
6.11.7 Highest academic qualification of respondents
Figure 6.5: Highest academic qualification of respondents
Figure 6.5 indicates that most of the respondents have degrees, 39%, and that the least number of respondents have PhD/DTech Degrees, at 2%. Respondents with a Certificate/Higher Certificate comprise 15%; those with Honours/BTech/Postgraduate Diplomas are 18%, and those with a National Diploma and Masters are 14% and 12%
respectively. The results indicate that the majority of employees in provincial legislatures are educated up to the level of a degree.