Anda di halaman 1dari 83

http://www.projectscollege.blogspot.

com

A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON THE PERFORMANCE OF [COMPANY NAME]

ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY WITH ITS INDUSTRIAL

COMPETITORS

By

[STUDENT NAME]

(Reg. no. )

Of

[COLLEGE NAME]

A PROJECT REPORT

Submitted to the

FACULTY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree

Of

MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[UNIVERSITY NAME]

[PLACE]

[YEAR]
TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.No CHAPTERS PAGE. NO.


Abstract I
List of tables II
List of figures IV

CHAPTER – 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Industry Profile 1


1.2 Company Profile 7
1.3 Product Profile 9

CHAPTER – 2: DEVELOPMENT OF MAIN THEME

2.1 Need of the study 13


2.2 Objectives of the study 14
2.3 Scope of the study 15
2.4 Limitations of the study 16
2.5 Review of Literature 17

CHAPTER – 3: ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION

3.1 Research Methodology 21


3.2 Analysis & Interpretation 26
3.3 Findings 72
3.4 Suggestions 76
3.5 Conclusion 77

APPENDIX

Questionnaire I
Bibliography V
ABSTRACT

This project titled as “A Comparative Study on the Performance of [COMPANY


NAME] Alliance Insurance Company with its Industrial Competitors” focuses on some
of the key issues like competitive position that [COMPANY NAME] holds, the strengths
and weaknesses of the company’s insurance schemes, consumer’s awareness, customer’s
perception etc.

The sample size for this study is 120. The research design carried out for this study is
descriptive research. Primary data are collected from the clients of various insurance
companies through a structured undisguised questionnaire. Secondary data are gathered
from the websites of [COMPANY NAME] and other companies for the purpose of
making a comparative analysis. Statistical tools like graphs, interval estimation, chi-
square test, H-test, and correlation have been used for the purpose of analysis.

The findings of the study were arrived at based on the analysis conducted. Some of the
major findings of the study relate to increased necessity of having a general insurance
cover, higher reputation enjoyed by [COMPANY NAME] and priority to have auto/car
and health insurance cover by majority of the respondents. Some of the suggestions of the
study are to make amendments in the premium rates, to maintain the promptness in the
claim settlement procedure, to introduce additional insurance covers and create more
awareness about the products.

The study is been concluded that the performance of [COMPANY NAME] is excellent in
comparison with its industrial competitors and that the company has high growth
prospects in future years to come.
LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. TITLE OF TABLE PAGE NO

Age of respondents 26
3.2.1

Gender of respondents 27
3.2.2

Occupation of respondents 28
3.2.3

Number of members in a family 29


3.2.4

Annual income of respondents 30


3.2.5

Necessity of having a general insurance cover 31


3.2.6

No. of general insurance policies held by respondents 32


3.2.7

Are the general insurance policies taken from the same 33


3.2.8
company

No. of companies in which respondent is a policy 35


3.2.9
holder

Companies enjoying higher reputation amidst 36


3.2.10
customers

Awareness among the [COMPANY NAME] customers 38


3.2.11
towards insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY
NAME]
40
3.2.12
Respondent’s opinion towards customer-centric
products offered by [COMPANY NAME]
41
3.2.13
Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by
[COMPANY NAME]
42
3.2.14
Sources by which the respondent’s became familiar of
[COMPANY NAME]
43
3.2.15
Period of insurance cover held by respondents
44
3.2.16
Amount of yearly insurance premium paid by
respondents.
47
3.2.17
Respondent’s comment on the yearly insurance
premium paid 52
3.2.18 Satisfactory level of respondents towards the policy
taken
57
3.2.19 No. of respondent’s having insurance agents
59
3.2.20 Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by
insurance agents
61
3.2.21 Claims rejected by insurance companies
62
3.2.22 Factors that influences customers to choose a particular
company in buying an insurance policy
64
3.2.23 Respondent’s satisfactory level towards various features
of general insurance policy taken
68
3.2.24 Sources most preferred by respondents to know about
an insurance company and its products
69
3.2.25 General Insurance cover that is most favored by
respondents
LIST OF CHARTS

CHART NO. TITLE OF CHART PAGE


NO

Age of respondents 26
3.2.1

Gender of respondents 27
3.2.2

Occupation of respondents 28
3.2.3

Number of members in a family 29


3.2.4

Annual income of respondents 30


3.2.5

Necessity of having a general insurance cover 31


3.2.6

No. of general insurance policies held by respondents 32


3.2.7

Are the general insurance policies taken from the same 33


3.2.8
company

No. of companies in which respondent is a policy holder 35


3.2.9

Companies enjoying higher reputation amidst customers 37


3.2.10

Awareness among the [COMPANY NAME] customers 38


3.2.11
towards insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY
NAME]
40
3.2.12
Respondent’s opinion towards customer-centric products
offered by [COMPANY NAME]
41
3.2.13
Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by
[COMPANY NAME]
42
3.2.14
Sources by which the respondent’s became familiar of
[COMPANY NAME]
43
3.2.15
Period of insurance cover held by respondents
44
3.2.16
Amount of yearly insurance premium paid by respondents.
48
3.2.17
Respondent’s comment on the yearly insurance premium
paid
3.2.18 53
Satisfactory level of respondents towards the policy taken
3.2.19 57
No. of respondent’s having insurance agents
3.2.20 60
Respondent’s comment on the service rendered by
insurance agents
3.2.21 61
Claims rejected by insurance companies
3.2.22 63
Factors that influences customers to choose a particular
company in buying an insurance policy
3.2.23 65
Respondent’s satisfactory level towards various features of
general insurance policy taken
3.2.24 68
Sources most preferred by respondents to know about an
insurance company and its products
3.2.25 71
General Insurance cover that is most favored by
respondents
1.1 INDUSTRY PROFILE

Introduction

The outlook for the general insurance industry in India is stable as per the financial
forecast that has been made. Over the medium and long term, India’s insurance market
will continue to experience major changes as its operating environment increasingly
deregulates. On the one hand, a mix of new products, new delivery system and a greater
awareness of risk will generate growth. On the other hand, the competition is expected to
remain intense as private sector insurers and those about to enter India seek to win market
share from the more established public sector entities.

In 2006-07, India’s general insurance market witnessed a variety of changes as


deregulation continued at a hectic pace. With the removal of pricing controls on fire and
engineering lies in 2007, insurers have since discounted their rates by 50% or more in
their quest to retain or win market share. Furthermore, the number of private insurers is
expected to grow as various foreign companies have announced intentions to establish
joint ventures.

History of Insurance industry


In some sense we can say that insurance appeared simultaneously with appearance of
human society. In earlier economies, we can see insurance in the form of people helping
each other. For example, if a house is burnt, the members of the community help build a
new one. Should the same thing happen to one’s neighbour, the other neighbors must
come to help? Otherwise, neighbors will not receive help in the future.

Insurance in the modern sense, started as a methods of transferring or distributing risk


were practiced by Chinese and Babylonian traders as long ago as the 3rd and 2nd
millennia BC, respectively. Chinese merchants traveling treacherous river rapids would
redistribute their cargo across many vessels to limit the loss due to any single vessel’s
capsizing. The Babylonians developed a system which was recorded in the famous Code
of Hammurabi, c. 1750 BC, and practiced by early Mediterranean sailing merchants. If a
merchant received a loan to fund his shipment, he would pay the lender an additional sum
in exchange for the lender’s guarantee to cancel the loan should the shipment be stolen.
Greek monarchs were the first to insure their people and made it official by registering
the insuring process in governmental notary offices. They invented the concept of the
‘general average’. Merchants whose goods were being shipped together would pay a
proportionally divided premium which would be used to reimburse any merchant whose
goods were jettisoned during storm or sinking of the vessel in the sea.

The Greeks and Romans introduced the origins of health and life insurance c. 600 AD
when they organized guilds called “benevolent societies” which cared for the families
and paid funeral expenses of members upon death. Guilds in the middle Ages served a
similar purpose. Before insurance was established in the late 17th century, “friendly
societies” existed in England, in which people donated amounts of money to a general
sum that could be used for emergencies.

Separate insurance contracts (i.e., insurance policies not bundled with loans or other
kinds of contracts) were invented in Greeks rulers in the 14th century, as were insurance
pools backed by pledges of landed estates. These new insurance contracts allowed
insurance to be separated from investment, a separation of roles that first proved useful in
marine insurance. Insurance became far more sophisticated in post-Renaissance Europe,
and specialized varieties developed. Insurance as we know it today can be traced to the
Great Fire of London, which in 1666 A.D devoured 13,200 houses. In the aftermath of
this disaster, Nicholas Barbon opened an office to insure buildings. In 1680, he
established England’s first fire insurance company, “The Fire Office,” to insure brick and
frame homes.

The first insurance company in the United States underwrote fire insurance and was
formed in Charles Town (modern-day Charleston), South Carolina, in 1732.

Evolution of insurance industry in India –Important milestones

In India, insurance has a deep-rooted history. It finds mention in the writings of Manu
(Manusmrithi ), Yagnavalkya ( Dharmasastra ) and Kautilya ( Arthasastra ). The
writings talk in terms of pooling of resources that could be re-distributed in times of
calamities such as fire, floods, epidemics and famine. This was probably a pre-cursor to
modern day insurance. Ancient Indian history has preserved the earliest traces of
insurance in the form of marine trade loans and carriers’ contracts. Insurance in India has
evolved over time heavily drawing from other countries, England in particular

Year Event
1818 The advent of life insurance business in India with the establishment of the
Oriental Life Insurance Company in Calcutta.
1834 Oriental Life Insurance Failure

1850 The advent of General Insurance in India with the establishment of Triton
Insurance Company Ltd in Calcutta
1870 The enactment of the British Insurance Act

1907 The Indian Mercantile Insurance Ltd was set up

1912 The Indian Life Assurance Companies Act, 1912 was the first statutory
measure to regulate life business.
1928 The Indian Insurance Companies Act was enacted.

1956 Nationalization of Life Insurance Sector and Life Insurance Corporation .The
LIC absorbed 154 Indian, 16 non-Indian insurers as also 75 provident
societies.
1971 The General Insurance Corporation of India was incorporated as a company

1973  General insurance business was nationalized with effect from 1st January
1973.
 107 insurers were amalgamated and grouped into four companies namely:
1) National Insurance Company Ltd.,
2) The New India Assurance Company Ltd.,
3) The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd
4) The United India Insurance Company Ltd.
1993 The Government set up a committee under the chairmanship of RN Malhotra
former Governor of RBI to propose recommendations for reforms in the
insurance sector
2000  The IRDA was incorporated as a statutory body in April 2000.
 Foreign companies were allowed ownership of up to 26%.
2000-01 Insurance Industry had 16 new entrants, 10 in Life and 6 in General Insurance
2001-03 Insurance Industry had 5 new entrants, 2 in Life and 3 in General

2003-04 Insurance Industry had 1new entrant, Sahara India Insurance Company Ltd. In
Life Insurance category
2004-05 Insurance Industry had 1new entrant, Shri Ram Insurance company Ltd. In
Life Insurance category
2005-06 Bharti Axa Life insurance company was granted Certification of Registration
in July
2006 Bharti Axa Life insurance company commenced its operations the newest
player in the insurance sector.

Evolution of Non-Life insurance in India:


The boycott of British goods and British institutions, which occurred because of the
nationalist movement, encouraged formation of Indian-owned commercial and business
houses. By 1907, the Indian mercantile the first of the long lasting general insurance
companies to be established with Indian capital, had started functioning five offices, the
New India, Vulcan, Jupiter, British India General and the Universal, were established in
1919 almost simultaneously for transacting general insurance business.

In 1928, prominent insurance men of Bombay met and formed the Indian insurance
companies association to protect the interest of Indian insurers. Leaders of the insurance
industry began to organize conferences, educate public on the benefit of insurance, focus
attention on the annual remove of national wealth through invisible export’s, and arise
public interest in favour of Indian insurance.

In 1950, the planning commission was set up to formulate plans for successive five years.
This five year plan brought about large scale economic development and increased
insurance consciousness among the people. As insurance business increased the number
of claims for compensation against losses also naturally increased. Settlement of too
many large claims meant a severe demand on the funds of insurance companies. So to
prevent this situation the practice of ‘Reinsurance’ was adopted according to which
insurers themselves reinsured portions of the insurances they had undertaken. So Indian
insurance companies with their expanding business wanted to reinsure for which they had
to seek foreign reinsurance markets.

Since the need for conserving foreign exchange was felt in India all the insurers in India
as well as foreigners operating in India formed the India Reinsurance Corporation in
1956. This corporation provided reinsurance facilities. It was compulsory for insurers in
India to reinsure a fixed percentage of their insurances with the corporation.
The Insurance Amendment Act 1950 imposed certain limitations on expenses of
management. The general insurance council constituted what was called the tariff
committee to control and regulate terms and conditions of business.

In 1972, the General Insurance Business (Nationalization) Act 1972 was passed under the
provisions of this act. The general insurance corporation of India was established for the
purpose of directing, controlling and caring on the general insurance business and all the
106 insurers were merged and grouped into four subsidiaries of the general insurance
corporation of India namely:
 National Insurance Company Ltd., with its head office at Calcutta.
 The New India Assurance Company Ltd., with its head office at Bombay.
 The Oriental Insurance company Ltd., with its head office at Delhi.
 The United India Insurance Company Ltd., with its head office at Madras.

Three Phases of De-Tariffing


India’s general insurance industry has undergone de-tariffing in three phases:
 1994 -- marine cargo, personal accident, health, banker liability and aviation
 2005-06 -- marine hull segment
 2007 -- Fire, engineering and motor own damage (OD). However, the de-tariffing
did not immediately allow for free pricing. Instead, insurers were required to follow
the “file and use” method, whereby they were expected to file a charter of proposed
rates, which was then approved by IRDA.
The only segment that remains under a tariff regime is the third party motor business,
although there has been a large upward revision in this area’s premium rates by regulators
in recent times. Moreover, commercial third party motor business, which has traditionally
contributed to adverse claims ratios, has been moved to a common pool, resulting in loss
sharing.

Insurance sector – moving quickly


The Indian insurance sector is rapidly moving towards international standards of free
(risk-based) market pricing and new/innovative product offerings. Big changes have
occurred over the last seven years, during which the sector was opened to private
participation, but with foreign direct investment (FDI) capped at 26%. With the regulator
possibly lifting the ceiling on foreign ownership to 49%, the capacities of domestic
partners would no longer constrain capital levels for joint ventures.

In the private sector, there were nine players with Future Generali the latest entrant as of
September 2007. A number of potential new entrants await the necessary approvals. Most
private players have tie-ups with international companies to compensate for their lack of
experience in insurance. Within the private sector, ICICI Lombard (IL) leads with 12.4%
market share for the period April-December 2007. Recently, Reliance General Insurance
(RGI) as emerged as the fastest growing player, recording a 150% rise year-on-year in
gross direct premium in the first nine months of 2007-08

1.2. COMPANY PROFILE

Founded in 1954, [COMPANY NAME] is one of India's leading finance companies.


Quality in lending, transparency in transactions, outstanding customer care and an
unyielding commitment to being the best, has made [COMPANY NAME] one of the
most respected finance companies in India. [COMPANY NAME] is part of the
[RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] Group of companies founded by TV
[RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] Iyengar in the early part of last century. In the
1950s, the [RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] group diversified into general insurance
with the Madras Motor and General Insurance Company (MMGI).

[COMPANY NAME] Limited was started as a subsidiary of MMGI to provide customers


with a range of finance and hire-purchase options for Light, Medium & Heavy
Commercial Vehicles, Cars, Jeeps, Machinery and Equipment. It has over 50 years of
experience in operation, and is recognized as one of the most trusted and respected
NBFC's in India. The company continues to enjoy highest credit rating of AAA from
leading rating agencies in the country. [COMPANY NAME] has a Nation-wide presence
with over 167 branches, 650,000 depositors and nearly 100,000 commercial vehicle and
car finance customers.

[COMPANY NAME] is one of the most well known and oldest insurance companies in
the world, having begun its operations in 1710. With an almost 300 year heritage, RSA is
one of the world’s leading multinational quoted insurance groups. It has the capability to
write business in over 130 countries and with major operations in the UK, Scandinavia,
Canada, Ireland, Asia and the Middle East and Latin America. Focusing on general
insurance, it has around 22,000 employees and in 2007, its net written premium were
£5.8bn

[COMPANY NAME] is a joint venture between [COMPANY NAME] and Royal & Sun
Alliance and in April 2000, a letter of undertaking was signed to establish a joint venture
insurance company. On 28th August 2000 the license application was submitted to the
IRDA and the license was granted to [COMPANY NAME] on 23rd of October 2000 by
the IRDA, making it the first private insurer to obtain a license for conducting in the
Non-Life segment.

[COMPANY NAME] was formally launched as a company on 12th March 2001. Since
then the company have been innovating constantly for its customers. Like being the first
to offer cashless hospitalisation, the first to offer segment specific business solutions, first
to offer co-branded credit cards, first to introduce industry-specific proposition. Their
product range is designed to provide extra cover to a varied range of customers starting
from the common man to corporate conglomerates. The company is now in the eighth
year of operation. The shareholders of [COMPANY NAME] are as follows:
 [COMPANY NAME] and Associates 74%
 [COMPANY NAME] London 26%

Working from a corporate office in Chennai, [COMPANY NAME] has been carrying out
its business in over 150 cities with four fully operational Regional Centers in Chennai,
Mumbai, Guargon and Kolkata supported by a network of 35 Branch Offices. Each of
these Regional Offices is staffed by a team of insurance professionals responsible for
Customer Servicing, Business Development, Underwriting, Operations and Claims
Management.

Royal [RESPECTIVE COMPANY NAME] brings the golden heritage and reliability
of [COMPANY NAME] (AAA), one of the most respected non-banking financial
institution in India, and RSA, one of the oldest and the second largest general insurer in
the UK.
The coming together of these two financial giants allows them to offer its customers the
best global practices in insurance industry, innovation in terms of products and services,
and unmatched, personalized customer service.

1.3. PRODUCT PROFILE

Marine Insurance
[COMPANY NAME] brings to India a wide range of marine cargo products from various
international markets. Their products considerably widen the scope of coverage presently
enjoyed by the insured population without necessarily involving a high premium.

Burglary insurance
Burglary Insurance for machinery, stock in trade, furniture, fixtures & fittings and for
goods held in trust or on commission for the insured is responsible. Burglary Insurance
covers burglary or housebreaking accompanied by either forcible or violent entry
into/exit from the premises and hold-up.

Engineering Insurance:

 Erection All Risks Insurance


The Erection All Risks policy is a comprehensive insurance, which provides complete
protection against all types of risks associated with erection, testing, commissioning of
machinery, plant and equipment during constructional stage.

 Boiler & Pressure Plant Insurance


It covers the risk of explosion and collapse of any boiler or other pressure plant in the
course of ordinary working.

 Contractor's All Risks Insurance


All types of civil engineering works, ranging from small buildings to massive dams are
exposed to damage from a wide range of causes such as fire, lightning, flood, inundation,
storm, cyclone and other accidental damages. It is a comprehensive insurance which
provides complete protection against all types of civil construction risks.

 Machinery Breakdown Insurance


[COMPANY NAME] extend its hand offering Machinery Breakdown Insurance Cover
ably supported by most capable technocrats to throw more light about the mechanical
side of all machines.

 Marine-Cum-Erection Insurance

It is developed as a comprehensive product to manage the risk and insurance needs in


course of erection as well as during transit. It is a combination of Erection-All-Risks and
Marine Insurance to cater to the needs of the client where Marine/Transit insurance is
connected with Erection All Risks Insurance of any project.

 Contractor's Plant & Machinery


Contractor's Plant & Machinery is an exclusive all risks policy covering the plant &
machinery used by the contractors at the site for various projects. It covers the property
whether they are at work or at rest or being dismantled for the purpose of cleaning or
overhauling, or in the course of operations or when being shifted within the premises or
during subsequent re-erection, but in any case only after successful commissioning.

Liability Insurance:

 Product Liability Insurance


Liability arises from a civil wrong or breach of personal duty imposed by law on a person
and owed to his/her fellow citizens. In some countries legal rights and duties are framed
in a Civil Code. In others they are not codified but drawn from the precedent of decisions
handed down in the courts over the centuries; this is known as "Common Law".

 Workmen's Compensation Insurance


It provides Insurance against occupational accident or disease to an employee whilst in
course of his employment.
 Public Liability Act

It provides indemnity against the Insured's liability at law to the public in general
(excluding employees) for bodily injury and loss of or damage to property due to the
business activities carried on in insured's premises.

Business solutions:

 Industrial All Risks Policy

It’s a wide and comprehensive cover for the large sized business where the assets at all
locations of the insured exceed Rs.100 Corers. It is an All Risks Policy covering a wide
range of perils such as fire and allied perils, burglary, accidental damage, breakdown as
well as business interruption.

 Office Shield

A flexible policy specifically designed to meet the insurance needs of your modern
office, irrespective of the number of locations.

 Hotel Shield

Tailor-made cover designed to suit the specific needs of the Hotel Industry.

 Enterprise Shield.

It is a newly devised package providing total insurance solutions for industries. You do
not need to analyze and evaluate a large number of insurance policies to insure your
business completely.

 Education Shield

Tailor-made cover designed to suit the specific needs of Education Industry.

 Traders Shield
It is an attractive policy that provides shopkeepers with a basic insurance package and a
further range of optional covers.

 All Risks Policy for Portable Equipments

It offers an overall solution to cover portable items like laptops, mobiles, cameras and
projectors.

 Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy

It offers cover against fire and allied perils and the perils of nature. The policy can cover
building (including plinth and foundation), plant and machinery, stocks, furniture,
fixtures and fittings and other contents.

 Consequential Loss (Fire) Insurance

It provides protection against loss of profits in business due to an interruption in business


consequent upon an insured peril covered under the material damage policy.

Employee solutions:

 Group Personal Accident Policy

It is a worldwide cover providing protection for the employees against any accidental
injuries sustained by the individuals resulting in death and disablement.

 Group Health

Health Premium Platinum is a comprehensive health insurance package, designed for the
employees of company and their family members.

 Workmen's Compensation
Workmen's Compensation provides cover to target clients as required by law in support
to project insurances or property insurances.

2.1 NEED OF THE STUDY

This study helps the company to identify its competitive position among its industrial
competitors by which the company can further improve its performance to enjoy high
reputation among clients.

This study also helps in making necessary changes in the attributes of the insurance cover
offered by the company so that the customers can enjoy the benefits of the insurance
cover.

The need for the study also arises to identify and offer additional insurance products
according to the expectations of the customers.
2.2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES

 To compare the performance of [COMPANY NAME] with other competitors


in the general insurance industry.

SECONDARY OBJECTIVES

 To identify the position [COMPANY NAME] holds among other private


players.

 To find out the strengths and weaknesses of the company’s insurance schemes

 To study consumer’s awareness towards insurance products

 To identify the customer’s perception about the company and its products.
2.3 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

This study has a wider scope among the insurance sector. The study which focuses on
various aspects such as competitive position of [COMPANY NAME], strengths and
weaknesses of insurance covers, customer’s perception, etc also holds good for other
companies in the life and non-life insurance segment.

The outcome of the study, which are based on the above aspects can be utilized by
the marketing department of both life and non-life insurance companies.
2.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

There were certain limitations in undertaking this research work. As it is understood that
the limitations are a part of the project, they have been overshadowed by the benefits of
the study.

 The survey conducted may not be considered as comprehensive as only limited


respondents could be contacted because of the time constraint.

 Objectives and the purposes of the study and the questions had to be explained to
the respondents and their responses may be biased.

 Some of the respondents were reluctant to give their responses.

 Only limited sample size had been considered for the study and therefore, the
conclusions drawn based on this may not be a reflection of the entire population.
2.5 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

According to the recent report of Lloyd, the Indian insurance market is likely to change in
the next few years significantly largely due to regulatory changes. In addition, premium
growth is being driven by other factors such as the growing consumer class, increased
foreign direct investment, infrastructure development, and an increased awareness of
catastrophe exposure.

Despite significant positive changes, the insurance market must still face the challenge of
poor customer perceptions and the danger that the pace of reform will slow. Several
significant structural changes are expected in the insurance market that will influence the
country’s development in the medium to long term

So far, the entry of a large number of Indian and foreign private companies has led to
greater choice in terms of products and services for Indian consumers. A growing
realisation of the benefits and importance of sophisticated insurance and reinsurance tools
has broadened the pool of potential buyers of insurance. Given this backdrop, the Indian
insurance market has experienced considerable growth since its liberalisation in 2000.
Over the next three years, the Indian insurance market is likely to see its process of
maturation accelerate. Regulatory changes in the four areas– products, market players,
distribution and reinsurance – will drive change in the Indian insurance market in the
medium term.

• Price competition has already begun to increase and is likely to continue to do so for the
next 18 to 24months.

• The practice of cross-subsidisation is likely to be phased out as risk-based pricing is


used increasingly for all products.

• As Indian insurers build a profitable portfolio, they are likely to have increased access
to the international reinsurance markets.
• Finally, rising demand for insurance is likely to be met by increased capacity as foreign
insurers look to access this growing market.

As per the recent research by Moody’s – ICRA Global Insurance, the following facts
relating to the performance of both private and public sector general insurance companies
were made.

Private Sector’s Growing Influence


The private sector has been steadily growing market share despite the fact that public
sector companies have been around for a lot longer. The private insurers enjoy
considerable operational flexibility, whereas the public sector companies have been
constrained by their traditions and inability to innovate.

Market Share – Redistribution


Due to the effectiveness of private marketing strategies, the market share of public
insurers has consistently declined. Given a faster growth rate, the market share of the
private sector is catching that of the public sector and the two will likely converge over
the medium term.

The private sector share of third party motor business was much lower in the past than
that for public firms as the former did not pursue this market because of its negative
underwriting margins. However, with the formation of the common third party motor
pool, the situation has changed. The losses related to this segment now get shared among
all the players, leaving little incentive to avoid this segment.

Fire and engineering now broadly contribute a similar proportion of overall business for
the private and public sectors. In terms of overall business, the focus has shifted towards
the retail segments of motor and health, where good growth is expected.

Operational Flexibility
The public entities lack the operational flexibility enjoyed by the private players. Their
limited capacity to innovate has impacted their ability to tailor and aggressively price
products for large corporations. The private players by contrast have focused on account-
level profitability for large corporations and have expanded their shares by cross-
subsidizing tariffed products.

Client Servicing
The public insurers have also been hampered in claims servicing by their process oriented
approach and limited operational flexibility. They have been unable to expedite claim
settlements through out-of-court negotiations since a large proportion of their claims
pertain to the third party motor segment, which is subject to adjudication by the Motor
Accident Claim Tribunal. The result is a time-consuming and involved process.

Strong Infrastructure and Systems


Private players are not hindered by their charters or legacy systems and have constructed
technologically advanced infrastructure. They started with large investments in
technology, which helped them to build robust data management systems. This
characteristic enables in turn quick and effective decision-making for pricing and claims
settlements, attributes vital to building franchises.
On the other hand, public entities have only recently upgraded their systems and have to
grapple with transition issues, such as moving from paper to paper-less systems. They are
encumbered by legacy systems and fragmented databases, and have not fully used their
past claim experiences, something which could give them a strong pricing edge in a de-
tariffed environment.

Focused Underwriting Strategy


The private players, especially during their initial years, have selectively targeted the
more profitable lines of the public sector companies for growth. They benefit from the
experiences of the public sector as well as their international joint-venture partners. They
have drawn talent from public sector companies.
Superior Claim Paying/Processing Capability
The combination of superior technology and selective underwriting has allowed the
private sector to set high standards for policyholder services, thereby differentiating
themselves from public sector insurers. The claim settlement performance of the private
sector has also been superior because of the limited amount of third party motor business
that they have underwritten. Such claims normally take a longer time to settle.

Distribution – Rise of Bancassurance


The Indian general insurance industry has historically been dominated by the agency
channel, through which 75% of total premium income is sourced. But in recent periods
other channels – for example, bancassurance, brokers, corporate agents, direct marketing
and direct sales channels -- are gaining importance. Most insurers now have tie-ups with
the banks, which act as corporate agents and are remunerated on a commission basis. For
example, ICICI Lombard sources a major portion of its business from a tie-up with ICICI
Bank. Similarly, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited (BAIL, second
largest private player) has tie-ups with large number of banks, which contribute a big
share of its total premium income.
As of December 31 2007, 267 brokers were registered with IRDA, including 228 direct
brokers, 33 composite brokers and 6 reinsurance brokers. In a deregulated environment,
the broking community will have plenty of opportunity to become an integral part of the
insurance and risk financing process. At this time, low cost channels like tele-sales and
the internet are still not developed in India, mainly due to relatively poor knowledge
about insurance products and low internet penetration.

One conclusion is certain– the Indian non-life market is set to grow dramatically over the
next few years. The simplest forecasts suggest that premium income could double in the
next few years to reach USD11.6bn in 2010. When the structural changes above are taken
into consideration, this growth becomes exponential, with relatively slow growth in 2007
rising to rapid growth by 2010.
3.1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

RESEARCH DESIGN
Research design is the plan, structure to answer whom, when, where and how the subject
is under investigation. Here plan is an outline of the research scheme & which the
researcher has to work. The structure of the research is a more specific outline and the
strategy out, specifying the methods to be used in the connection & analysis of the data.

Descriptive Research Design


The type of research design used in this study is the descriptive research. The main
characteristics of this method is that the researcher has no control over the variables and
he can only report what has happened or what is happening. This study which compares
the performance of [COMPANY NAME] with its industrial competitors has been
undertaken based on the opinions of the consumers. Hence, this research study is
categorized as Descriptive Research Method

DATA COLLECTION
The main source of information for this study is based on the data collection. Data
collected are both primary and secondary in nature.

 Primary Data
Primary data have been directly collected from the clients of [COMPANY NAME] as
well from the clients of other insurance companies by survey method through
undisguised structured questionnaire.
Questions like open ended, close ended, multiple choice, dichotomous and ranking type
have been used for the purpose of data collection.

 Secondary Data
Secondary data have been collected from official website of [COMPANY NAME] and
also from other official websites related to general insurance industry
TYPES OF QUESTIONS

 Open ended question


Open ended question are the type of question used to get suggestion from the respondent
in order to give feed back to the organization.

 Close ended question


Close ended question are the type of questions with a clear declined set of alternatives
that confine the respondents to choose one of them.

 Multiple choice question


It consists of multiple choices in which the respondents can choose more than one

 Likert scale
It uses 5 point or 7 point scale to elicit respondent’s favour or unfavour towards an
object.

 Dichotomous question
It consists of two choices of answers in which the respondent has to choose one of them.

 Ranking
In ranking, questions will have the ranking skill, which the respondents are free to rank
them according to their preference.

SAMPLING
Convenience sampling is been used in the study. This type of sampling is basically used
when you simply stop anybody in the street who is prepared to stop, or when you wander
round a business, a shop, a restaurant, a theatre or whatever, asking people you meet
whether they will answer your questions. In other words, the sample comprises subjects
who are simply available in a convenient way to the researcher. There is no randomness
and the likelihood of bias is high. You can't draw any meaningful conclusions from the
results you obtain.

However, this method is often the only feasible one, particularly for students or others
with restricted time and resources, and can legitimately be used provided its limitations
are clearly understood and stated.

SAMPLE SIZE
Sample size is the total number of samples selected for the study from the sampling
population. Sample size for the study was arrived at 120 by using the formula:

n = z2 * p * q
e2
n = 1.962 * 0.9143 * .086
0.052
= 120

METHODS / TOOLS OF ANALYSIS


Tools used for analysis are:
• Chi-square test
• Weighted average method
• Interval estimation
• Karl Pearson’s coefficient of correlation
• H-test
• Graph
• Percentage
1. CHI-SQUARE TEST
There may be situation in which it is not possible to make any rigid assumption about
distribution of the population from which samples being drawn. This limitation has led
to the development of a group of alternative techniques known as non-parametric
tests. Chi-square describes the magnitude of the discrepancy between theory and
observation.
n
∑ [(Oi – Ei) 2] with n-1 degrees of freedom
χ² =
i =1 Ei
2. WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD
This method is widely used in finding the weightage given to different attributed by
respondents. The respondents assign different weightage to the different ranking and
weighted average percentage is found and graphs are plotted.

Net score = (weight for column * no. of respondents)


Total weight

Net score in %age = net score in row


Total net score*100

3. INTERVAL ESTIMATION METHOD


An estimation of a population parameter given by 2 numbers between when the
parameter
may be considered to lie is called interval estimation of the parameter.

( p - z √pq ; p + z √pq )
n n

p = sample proportion of success


q = sample proportion of failure
z = standard variance of the confidence level
n = no. of sample size

3. KARL PEARSON’S COEFFICIENT OF CORRELATION

Correlation analysis helps us in determining the degree of relationship between 2 or more


variables. The value of the coefficient of correlation as obtained by the below formula
shall always lie between +1 and -1. When r = +1, it means there is perfect positive
correlation between the variables. When r = -1, there is perfect negative correlation
between the variables and when r = 0, there is no relationship between the two variables.
∑ xy
r = --------------------
_________
√∑x2 - ∑ y2
__ __
x = (X - X) ; y = (Y - Y)
4. H-TEST

When more than two random samples are given, H-test is used. It is used to test the null
hypothesis that several independent samples come from the same population.

H = [12 / (N (N+1)) * (R12/ n1 + R22 / n2 + R32 / n3 + R42 / n4 + R52 / n5)] – 3 (n + 1)


Ri = Sum of ranks of sample i

5. PERCENTAGE ANALYSIS
Percentage analysis shows the entire population in terms of percentages.

Percentage = No. of respondents *100


Total respondents

6. GRAPHS
Graphical method was used in order to represent the factor in various graphical methods
like pie-chart, bar diagram and cylinder.

3.2.1 TABLE SHOWING AGE OF RESPONDENTS


S.No Age No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)
1 Less than 25 yrs 43 35.83
2 25-35 32 26.67
3 35-45 20 16.67
4 45-55 12 10
5 Above 55 yrs 13 10.83
Total 120 100

Findings: The above table shows that 35.83% of the respondents belong to the age group
of less than 25 years, 26.67% fall under the category of 25-35 years, 16.67% belong to
the age group of 35-45 years, 10% belong to the age group of 45-55 years and the rest
10.83% above 55 years

Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (i.e. 35.83%) of respondents in


the age group of less than 25 years and comparatively very lower percentage (i.e. 10%) of
respondents in the age group of 45-55 years

3.2.1 CHART SHOWING AGE OF RESPONDENTS

40
35.83
35
30 26.67
25 16.67
No. of
20
respondents 10.83
15 10
10
5
0
Less 25-35 35-45 45-55 Above
than 25 55 yrs
yrs
Age in years

3.2.2 TABLE SHOWING GENDER OF RESPONDENTS

S.No Gender No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 Male 81 67.5
2 Female 39 32.5
Total 120 100

Findings: The above table shows that 67.5% of respondents are male and 32.5% are
female respondents

Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (i.e. 67.5%) of male


respondents.

3.2.2 CHART SHOWING GENDER OF RESPONDENTS

67.5

70
60
No.of respondents

50 32.5
40
30
20
10
0
Male Female

3.2.3 TABLE SHOWING OCCUPATION OF RESPONDENTS

S.No Occupation No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 Service 25 20.83
2 Govt. employee 16 13.33
3 Business 23 19.17
4 Professional 19 15.83
5 Others 37 30.83
Total 120 100

Findings: The above table shows that 20.83% of respondents belong to the category of
services, 13.33% are government employees, 19.17% belong to the category of business,
15.83% are professional and the rest 30.83% belong to other category, which comprises
of private sector employee

Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (i.e.30.83%) of respondents in


the category comprising private sector employees.

3.2.3 CHART SHOWING OCCUPATION OF RESPONDENTS

35 30.83

30
No. of respondents

25 20.83 19.17
15.83
20
13.33
15
10
5
0
Service Govt. Business Professional Others
employee
occupation

3.2.4 TABLE SHOWING NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN A FAMILY

S.No No. of family members No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 2-4 91 75.83
2 5-8 29 24.17
3 More than 8 - -
Total 120 100
Findings: The above table shows that 75.83% of respondents have 2-4 members in their
family and the rest 24.17% of respondents have 5-8 members in their family.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (75.83%) of respondents have 2-4


members in their family

3.2.4 CHART SHOWING NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN A FAMILY

0
No. of family members

More than 8

24.17
5 to 8

2 to 4 75.83

0 20 40 60 80
No.of respondents

3.2.5 TABLE SHOWING ANNUAL INCOME OF RESPONDENTS

S.No Annual income No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 Less than Rs.2 lakhs 31 25.83
2 Rs.2-5 lakhs 51 42.5
3 Rs.5 -10 lakhs 20 16.67
4 Rs.10-20 lakhs 9 7.5
5 Above Rs.20 lakhs 9 7.5
Total 120 100
Findings: The above table shows that 25.83% of respondents fall under the income
category of less than 2 lakhs, 42.5% fall under the category of 2-5 lakhs, 16.67% fall
under the income category of 5-10 lakhs, 7.5% in the category of 10-20 lakhs and the rest
7.5% in the income category above 20 lakhs

Inference: It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (42.5%) of respondents in the


income category of 2-5 lakhs and comparatively a very lower percentage (7.5%) of
respondents in the income category of 10-20 lakhs and above 20 lakhs

3.2.5 CHART SHOWING ANNUAL INCOME OF RESPONDENTS

42.5
45
40
35
No. of respondents

30 25.83
25 16.67
20
15 7.5 7.5
10
5
0
Less than Rs.2-5 lakhs Rs.5 -10 Rs.10-20 Above Rs.20
Rs.2 lakhs lakhs lakhs lakhs
Annual Income

3.2.6 TABLE SHOWING THE NECESSITY OF HAVING A GENERAL


INSURANCE COVER

S.No Opinion No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


RSA Other companies RSA Other companies
1 Yes 60 60 100 100
2 No - - - -
Total 60 60 100 100
Findings: The above table shows that 100% of respondents, who are policy holders with
[COMPANY NAME] and 100% who are policy holders with other companies, have
responded that it is necessary to have a general insurance cover.

Inference: It is inferred that all the respondents surveyed have stated that it is necessary
to have a general insurance cover.

3.2.6 CHART SHOWING THE NECESSITY OF HAVING A GENERAL


INSURANCE COVER

60
60
60
50
40
No.of RSA
30
respondents
Other companies
20
10 0 0

0
yes no

3.2.7 TABLE SHOWING NO. OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES HELD BY


RESPONDENTS

S.No No. of policies No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 1 62 51.67
2 2-4 41 34.17
3 More than 4 17 14.17
Total 120 100
Findings: The above table shows that 51.67% of respondents hold 1 policy, 34.17%
holds 2 to 4 policies and the rest 14.17% holds more than 4 general insurance policies.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (51.67%) of respondents holds 1 general


insurance policy.

3.2.7 CHART SHOWING NO. OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES HELD BY


RESPONDENTS

51.67
60
No.of respondents

50
34.17
40
30 14.17
20
10
0
1 2 to 4 More than 4
No.of policies

3.2.8 TABLE SHOWING WHETHER THE GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES


ARE TAKEN FROM THE SAME COMPANY

S.No Opinion No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 Yes 66 55
2 No 54 45
Total 120 100

Findings: The above table shows that 55% of respondents hold general insurance policy
with the same company and 45% of respondents hold it in various other companies.
Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (55%) of respondents holds general
insurance policy with the same company.

3.2.8 CHART SHOWING WHETHER THE GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES


ARE TAKEN FROM THE SAME COMPANY

55
60
45
50
No.of respondents

40
30
20
10
0
Yes No

INTERVAL ESTIMATION: WHETHER THE GENERAL INSURANCE


POLICIES TAKEN FROM THE SAME COMPANY

Formula:

pq
p ± Zα/2
n

No. of respondents who have taken policies from the same company: 66
No. of respondents who have not taken policies from the same company: 54
n = sample size = 120

p= Number of yes = 66 = .55


Sample size 120

q = 1-p = 1-.55 = .45

Z α / 2 = 1.96 at 95% confidence level


__________
pq
Standard error = = .55 * .45 = 0.0454
n
120

pq
Interval estimation= p ± Zα / 2
n
= (0.55 ± 1.96(0.0454)
= 0.4610>p>0.639
= 46.1%, 63.9%

Conclusion
Hence, we conclude that the percentage of respondents who have taken policies from the
same company lies between 46.1% to 63.9%

3.2.9 TABLE SHOWING NO.OF COMPANIES IN WHICH RESPONDENT IS A


POLICY HOLDER

S.No No. of companies No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 2 companies 43 79.63
2 2-5 10 18.52
3 More than 5 companies 1 1.85
Total 54 100
Findings: The above table shows that 79.63% of respondents are policy holders in 2
companies, 18.52% of respondents are policy holders in 2-5 companies and the rest
1.85% of respondents are policy holders in more than 5 companies.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (79.63%) are policy


holders in at least 2 companies.

3.2.10 CHART SHOWING NO.OF COMPANIES IN WHICH RESPONDENT IS A


POLICY HOLDER

79.63
80
70
No.of respondents

60
50 18.51
40
30 1.851
20
10
0
2 companies 2 to 5 More than 5
companies

3.2.10 TABLE SHOWING COMPANIES ENJOYING HIGH REPUTATION


AMIDST CUSTOMERS.
S.No Companies No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)
1 [COMPANY NAME] 47 39.17
2 TATA AIG 13 10.83
3 Bajaj Allianz 15 12.5
4 Iffco tokio 8 6.67
5 ICICI 12 10
6 Reliance 14 11.67
7 Others 11 9.17
Total 120 100
Findings: The above table shows that 39.17% of respondents have stated [COMPANY
NAME], 10.83% have stated TATA AIG, 12.5% have stated Bajaj Allianz, 6.67% have
stated Iffco Tokio, 10% of them have stated ICICI, 11.6% of them have stated Reliance
and the rest 9.17% of them have stated other companies like Cholamandalam and Public
sector insurance companies

Inference: It is inferred that higher reputation amidst customers is enjoyed by


[COMPANY NAME] with 39.17% of respondents stating it.

3.2.10 CHART SHOWING COMPANIES ENJOYING HIGH REPUTATION


AMIDST CUSTOMERS
Others
9%
Reliance Royal
12% Sundaram
39%
ICICI
10%
Iffco tokio
7%
Bajaj Allianz TATA AIG
12% 11%

3.2.11 TABLE SHOWING AWARENESS AMONGST [COMPANY NAME]


CUSTOMERS TOWARDS THE INSURANCE SCHEMES OFFERED BY
[COMPANY NAME]
S.No Awareness No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)
1 Yes 45 75
2 No 15 25
Total 60 100

Findings: The above table shows that 75% of respondents, who are policy holders with
[COMPANY NAME], have stated that they are aware of various insurance schemes
offered by [COMPANY NAME] and the rest 25% of respondents who are policy holders
with [COMPANY NAME] have stated that they are not aware of all the insurance
schemes offered by the company

Inference: It is inferred that higher percentage (75%) of respondents, who are policy
holders with [COMPANY NAME] are aware of various insurance schemes offered by
the company.

3.2.11 CHART SHOWING AWARENESS AMONGST [COMPANY NAME]


CUSTOMERS TOWARDS THE INSURANCE SCHEMES OFFERED BY
[COMPANY NAME]

25

Yes
No

75

INTERVAL ESTIMATION: AWARENESS AMONGST [COMPANY NAME]


CUSTOMERS TOWARDS THE INSURANCE SCHEMES OFFERED BY
[COMPANY NAME]
Formula:

pq
p ± Zα/2
n

No. of [COMPANY NAME] customers who are aware of various insurance schemes
offered by [COMPANY NAME]: 45

No. of [COMPANY NAME] customers who are aware of various insurance schemes
offered by [COMPANY NAME]: 15

n = sample size = 60

p= Number of yes = 45 = .75


Sample size 60

q = 1-p = 1-.75 = .25

Z α / 2 = 1.96 at 95% confidence level


__________
pq
Standard error = = .75 * .25 = 0.056
n
60

pq
Interval estimation= p ± Zα / 2
n
= (0.75 ± 1.96(0.056)
= 0.64024>p>0.8598
= 64.02%, 85.98%

Conclusion
Hence we conclude that the percentage of respondents aware of various insurance
schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] lies between 64.02% to 85.98%
3.2.12 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S OPINION TOWARDS [COMPANY
NAME]’S OFFERING OF CUSTOMER CENTRIC PRODUCTS

S.No Opinion No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 Highly agree 5 8.3
2 Agree 48 80
3 Neither agree nor disagree 5 8.3
4 Disagree 2 3.3
5 Highly disagree - -
Total 60 100

Findings: The above table shows that 8.3% of respondents, who are policy holders with
[COMPANY NAME] highly agree, 80% of them just agree, 8.3% of them neither agree
nor disagree and the rest 3.3% of them disagree that [COMPANY NAME] is known for
offering customer-centric products.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (80%) of respondents, who are policy
holders with [COMPANY NAME] have agreed that [COMPANY NAME] is well known
for offering customer centric products.

3.2.12 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S AGREEMENT TOWARDS


[COMPANY NAME]’S OFFERING OF CUSTOMER CENTRIC PRODUCTS

Highly disagree 0

Disagree 3.3

Neither agree nor disagree 8.3

Agree 80

Highly agree 8.3

0 20 40 60 80 100
No.of respondents

3.2.13 TABLE SHOWING THE RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE


SERVICE OF [COMPANY NAME]

S.No Comment No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 Excellent 23 38.33
2 Very good 30 50
3 Moderate 7 11.67
4 Poor - -
5 Very poor - -
Total 60 100

Findings: The above table shows that 38.33% of respondents have indicated the service
of [COMPANY NAME] as excellent, and 50% of them have stated it as very good and
11.67% of them have indicated it as moderate.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (50%) of respondents have indicated


that the service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] as very good.

3.2.13 CHART SHOWING THE RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE


SERVICE OF [COMPANY NAME]

60
50
50
No. of respondents

38.33
40

30

20
11.67
10
0 0
0
Excellent Very good Moderate Poor Very poor

3.2.14 TABLE SHOWING SOURCES BY WHICH THE RESPONDENTS


BECAME FAMILIAR OF [COMPANY NAME]

S.No Source of information No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 Ads (print, radio, TV) 21 35
2 Insurance agents 14 23.33
3 Friends & Relatives 25 41.67
4 Others - -
Total 60 100
Findings: The above table shows that 35% of respondents have indicated advertisement,
23.33% of them have stated insurance agents and 41.67% of them have indicated friends
& relatives as means by which they came to know about [COMPANY NAME].

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (41.67%) of respondents has indicated


friends and relatives as means by which they came to know about [COMPANY NAME].

3.2.14 CHART SHOWING SOURCES BY WHICH THE RESPONDENTS


BECAME FAMILIAR OF [COMPANY NAME]

Others
0% Ads (print,
radio, TV)
Friends & 35%
Relatives
42%

Insurance
agents
23%

3.2.15 TABLE SHOWING THE PERIOD OF INSURANCE COVER HELD BY


RESPONDENTS.

S.No Period of insurance cover No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 Annual policy 61 50.83
2 1-5 year 35 29.17
3 5-10 year 11 9.17
4 10-15 year 13 10.83
5 Greater than 15 years - -
Total 120 100
Findings: The above table shows that 50.83% of respondents hold annual policy, 29.17%
of them hold 1-5 year policy cover, 9% of them hold 5-10year policy and 10.83% of them
hold 10-15 year policy.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (50.83%) of respondents holds annual


policy.

3.2.15 CHART SHOWING THE PERIOD OF INSURANCE COVER HELD BY


RESPONDENTS.

greater than 5 years 0


period of insurance cover

10-15 year 10.83

5-10 year 9.17

1-5 year 29.17

Annual policy 50.83

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
No.of respondents

3.2.16 TABLE SHOWING THE AMOUNT OF YEARLY INSURANCE


PREMIUM PAID

S.No Yearly premium paid No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 Less than Rs.5000 43 35.83
2 Rs.5000-15000 58 48.33
3 Rs.15000-25000 12 10
4 Greater than Rs.25000 7 5.83
Total 120 100

Findings: The above table shows that 35.83% of respondents have been paying insurance
premium less than Rs.5000 yearly, 48.330% of them have been paying premium between
Rs.5000-15000 yearly, 10% of them have been paying between Rs.15000-25000 as
yearly premium and 5.83% of them have been paying more than Rs.25000 as yearly
premium.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (48.3%) have been


paying yearly insurance premium between Rs.5000-15000

3.2.16 CHART SHOWING THE AMOUNT OF YEARLY INSURANCE


PREMIUM PAID

Greater than R s .25000 5.83

R s .15000-25000 10
48.33
R s .5000-15000

Les s than R s .5000 35.83

0 10 20 30 40 50

No.of respondents
APPLYING KARL PEARSON’S CORRELATION COEFFICIENT BY
COMPARING ANNUAL INCOME AND THE YEARLY PREMIUM AMOUNT
PAID

Premium amount Less than Rs.5000 - Rs.15000 - More than


Rs.5000 15000 25000 Rs.25000
No. of respondents 43 58 12 7

Annual income Less than Rs.2-5 Rs.5-10 Rs.10-20 Above


Rs.2 lakhs lakhs lakhs lakhs Rs.20 lakhs
No. of respondents 31 51 20 9 9

Premium amount Annual income


(X) (Y)
43 31
58 51
12 20
7 9
0 9

∑ xy
r = --------------------
_________
√∑x2 - ∑ y2

__ __
x = (X - X) ; y = (Y - Y)

Premium Annual
(X) x x2 income (Y) y y2 xy
43 13 169 31 7 49 91
58 28 784 51 27 729 756
12 -18 324 20 -14 16 72
7 -23 529 9 -15 225 345
0 0 0 9 -15 225 0
∑X = 120 ∑ x2= ∑ Y= 120 ∑ y2= ∑ xy = 1264
1806 1244
__
X = 120 = 30
4
__
Y = 120 = 24
5

∑ x2 = 1806 ; ∑ y2 = 1244 ; ∑ xy = 1264

1264
r= -------------------------- = .8433
_____________
√1806 * 1244

Conclusion:

The variables annual income and premium amount paid are positively correlated. Hence,
the annual income has an impact on the premium amount paid.
3.2.17 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE YEARLY
PREMIUM PAID

S.No Comment No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


RSA Other co. RSA Other Co.
1 Very high - - -
2 High 39 12 65 20
3 Reasonable 21 48 35 80
4 Low - - -
5 Very low - - -
Total 60 60 100 100

Findings: The above table shows that 65% of respondents, who are policy holders with
[COMPANY NAME] have stated that the yearly premium paid, is high and the rest 35%
of them have stated it is reasonable. Amongst the respondents, who are policy holders
with other companies 20% of them have stated that the yearly premium being paid is high
and the rest 80% of them have stated that it is reasonable.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (65%) of policy holders of [COMPANY


NAME] feel that the premium paid is high and only 20% of policy holders of other
companies have stated it is high

3.2.17 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE YEARLY


PREMIUM PAID
90 80
80
70 65

no. of respondents
60
50 RS A
40 35
Other Co.
30 20
20
10
0

low
high

very low
very high

reasonable

APPLYING CHI-SQAURE TEST BY COMPARING THE PERIOD OF


GENERAL INSURANCE COVER AND THE PREMIUM RANGE
Period of Premium range
Very high High Reasonable Low Very Total
insurance
low
cover
Annual policy 0 27 34 0 0 61
1-5 yr 0 10 25 0 0 35
5-10 yr 0 7 4 0 0 11
10-15 yr 0 7 6 0 0 13
>15 yr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 51 69 0 0 120

Ho: There is no significant difference between premium and period of general


insurance policy
H1: There is a significant difference between premium and period of general
insurance policy

Table of expected frequency:


Expected Value = row total * column total
Grand total

0 25.925 35.075 0 0
0 14.875 20.125 0 0
0 4.675 6.325 0 0
0 5.525 7.475 0 0
0 0 0 0 0

Formulae:
χ² = ∑ [(Oi – Ei) 2] with n-1 degrees of freedom
i =1 Ei

Oi Ei (Oi-Ei)2 (Oi-Ei)2/Ei
0 0 0 0
27 25.925 1.156 0.0446
34 35.075 1.156 .033
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
10 14.875 23.766 1.6
25 20.125 23.766 1.18
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
7 4.675 5.406 1.1564
4 6.325 5.406 .855
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
7 5.525 2.176 .394
6 7.475 2.176 .291
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
Total 5.554

χ²cal = 5.554
χ²0.05 with (n-1) (n-1) = (5-1) (5-1) = 16
χ²0.05 with 16 d.f = 26.3
χ²cal < χ²0.05
Hence, we accept ho
Conclusion:
We conclude that there is no significant difference between premium and period of
general insurance policy.
3.2.18 TABLE SHOWING THE SATISFACTORY LEVEL OF RESPONDENTS
TOWARDS THE POLICY TAKEN

S.No Satisfactory level No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


RSA Other cos. RSA Other cos.
1 Highly satisfactory 8 5 13.3 8.3
2 Satisfactory 47 53 78.3 88.3
3 Neither satisfactory nor 5 2 8.3 3.3
dissatisfactory
4 Dissatisfactory - - - -
5 Highly dissatisfactory - - - -
Total 60 60 100 100

Findings: The above table shows that among policy holders of [COMPANY NAME]
13.3% of them are highly satisfied with the policy taken, 78.3% of them are just satisfied
and the rest 8.3% of them are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the policy taken.
Among policy holders of other companies, 8.3% of them are highly satisfied, 88.3% of
them are highly satisfied and the rest 3.35% of them are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
with the policy taken.
Inference: It is inferred that among the policy holders of Royal Sundarm, higher
percentage (78.3%) of them feel that they are satisfied and 13.3% of them are highly
satisfied with the policy taken. Among other policy holders, a higher percentage (88.3%)
of them also feels that they are satisfied and 8.3% of them feel that they are highly
satisfied with the policy taken.

3.2.18 CHART SHOWING THE SATISFACTORY LEVEL OF RESPONDENTS


TOWARDS THE POLICY TAKEN

100
88.3
90 78.3
80
no. of respondents

70
60
RSA
50
Other Co.
40
30
20 13.3
8.3 8.3
10 3.3 0 0 0 0
0
satisfactory

satisfactory

dissatisfactory

dissatisfactory

dissatisfactory
satisfactory
highly

neither

highly
nor
APPLYING CHI-SQUARE TEST BY COMPARING SATISFACTORY LEVEL
TOWARDS GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY TAKEN AND THE YEARLY
PREMIUM PAID

Satisfactory level towards General insurance policy


Highly Satisfactory Neither Dissatisfactory Highly Total
Premium
satisfactory satisfactory dissatisfactory
amount
nor
dissatisfactory
Less than 3 38 2 0 0 43
Rs.5000
Rs.5000- 0 57 1 0 0 58
15000
Rs.15000- 7 3 2 0 0 12
25000
More than 3 2 2 0 0 7
Rs.25000
Total 13 100 7 0 0 120

Ho: There is no significant difference between yearly premium paid and satisfactory
level towards general insurance policy taken
H1: There is a significant difference between yearly premium paid and satisfactory
level towards general insurance policy taken
Table of expected frequency:
Expected Value = row total * column total
Grand total

4.6583 35.83 2.5083 0 0


6.283 48.3 3.383 0 0
1.3 10 .07 0 0
.7583 5.83 .4083 0 0

Formulae:
χ² = ∑ [(Oi – Ei) 2] with n-1 degrees of freedom
i =1 Ei

Oi Ei (Oi-Ei)2 (Oi-Ei)2/Ei
3 4.6583 2.75 0.5903
38 35.83 4.7089 0.1314
2 2.5083 0.2584 0.1030
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 6.283 39.48 6.283
57 48.3 75.69 1.57
1 3.383 5.68 1.68
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
7 1.3 32.49 24.99
3 10 49 4.9
2 .07 3.725 53.214
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
3 .7583 5.025 6.63
2 5.83 14.67 2.5163
2 .4083 2.5335 6.205
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
Total 108.813

χ²cal = 108.813
χ²0.05 with (n-1) (n-1) = (5-1) (4-1) = 12
χ²0.05 with 12 d.f = 21.0
χ²cal > χ²0.05
Hence, we reject ho

Conclusion:
We conclude that there is a significant difference between yearly premium paid and
satisfactory level towards general insurance policy taken.

3.2.19 TABLE SHOWING NO.OF RESPONDENTS HAVING INSURANCE


AGENTS
S.No Opinion No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)
RSA Other co. RSA Other co.
1 Yes 31 31 51.67 51.67
2 No 29 29 48.33 48.33
Total 60 60 100 100

Findings: The above table shows that 51.67% of respondents among both [COMPANY
NAME] and other companies have insurance agents and the rest 48.33% of respondents
among both [COMPANY NAME] and other companies do not have an insurance agent.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage (51.67%) of respondents among both


[COMPANY NAME] and other companies has insurance agents.

3.2.19 CHART SHOWING NO.OF RESPONDENTS HAVING INSURANCE


AGENTS

51.67
51.67
52

51
No.of respondents

50
48.33 48.33 RSA
49
Other companies
48

47

46
yes no

INTERVAL ESTIMATION: RESPONDENTS HAVING INSURANCE AGENTS

Formula:
pq
p ± Zα/2
n

No. of respondents having insurance agents: 62


No. of respondents not having insurance agents: 58

n = sample size = 120

p= Number of yes = 62 = .5166


Sample size 120

q = 1-p = 1-.5166 = .4834

Z α / 2 = 1.96 at 95% confidence level


______________
pq
Standard error = = .5166 * .4834 = 0.0456
n
120

pq
Interval estimation= p ± Zα / 2
n
= (0.5166 ± 1.96(0.0456)
= 0.4272>p>0.606
= 42.72%, 60.6%

Conclusion
Hence we conclude that the percentage of respondents having insurance agents lies
between 42.72% to 60.6%

3.2.20 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE GUIDANCE


RENDERED BY INSURANCE AGENTS

S.No Comment No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


RSA Other cos. RSA Other cos.
1 Excellent 8 2 25.8 6.5
2 Very good 20 16 64.5 51.6
3 Moderate 3 13 9.7 41.9
4 Poor - - - -
5 Very poor - - - -
Total 31 31 100 100

Findings: The above table shows that 25.8% of respondents among [COMPANY
NAME] and 6.5% of respondents among other companies have indicated that the
guidance rendered by their insurance agent is excellent, 64.5% of respondents among
[COMPANY NAME] and 51.6% of respondents of other companies have indicated that
it is very good and the rest 9.7% of respondents from [COMPANY NAME] and 41.9% of
respondents from other companies have indicated that it is moderate.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents from both [COMPANY


NAME] (64.5%) and from other companies (51.6%) have indicated that the guidance
rendered by their insurance agent is very good.

3.2.20 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S COMMENT ON THE GUIDANCE


RENDERED BY INSURANCE AGENTS
70 64.5

60 51.6

No.of respondents 50 41.9 Excellent


40 Very good
25.8 Moderate
30
Poor
20 Very poor
9.7 6.5
10 0 0 0 0
0
RSA OTHER CO.

3.2.21 TABLE SHOWING THE CLAIMS REJECTED BY THE INSURANCE


COMPANIES
S.No Claims rejected by insurance No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)
RSA Other cos. RSA Other cos.
companies
1 Yes 60 60 100 100
2 No - - -
Total 60 60 100 100

Findings: The above table shows that 100% of respondents, who are policy holders with
[COMPANY NAME] and 100% respondents, who are policy holders with other
companies have stated that their claims were not rejected by the insurance companies.

Inference: It is inferred that all the respondents, who are policy holders with
[COMPANY NAME] as well with other companies have indicated that their claims were
not rejected by the insurance companies.

3.2.21 CHART SHOWING THE CLAIMS REJECTED BY THE INSURANCE


COMPANIES

100 100
100
90
80
No.of respondents

70
60
RSA
50
40 Other companies
30
20 0
0
10
0
yes no

3.2.22 TABLE SHOWING FACTORS THAT INFLUENCES CUSTOMERS TO


CHOOSE A PARTICULAR COMPANY IN BUYING AN INSURANCE POLICY
Influencing factors Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3 Rank 4 Rank 5 Rank 6 Rank 7 Rank 8
Reputation 85 17 9 5 - 1 2 1
Excellent 16 68 12 14 5 4 1 -
service/Responsiveness
Easy accessibility - 3 2 8 17 44 46 -
Good schemes 3 7 19 30 41 17 3 -
Low premium rates 6 7 14 24 48 16 5 -
Heard of good experience 11 3 17 6 4 23 56 -
of others
Proper claim settlement 12 14 50 23 13 5 3 -
Others - - - - - - 7 113

APPLYING WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD


8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Influencing factors 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 W.A RANK
Reputation 85 17 9 5 - 1 2 1 24.61 1
Excellent 16 68 12 14 5 4 1 - 21.7 2
service/Responsiveness
Easy accessibility - 3 2 8 17 44 46 - 10.14 7
Good schemes 3 7 19 30 41 17 3 - 15.5 4
Low premium rates 6 7 14 24 48 16 5 - 15.306 5
Heard of good 11 3 17 6 4 23 56 - 12.17 6
experience of others
Proper claim 12 14 50 23 13 5 3 - 18.94 3
settlement
Others - - - - - - 7 113 3.53 8

Formulae:

Average score = [(R1*8 + R2*7 + R3*6 + R4*5 + R5*4 + R6*3 +R7*2 + R8*1)]
Total weights

Sample calculation:

Average score = [(85*8 + 17*7 + 9*6 +5*5 + 0*4 + 1*3 + 2*2 + 1*1)]
36
= 24.61
Findings: The above table clearly shows that while selecting a particular insurance
company to take a policy, majority of the respondents look out for reputation of the
company first, secondly they look out for excellent service/responsiveness of the
company, thirdly proper claim settlement of the company followed by good schemes, low
premium rates, others good experience, and easy accessibility.

Inference: It is inferred that majority of respondents would first look out for the
reputation of the company. Hence it is ranked first.

3.2.22 CHART SHOWING FACTORS THAT INFLUENCES CUSTOMERS TO


CHOOSE A PARTICULAR COMPANY IN BUYING AN INSURANCE POLICY

30
24.61
25
No.of respondents

21.7
18.94
20
15.5 15.306
15 12.17
10.14
10
3.53
5
0
service/Responsiveness

experience of others
Reputation

Low premium rates

Proper claim settlement


Easy accessibility

Good schemes

Others
Heard of good
Excellent

3.2.23 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S SATISFACTORY LEVEL


TOWARDS VARIOUS FEATURES OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY
TAKEN

S.No Attributes of Highly Satisfied Neither Dissatisfied Highly Total


general satisfied satisfied nor dissatisfied
insurance cover dissatisfied
1 Low premium 9 92 9 10 - 120
2 Claim settlement 26 86 7 1 - 120
3 Larger risk 21 83 13 3 - 120
coverage
4 Money back 7 41 62 10 120
guarantee
5 Easy access to 21 39 58 2 - 120
agents
Total 84 341 149 26 0 600

3.2.23 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S SATISFACTORY LEVEL


TOWARDS VARIOUS FEATURES OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY
TAKEN
100
92
90 86
83
80 Highly satisfied

70
no. of respondents

62 Satisfied
58
60
Neither satisfied nor
50
41 dissatisfied
39
40 Dissatisfied
30 26
21 21 Highly dissatisfied
20 13
9 910 7 7
10
10 3
0 10 0 0 20
0
Claim settlement

Money back
Larger risk

Easy access to
Low premium

coverage

guarantee

agents

APPLYING KRUSKAL – WALLIS OR H – TEST TO THE TABLE 3.2.23

Ho: Respondent’s satisfaction level towards all the attributes of general insurance cover
taken is the same
H1: Respondent’s satisfaction level towards all the attributes of general insurance cover
taken is not the same.

Values Ranks Ranks of Ranks of Ranks of Ranks of Ranks of


low claim larger risk money back easy access
premium settlemen coverage guarantee to agents
(R1) t (R2) (R3) (R4) (R5)
1 1 6.5 13 11.5 5.5 11.5
2 2 20 19 18 15 14
3 3 6.5 4.5 10 17 16
7 4.5 8.5 1 3 8.5 2
7 4.5
9 6.5
9 6.5
10 8.5
10 8.5
13 10
21 11.5
21 11.5
26 13
39 14
41 15
58 16
62 17
83 18
86 19
92 20
Total 41.5 37.5 42.5 46 43.5
R1 = 41.5 ; R2 = 37.5 ; R3 = 42.5 ; R4 = 46 ; R5 = 43.5
Applying the formula for H:

H = [12 / (N (N+1)) * (R12/ n1 + R22 / n2 + R32 / n3 + R42 / n4 + R52 / n5)] – 3 (n + 1)


H = [12 / (20 (20+1)) * (41.52/4 + 37.52/4 + 42.52/4 + 462/4 + 43.52/4)] – 3 (20+1)
= [(12/420) * (2235.75) – 63
H = .8786

At 5% level of significance with (5-1) d.f = 9.49


χ²0.05 = 9.49
Since, 0.8786 < 9.49
We accept Ho.

Conclusion
Hence, we conclude that the respondent’s satisfaction level towards all the attributes of
general insurance cover taken is the same.

3.2.24 TABLE SHOWING THE SOURCES MOST PREFERRED BY


RESPONDENTS TO KNOW ABOUT INSURANCE COMPANY AND ITS
PRODUCTS

S.No Preferred source of information No. Of Respondents Percentage (%)


1 Ads (print, radio & TV) 31 25.83
2 Insurance agents 44 36.67
3 Friends & Relatives 42 35
4 Others 3 2.5
Total 120 100

Findings: The above table shows that 25.83% of respondents would prefer Ads, 36.67%
of them prefer insurance agents, 35% of them prefer Friends & relatives, and the rest
2.5% of them would prefer other sources like company websites, SMS, etc, in order to
know about an insurance company and its products.

Inference: It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (36.67%) have stated


insurance agents as the most preferred source.

3.2.24 CHART SHOWING THE SOURCES MOST PREFERRED BY


RESPONDENTS TO KNOW ABOUT INSURANCE COMPANY AND ITS
PRODUCTS

40
36.67
35
35
No.of respondents

30
25.83
25

20

15

10

5 2.5

0
Ads (print, radio & Insurance agents Friends & Relatives Others
TV)

3.2.25 TABLE SHOWING GENERAL INSURANCE COVER THAT IS MOST


FAVORED BY RESPONDENTS
Most favored Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3 Rank 4 Rank 5 Rank 6 Rank 7 Rank 8
insurance cover
Auto/car insurance 85 15 4 16 - - - -
Health insurance 34 64 9 13 - - - -
Hospital cash 2 29 65 17 4 2 1 -
insurance
Personal accident - 7 38 65 4 6 - -
insurance
Travel insurance 1 - - 5 22 53 37 2
Householder’s - 4 - 3 77 35 1 -
insurance
Shopkeeper’s - - 5 - 11 24 72 8
insurance
Others - - - - 16 - 7 97

APPLYING WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD TO THE TABLE 3.2.25


8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Most favored 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 W.A RANK
insurance cover
Auto/car insurance 85 15 4 16 - - - - 24.7 1
Health insurance 34 64 9 13 - - - - 23.306 2
Hospital cash 2 29 65 17 4 2 1 - 19.94 3
insurance
Personal accident - 7 38 65 4 6 - - 17.67 4
insurance
Travel insurance 1 - - 5 22 53 37 2 9.9 6
Householder’s - 4 - 3 77 35 1 - 12.72 5
insurance
Shopkeeper’s - - 5 - 11 24 72 7 8.25 7
insurance
Others - - - - 16 - 7 92 4.72 8

Formulae:

Average score = [(R1*8 + R2*7 + R3*6 + R4*5 + R5*4 + R6*3 +R7*2 + R8*1)]
Total weights

Sample calculation:

Average score = [(85*8 + 15*7 + 4*6 + 16*5 + 0*4 + 0*3 + 0*2 + 0*1)]
36
= 24.7

Findings: The above table clearly shows that auto/car insurance is been ranked I by
majority of respondents, health insurance ranked II, hospital cash insurance ranked III
followed by personal accident insurance, householder’s insurance, travel insurance,
shopkeeper’s insurance and other insurance (fire insurance, marine, rural insurance, etc)
which are ranked as IV, V, VI, VII and VIII respectively.

Inference: It is inferred that auto/car insurance is the most favored insurance cover
among majority of respondents.

3.2.25 CHART SHOWING GENERAL INSURANCE COVER THAT IS MOST


FAVORED BY RESPONDENTS

30
24.7
25 23.306
No.of respondents

19.94
20 17.67

15 12.72
9.9
10 8.25
4.72
5

0
insurance

insurance

Hospital cash

insurance

insurance

Others
Householder’s

Shopkeeper’s
Personal
Auto/car

accident

Travel
Health

insurance

insurance
insurance

3.3 FINDINGS
 It is found that there is a higher percentage (i.e. 35.83%) of respondents in the age
group of less than 25 years and comparatively very lower percentage (i.e. 10%) of
respondent belongs to the age group of 45-55 years.

 There is a higher percentage (i.e. 67.5%) of male respondents among the


respondents who has taken general insurance cover.

 Majority of the respondents (i.e.30.83%), who has taken general insurance cover
are private sector employees.

 It is found that a higher percentage (75.83%) of respondents have 2-4 members in


their family.

 It is inferred that there is a higher percentage (42.5%) of respondents in the income


category of 2-5 lakhs and comparatively a very lower percentage (7.5%) of
respondents in the income category of 10-20 lakhs and above 20 lakhs

 It is implied that all the respondents surveyed have stated that it is necessary to
have a general insurance cover.

 It is evident from the study conducted that majority (51.67%) of the respondents
holds at least 1 general insurance policy.

 The study discloses that 55% of respondents hold general insurance policy with
the same company and the rest 45% of respondents hold it in various other
companies.

 From the analysis made it is inferred that the percentage of respondents who have
taken policies from the same company lies between 46.1% and 63.9%.
 It is inferred that a higher percentage of respondents (79.63%) are policy holders
in at least 2 companies, while18.52% of respondents are policy holders in 2-5
companies and the rest 1.85% of respondents are policy holders in more than 5
companies.

 It is inferred that higher reputation amidst customers is enjoyed by [COMPANY


NAME] with 39.17% of respondents stating it.

 Majority of respondents (i.e., 75%), who are policy holders with [COMPANY
NAME] have stated that they are aware of various insurance schemes offered by
the company.

 It is found that the percentage of respondents aware of various insurance schemes


offered by [COMPANY NAME] lies between 64.02% and 85.98%

 Majority of respondents (i.e., 80%), who are policy holders with [COMPANY
NAME] have agreed that [COMPANY NAME] is well known for offering
customer centric products.

 It is inferred that a higher percentage (50%) of respondents have indicated that the
service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] as very good, while 38.33% of
respondents have indicated the service of [COMPANY NAME] as excellent, and
the rest 11.67% of them have indicated it as moderate.

 The study implies that a higher percentage (41.67%) of respondents has indicated
friends and relatives, while 35% of respondents have indicated advertisement and
the rest 23.33% of them have stated insurance agents as means by which they
came to know about [COMPANY NAME]

 Among the respondents, who has taken general insurance cover it is inferred that a
higher percentage (50.83%) of respondents holds annual policy.
 Among the respondents, who are holding general insurance cover it is found that a
higher percentage of respondents (48.3%) have been paying yearly insurance
premium between Rs.5000-15000

 With the application of Karl Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient it is found that the
variables annual income and premium amount paid are positively correlated.

 Among the policy holders of [COMPANY NAME], 65% of them feel that the
premium being paid is high and among the policy holders of other companies only
20% have stated it as high.

 According to the chi – square test conducted, it is found that there is no significant
difference between premium and period of general insurance policy.

 It is inferred from the study that among the policy holders of Royal Sundarm,
higher percentage (78.3%) of them feel that they are satisfied and 13.3% of them
are highly satisfied with the policy taken. Among other policy holders, a higher
percentage (88.3%) of them also feels that they are satisfied and 8.3% of them feel
that they are highly satisfied with the policy taken.

 It is found that there is a significant difference between yearly premium paid and
satisfactory level towards general insurance policy taken, as per the chi-square test
conducted.

 The study conducted reveals that a higher percentage (51.67%) of policy holders
among both [COMPANY NAME] and other companies has insurance agents.

 It is found that the percentage of respondents having insurance agents lies between
42.72% and 60.6%, according to the analysis conducted
 It is found that a higher percentage of respondents from both [COMPANY
NAME] (64.5%) and from other companies (51.6%) have indicated that the
guidance rendered by their insurance agent is very good.

 It is inferred that all the respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY
NAME] as well with other companies have indicated that their claims were not
rejected by the insurance companies.

 It is found that while selecting a particular insurance company to take a policy,


majority of the respondents look out for reputation of the company first, secondly
they look out for excellent service/responsiveness of the company, thirdly proper
claim settlement of the company followed by good schemes, low premium rates,
others good experience, and easy accessibility.

 According to the result of the H-test, it is found that the respondent’s satisfaction
level towards all the attributes of general insurance cover taken is the same.

 Majority of respondents (36.67%) have stated insurance agents as the most


preferred source to know about an insurance company and its products.

 It is found that auto/car insurance is been ranked I by majority of respondents,


health insurance ranked II, hospital cash insurance ranked III followed by personal
accident insurance, householder’s insurance, travel insurance, shopkeeper’s
insurance and other insurance covers (fire insurance, marine, rural insurance, etc)
which are ranked as IV, V, VI, VII and VIII respectively.

3.4 SUGGESTIONS
 The present scenario demands almost all the customers to have a general insurance
cover in order to protect from future uncertainty. The company always has an
opportunity to grow and expand its operations in the non-life insurance segment.
Hence, the company can seize this opportunity and pay attention to introduce more
insurance covers to cater to the needs of various classes of people.

 Majority of the respondents, who are policy holders with [COMPANY NAME] have
felt that the premium being paid is comparatively higher with the premium rates of
other insurance companies. Hence, amendments can be made in this regard by
offering insurance cover at reasonable premium rates to the customers.

 The promptness of claim settlement procedure can be maintained as it is one of the


important aspects which would enhance the reputation of the company, as well as
build trust in the minds of the customers. Also, it helps to retain existing customers
and attract new customers.

 The company has to focus more on the auto/car insurance segment and health
insurance segment. Majority of the respondents have preference towards auto/car
insurance as it is a must to have insurance for their vehicles by law. Therefore, the
company has got enough opportunities to earn huge profits from both these
segments.

 The company can create more awareness about its products among potential
customers by means of advertisements and efficient insurance agents, which in turn
will help in increasing its customer base.

3.5 CONCLUSIONS
The study was conducted to compare the performance of [COMPANY NAME] with its
industrial competitors. The study has been able to accomplish its objectives, by
thoroughly analyzing and identifying the competitive position of [COMPANY NAME],
strengths and weaknesses of various insurance covers among the clients of various
insurance companies, customer’s awareness and perception about the company and its
products. The company may highly be benefited by the outcome of this study.

The outcome of the study has proved that the performance of the company is outstanding
in comparison with other competitors in the non-life insurance segment and that the
company has a higher reputation among customers.

It is concluded that the company could initiate various steps based on the
recommendations given in this report. The company by adopting some of the
recommendations, if not all, can further improve its performance and occupy a leading
position among other competitors in the non-life insurance market in future years to
come.