Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

This chapter presents the data gathering of the study, interpretation of the results from the conducted survey

and the software product analysis. 1. Demographic Profile of the Respondents Table 4.0 Age and Gender of the Respondents

Age 20-29 30-39 40-49 50 and above

Gender M

Percentage F

Age% %

The Table 4.0 shows the age range of the respondents. Majority (44%) of the respondents belong to the 26-33 age range. The 34-44 year olds comes next which

comprises 32% of the total respondents. The lowest percent goes to 45 year olds and above which only comprises 6% of the total sample population. Out of the 32 respondents surveyed, 44% are males while 56% are females which means majority of the total sample population are females.

Table 5.0 Respondents Civil Status

Male

Female M % F % Age% 18-25 7 11% 6 10% 21% 26-33 11 18% 14 23% 41% 34-44 7 11% 10 17% 28% 45 Above 2 4% 4 6% 10% Total 27 44% 34 56% 100.00% The Table 4.0 shows the age range of the respondents. Majority (41%) of the respondents belong to the 26-33 age range. The 34-44 year olds comes next which

comprises 28% of the total respondents. The lowest percent goes to 45 year olds and above which only comprises 10% of the total sample population. Out of the 61 respondents surveyed, 44% are males while 56% are females which means majority of the total sample population are females. Table 5.0 Respondents Civil Status Status No. of Respondents

Percentage Single 27 44% Married 34 56% Total 61 100% Table 5.0 presents the frequency and percentage distribution of the respondents civil status. The table shows that majority of the respondents are married while the minority are single. The frequency is distributed to 44% single and 56% married.

Table 6.0 Respondents Length of Service

Years No. of Respondents Percentage 0 1 Years 22 36% 2 3 Years 25 40% 4 5 Years 8 14% 6 Years and above 6 10% Total 61 100% Table 6.0 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of the respondents according to their length of service in the company. Out of the 61 total sample population, 22 have served 0 1 years in the company (36%), 25 have served 2 3 years in the company (40%), 8 have served at least 4 5 years (14%) and 6 have served more than 6 years (10%).

2.

Problems of the Existing System

Table 7.0 Problems Encountered by the Respondents


Problems Criteria 5 4 3 2 1 Total N % N % N % N % N % N % There is no clear sales process to follow and guide the agents in closing every sale. 40 66% 18 30% 2 3% 1 1% 0 0% 61 100% Keeping track of the prospect and client lists are done manually by agents. 31 51% 29 48% 1 1% 0 0% 0 0% 61 100% Difficult and time consuming in manually keeping track of all schedules

and appointments. 30 49% 31 51% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 61 100% Inability of managers to keep track of the agents sales activities. 38 63% 22 36% 1 1% 0 0% 0 0% 61 100% Storage of files is susceptible to be damaged as well as lost of files. 35 57% 22 36% 4 7% 0 0% 0 0% 61 100%

Table 7.0 shows the common problems encountered with the existing manual system of the agency and the respondents rating for each problem, where the scale of 5 means strongly agree while the scale 1 refers to strongly disagree.
30

Majority (66%) of the total respondents strongly agree that there is no clear sales process to follow and guide the agents, while only 1% disagree. Around half (51%) of the total respondents strongly agree that keeping track of the prospect and client lists are slow and difficult due to the manual way of listing the names. No one (0%) disagreed.

Almost half (49%) of the respondents strongly agree that the manual way of keeping schedules and appointments are difficult and time consuming. No one (0%) disagreed. A vast majority (63%) of the sample population strongly agree that the inability of managers to keep track of the agents sales activities is a big problem with no one (0%) disagreeing. Out of the 61 total sample population surveyed, more than half (57%) strongly agree that the storage of files are susceptible to damage while nobody (0%) disagreed. The table clearly shows that a vast majority of the respondents strongly agree to the problems encountered with the manual system of the agency. 3. Effectiveness of the Proposed System
31

Table 7.0 Mean Summary of the Existing and the Proposed System Criteria Existing System Proposed System Accuracy 2.66 4.89 Reliability 2.26 4.87 Efficiency 2.15 4.69 Speed 2.05 4.85

User-Friendliness 1.97 4.59 Average Mean 2.22 4.78 Table 7.0 presents the mean summary of the existing and the proposed online system. With an average mean of 2.22 for the existing system and 4.78 for the proposed system, the table clearly illustrates how it is more effective than the manual system in terms of accuracy, reliability, efficiency, speed and user-friendliness. With the summary of the table, it only shows that the proposed system is indeed feasible for implementation and effective for the life insurance agency. 4. Summary of ROI and Payback Period

Table 8.0 Summary of CBA COST DESCRIPTION AMOUNT IN PESO


Total Hardware Development Cost Add: Total Software Development Cost TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COST P 0.00 P 27,000.00 P 27,000.00 Total Present Annual Supplies Cost Add: Total Present Electric Consumption TOTAL PRESENT ANNUAL OPERATING COST P 26,587.75 P 5,588.35 P 32,176.10 Total Proposed Annual Supplies Cost Add: Total Proposed Web Services Cost Add: Total Proposed Electric Consumption TOTAL PROPOSED ANNUAL OPERATING COST P 10,349.30 P 3,500.00 P 5,868.29 P 19,717.59 Total Present Annual Operating Cost Less: Total Proposed Annual Operating Cost TOTAL ANNUAL COST SAVINGS P 32,176.10 P 19,717.59 P 12,458.51 Payback Period 1 Year and 11 Months Net Present Value P 1,031.65

Table 8.0 presents the summary of Cost Benefit Analysis. (CBA). The payback period of the company is within 1.84 years and the Net Present Value is P1,031.65 in 1 year and 11 months of payback period. Existing System

02cee446f71319
document_comme 4gen

Оценить