Docstoc

MBA Final year project in Insurance

Document Sample
MBA Final year project in Insurance Powered By Docstoc
					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 Abstract List of tables List of figures CHAPTER – 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.2 1.3 Industry Profile Company Profile Product Profile CHAPTER – 2: DEVELOPMENT OF MAIN THEME 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Need of the study Objectives of the study Scope of the study Limitations of the study Review of Literature CHAPTER – 3: ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Research Methodology Analysis & Interpretation Findings Suggestions Conclusion APPENDIX Questionnaire Bibliography I V 21 26 72 76 77 13 14 15 16 17 1 7 9 CHAPTERS PAGE. NO. I II IV

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, chisquare 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. 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7 3.2.8 TITLE OF TABLE Age of respondents Gender of respondents Occupation of respondents Number of members in a family Annual income of respondents Necessity of having a general insurance cover No. of general insurance policies held by respondents Are the general insurance policies taken from the same company No. of companies in which respondent is a policy holder Companies enjoying higher reputation amidst customers Awareness among the [COMPANY NAME] customers towards insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] Respondent‟s opinion towards customer-centric products offered by [COMPANY NAME] 3.2.13 Respondent‟s comment on the service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] 3.2.14 Sources by which the respondent‟s became familiar of [COMPANY NAME] 3.2.15 Period of insurance cover held by respondents 3.2.16 Amount of yearly insurance premium paid by respondents. 3.2.17 Respondent‟s comment on the yearly insurance PAGE NO 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

3.2.9

35

3.2.10

36

3.2.11

38

3.2.12

40

41

42

43 44

47

3.2.18

premium paid Satisfactory level of respondents towards the policy taken No. of respondent‟s having insurance agents

52

3.2.19 3.2.20 Respondent‟s comment on the service rendered by insurance agents 3.2.21 Claims rejected by insurance companies 3.2.22 Factors that influences customers to choose a particular company in buying an insurance policy 3.2.23 Respondent‟s satisfactory level towards various features of general insurance policy taken 3.2.24 Sources most preferred by respondents to know about an insurance company and its products 3.2.25 General Insurance cover that is most favored by respondents

57 59

61 62

64

68

69

LIST OF CHARTS
CHART NO. TITLE OF CHART PAGE NO 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33

3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5 3.2.6 3.2.7 3.2.8

Age of respondents Gender of respondents Occupation of respondents Number of members in a family Annual income of respondents Necessity of having a general insurance cover No. of general insurance policies held by respondents Are the general insurance policies taken from the same company No. of companies in which respondent is a policy holder Companies enjoying higher reputation amidst customers Awareness among the [COMPANY NAME] customers towards insurance schemes offered by [COMPANY NAME] Respondent‟s opinion towards customer-centric products offered by [COMPANY NAME]

3.2.9 3.2.10 3.2.11

35 37 38

3.2.12

40

3.2.13 Respondent‟s comment on the service rendered by [COMPANY NAME] 3.2.14 Sources by which the respondent‟s became familiar of [COMPANY NAME] 3.2.15 Period of insurance cover held by respondents 3.2.16 Amount of yearly insurance premium paid by respondents. 3.2.17 Respondent‟s comment on the yearly insurance premium paid

41

42

43 44 48

3.2.18 Satisfactory level of respondents towards the policy taken 3.2.19 No. of respondent‟s having insurance agents 3.2.20 Respondent‟s comment on the service rendered by insurance agents 3.2.21 Claims rejected by insurance companies 3.2.22 Factors that influences customers to choose a particular company in buying an insurance policy 3.2.23 Respondent‟s satisfactory level towards various features of general insurance policy taken 3.2.24 Sources most preferred by respondents to know about an insurance company and its products 3.2.25 General Insurance cover that is most favored by respondents

53 57 60

61 63

65

68

71

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 1818 Event 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   2000-01 2001-03 The IRDA was incorporated as a statutory body in April 2000. Foreign companies were allowed ownership of up to 26%.

Insurance Industry had 16 new entrants, 10 in Life and 6 in General Insurance 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 accountlevel profitability for large corporations and have expanded their shares by crosssubsidizing 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 detariffed 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 i =1 Ei 2. WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD χ² = 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 1 2 3 4 5 Age Less than 25 yrs 25-35 35-45 45-55 Above 55 yrs Total No. Of Respondents 43 32 20 12 13 120 Percentage (%) 35.83 26.67 16.67 10 10.83 100

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 30 25 No. of 20 respondents 15 10 5 0

35.83 26.67 16.67 10 10.83

Less 25-35 than 25 yrs

35-45

45-55

Above 55 yrs

Age in years

3.2.2 TABLE SHOWING GENDER OF RESPONDENTS S.No 1 2 Gender Male Female Total No. Of Respondents 81 39 120 Percentage (%) 67.5 32.5 100

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

No.of respondents

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Male Female 32.5

3.2.3 TABLE SHOWING OCCUPATION OF RESPONDENTS S.No 1 2 3 4 5 Occupation Service Govt. employee Business Professional Others Total No. Of Respondents 25 16 23 19 37 120 Percentage (%) 20.83 13.33 19.17 15.83 30.83 100

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
30.83

35

No. of respondents

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Service Govt. employee Business occupation Professional Others 20.83 13.33 19.17 15.83

3.2.4 TABLE SHOWING NUMBER OF MEMBERS IN A FAMILY S.No 1 2 3 No. of family members 2-4 5-8 More than 8 Total No. Of Respondents 91 29 120 Percentage (%) 75.83 24.17 100

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

No. of family members

More than 8

0

5 to 8

24.17

2 to 4 0 20 40 No.of respondents 60

75.83

80

3.2.5 TABLE SHOWING ANNUAL INCOME OF RESPONDENTS S.No 1 2 3 4 5 Annual income Less than Rs.2 lakhs Rs.2-5 lakhs Rs.5 -10 lakhs Rs.10-20 lakhs Above Rs.20 lakhs Total No. Of Respondents 31 51 20 9 9 120 Percentage (%) 25.83 42.5 16.67 7.5 7.5 100

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

No. of respondents

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Less than Rs.2-5 lakhs Rs.2 lakhs Rs.5 -10 lakhs Rs.10-20 lakhs Above Rs.20 lakhs 7.5 7.5 25.83 16.67

Annual Income

3.2.6 TABLE SHOWING THE NECESSITY OF HAVING A GENERAL INSURANCE COVER S.No Opinion No. Of Respondents RSA 1 2 Yes No Total 60 60 Other companies 60 60 RSA 100 100 Percentage (%) Other companies 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 50 40 No.of 30 respondents 20 10 0 yes

60

RSA Other companies 0 no 0

3.2.7 TABLE SHOWING NO. OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES HELD BY RESPONDENTS S.No 1 2 3 No. of policies 1 2-4 More than 4 Total No. Of Respondents 62 41 17 120 Percentage (%) 51.67 34.17 14.17 100

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 40 30 20 10 0 1

34.17 14.17

2 to 4 No.of policies

More than 4

3.2.8 TABLE SHOWING WHETHER THE GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES ARE TAKEN FROM THE SAME COMPANY S.No 1 2 Opinion Yes No Total No. Of Respondents 66 54 120 Percentage (%) 55 45 100

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

No.of respondents

45

50 40 30 20 10 0 Yes No

INTERVAL ESTIMATION: WHETHER THE GENERAL INSURANCE POLICIES TAKEN FROM THE SAME COMPANY Formula:
p  Z/2 pq 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  / 2 = 1.96 at 95% confidence level __________ pq Standard error = = .55 * .45 = 0.0454 n 120 Interval estimation= p  Z / 2 pq
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 1 2 3 No. of companies 2 companies 2-5 More than 5 companies Total No. Of Respondents 43 10 1 54 Percentage (%) 79.63 18.52 1.85 100

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

No.of respondents

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2 companies 2 to 5 More than 5 companies 18.51 1.851

3.2.10 TABLE SHOWING COMPANIES ENJOYING HIGH REPUTATION AMIDST CUSTOMERS. S.No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Companies [COMPANY NAME] TATA AIG Bajaj Allianz Iffco tokio ICICI Reliance Others Total No. Of Respondents 47 13 15 8 12 14 11 120 Percentage (%) 39.17 10.83 12.5 6.67 10 11.67 9.17 100

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 12% ICICI 10% Iffco tokio 7% Bajaj Allianz 12% TATA AIG 11% Royal Sundaram 39%

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

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:
p  Z/2 pq 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  / 2 = 1.96 at 95% confidence level __________ pq Standard error = = .75 * .25 = 0.056 n 60 Interval estimation= p  Z / 2 pq
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 1 2 3 4 5

Opinion Highly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Highly disagree Total

No. Of Respondents 5 48 5 2 60

Percentage (%) 8.3 80 8.3 3.3 100

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 Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Highly agree

0 3.3 8.3 80 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 1 2 3 4 5 Comment Excellent Very good Moderate Poor Very poor Total No. Of Respondents 23 30 7 60 Percentage (%) 38.33 50 11.67 100

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

40 30 20

38.33

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

3.2.14 TABLE SHOWING SOURCES BY WHICH THE RESPONDENTS BECAME FAMILIAR OF [COMPANY NAME] S.No 1 2 3 4 Source of information Ads (print, radio, TV) Insurance agents Friends & Relatives Others Total No. Of Respondents 21 14 25 60 Percentage (%) 35 23.33 41.67 100

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% Friends & Relatives 42%

Ads (print, radio, TV) 35%

Insurance agents 23%

3.2.15 TABLE SHOWING THE PERIOD OF INSURANCE COVER HELD BY RESPONDENTS. S.No 1 2 3 4 5 Period of insurance cover Annual policy 1-5 year 5-10 year 10-15 year Greater than 15 years Total No. Of Respondents 61 35 11 13 120 Percentage (%) 50.83 29.17 9.17 10.83 100

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.

period of insurance cover

greater than 5 years 10-15 year 5-10 year 1-5 year Annual policy

0 10.83 9.17 29.17 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 1 2 3 4 Yearly premium paid Less than Rs.5000 Rs.5000-15000 Rs.15000-25000 Greater than Rs.25000 Total No. Of Respondents 43 58 12 7 120 Percentage (%) 35.83 48.33 10 5.83 100

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 Rs.25000 Rs.15000-25000 Rs.5000-15000 Less than Rs.5000 0

5.83 10 48.33

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

Annual income

Less than Rs.2 lakhs

Rs.2-5 lakhs 51

Rs.5-10 lakhs 20

Rs.10-20 lakhs 9

Above Rs.20 lakhs 9

No. of respondents

31

Premium amount (X) 43 58 12 7 0

Annual income (Y) 31 51 20 9 9

∑ xy r = -------------------_________ √∑x2 - ∑ y2 __ __ x = (X - X) ; y = (Y - Y)

Premium (X) 43 58 12 7 0 ∑X = 120 x 13 28 -18 -23 0 x2 169 784 324 529 0 ∑ x2= 1806

Annual income (Y) 31 51 20 9 9 ∑ Y= 120 y 7 27 -14 -15 -15 y2 49 729 16 225 225 ∑ y2= 1244 __ X = 120 = 30 4 __ Y = 120 = 24 5 ∑ x2 = 1806 ; ∑ y2 = 1244 ; ∑ xy = 1264 xy 91 756 72 345 0 ∑ xy = 1264

r=

1264 -------------------------_____________ √1806 * 1244

= .8433

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 RSA Other co. 12 48 60

Percentage (%) RSA 65 35 100 100 20 80 Other Co.

1 2 3 4 5

Very high High Reasonable Low Very low Total

39 21 60

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 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
very high

80 65 RSA 35 20 Other Co.

no. of respondents

reasonable

very low

high

low

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

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

χ² =

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

Oi 0 27 34 0 0 0 10 25 0 0 0 7 4 0 0 0 7 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ei 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 Total

(Oi-Ei)2 0 1.156 1.156 0 0 0 23.766 23.766 0 0 0 5.406 5.406 0 0 0 2.176 2.176 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

(Oi-Ei)2/Ei 0 0.0446 .033 0 0 0 1.6 1.18 0 0 0 1.1564 .855 0 0 0 .394 .291 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 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 RSA Other cos. 5 53 2

Percentage (%) RSA 13.3 78.3 8.3 Other cos. 8.3 88.3 3.3

1 2 3

Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Neither satisfactory nor dissatisfactory

8 47 5

4 5

Dissatisfactory 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 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

no. of respondents

88.3 78.3

RSA Other Co. 13.3

8.3
satisfactory

8.3

3.3

0 0
dissatisfactory

0 0
highly dissatisfactory

highly satisfactory

neither satisfactory nor dissatisfactory

APPLYING CHI-SQUARE TEST BY COMPARING SATISFACTORY LEVEL TOWARDS GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY TAKEN AND THE YEARLY PREMIUM PAID Satisfactory level towards General insurance policy Premium amount Highly satisfactory Satisfactory Neither satisfactory nor dissatisfactory Less than Rs.5000 Rs.500015000 Rs.1500025000 More than Rs.25000 Total 13 100 7 0 0 120 3 2 2 0 0 7 7 3 2 0 0 12 0 57 1 0 0 58 3 38 2 0 0 43 Dissatisfactory Highly dissatisfactory Total

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 6.283 1.3 .7583 35.83 48.3 10 5.83 2.5083 3.383 .07 .4083 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Formulae: χ² = ∑ [(Oi – Ei) 2] with n-1 degrees of freedom i =1 Ei Oi 3 38 2 0 0 0 57 1 0 0 7 3 2 0 0 3 2 2 0 0 Ei 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 Total (Oi-Ei)2 2.75 4.7089 0.2584 0 0 39.48 75.69 5.68 0 0 32.49 49 3.725 0 0 5.025 14.67 2.5335 0 0 (Oi-Ei)2/Ei 0.5903 0.1314 0.1030 0 0 6.283 1.57 1.68 0 0 24.99 4.9 53.214 0 0 6.63 2.5163 6.205 0 0 108.813

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 RSA Other co. 31 29 60

Percentage (%) RSA 51.67 48.33 100 Other co. 51.67 48.33 100

1 2

Yes No Total

31 29 60

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

No.of respondents

51 50 49 48 47 46 yes no 48.33 48.33 RSA Other companies

INTERVAL ESTIMATION: RESPONDENTS HAVING INSURANCE AGENTS Formula:
p  Z/2 pq 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  / 2 = 1.96 at 95% confidence level ______________ pq Standard error = = .5166 * .4834 = 0.0456 n 120 Interval estimation= p  Z / 2 pq
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 RSA 1 2 3 4 5 Excellent Very good Moderate Poor Very poor Total 8 20 3 31 Other cos. 2 16 13 31 Percentage (%) RSA 25.8 64.5 9.7 100 Other cos. 6.5 51.6 41.9 100

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 60

64.5 51.6 41.9 Excellent Very good 25.8 Moderate Poor Very poor 0 OTHER CO. 0

No.of respondents

50 40 30 20 10 0 RSA

9.7 0 0

6.5

3.2.21 TABLE SHOWING THE CLAIMS REJECTED BY THE INSURANCE COMPANIES S.No Claims rejected by insurance companies 1 2 Yes No Total No. Of Respondents RSA 60 60 Other cos. 60 60 Percentage (%) RSA 100 100 100 Other cos. 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 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 yes

100

No.of respondents

RSA Other companies

0 no

0

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

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

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

No.of respondents

25 20 15 10 5

24.61 21.7 18.94 15.5 10.14 15.306 12.17 3.53

Excellent service/Responsiveness

0

Heard of good experience of others

Reputation

Good schemes

Low premium rates

Proper claim settlement

Easy accessibility

Others

3.2.23 TABLE SHOWING RESPONDENT’S SATISFACTORY LEVEL TOWARDS VARIOUS FEATURES OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY TAKEN S.No Attributes of general insurance cover 1 2 3 Low premium Claim settlement Larger risk coverage 4 Money back guarantee 5 Easy access to agents Total 84 341 149 26 0 21 39 58 2 120 7 41 62 10 120 9 26 21 92 86 83 Highly satisfied Satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 9 7 13 10 1 3 120 120 120 Dissatisfied Highly dissatisfied Total

600

3.2.23 CHART SHOWING RESPONDENT’S SATISFACTORY LEVEL TOWARDS VARIOUS FEATURES OF GENERAL INSURANCE POLICY TAKEN

100 90 80
no. of respondents

92 86 83 Highly satisfied 62 Satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Dissatisfied 26 21 9 910 0 13 7 10
Claim settlement

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Low premium

58

41

39

21 7 0 10 0
Money back guarantee

Highly dissatisfied

3

20
Easy access to agents

Larger risk coverage

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

1 2 3 7 7 9 9 10 10 13 21 21 26 39 41 58 62 83 86 92

1 2 3 4.5 4.5 6.5 6.5 8.5 8.5 10 11.5 11.5 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Ranks of low premium (R1) 6.5 20 6.5 8.5

Ranks of claim settlement (R2) 13 19 4.5 1

Ranks of larger risk coverage (R3) 11.5 18 10 3

Ranks of money back guarantee (R4) 5.5 15 17 8.5

Ranks of easy access to agents (R5) 11.5 14 16 2

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 1 2 3 4 Preferred source of information Ads (print, radio & TV) Insurance agents Friends & Relatives Others Total No. Of Respondents 31 44 42 3 120 Percentage (%) 25.83 36.67 35 2.5 100

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 35

36.67

35

No.of respondents

30 25 20 15 10 5 0

25.83

2.5

Ads (print, radio & TV)

Insurance agents

Friends & Relatives

Others

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

APPLYING WEIGHTED AVERAGE METHOD TO THE TABLE 3.2.25 8 Most favored insurance cover Auto/car insurance Health insurance Hospital cash insurance Personal accident insurance Travel insurance Householder‟s insurance Shopkeeper‟s insurance Others 16 7 92 4.72 8 5 11 24 72 7 8.25 7 1 4 5 3 22 77 53 35 37 1 2 9.9 12.72 6 5 7 38 65 4 6 17.67 4 85 34 2 15 64 29 4 9 65 16 13 17 4 2 1 24.7 23.306 19.94 1 2 3 1 7 2 6 3 5 4 4 5 3 6 2 7 1 8 W.A RANK

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 25 24.7 23.306 19.94 20 15 9.9 10 5 0 17.67 12.72 8.25 4.72

No.of respondents

Auto/car insurance

Health insurance

Personal accident insurance

Hospital cash insurance

Travel insurance

Householder’s insurance

Shopkeeper’s insurance

Others

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.


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: Sample college project and guidelines for reference