DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

4.0 Introduction

The main objective of this study was to explore the relationship between group dynamics and performance of youth owned enterprises in Kotido district. The researcher presents the findings of the study in this chapter using graphs, descriptive statistics, and frequencies.  Thus the findings are related to the response rate; results related to background information of respondents and enterprises; the relationship between communication and performance; the relationship between cohesion and performance and the relationship between membership and performance of youth owned enterprises. In addition, extracts from linear regression model out puts were used to test the hypothesis in determining relationship level of significance between the independent variables (communication, cohesion, and membership) and dependent variable (performance of youth owned enterprises).

4.1         Response rate

The response rate for this research was computed to determine the representativeness of the study population from which the sample was selected

Table 4.1: Response rate

Source: Primary data (2021)

The researcher expected to reach of a sample of 3 staff from the government sector was expected to be reached through key informant in-depth interviews, however, this study managed to reach 3 staff, representing 100% response rate, it also intended to reach 2 non-governmental organisation staff and it reached 2 representing 100%, and finally for the questionnaires the study aimed at reaching 197 respondents, but was able to reach only 155 representing 78% Considering the mixed method approach employed by this study, the overall response rate was  89%.

A 100% response rate was not achieved mainly due to insecurity in Kotido and also due to the fact that some groups could not be traced, Key informants were also not reached due to their busy working schedules. Options could have been to email questionnaires, but this was not possible given the fact that the population was illiterate and could to access emails.  The research team also found out that some groups had closed businesses but could not ascertain how many they were due to the insecurity in the area.

Generally, the response rate in Table 4.1 was 89%.  According to Weaver, Beebe and Rockwood (2019), a response rate above or equal to 66.7% is acceptable to reflect the generalizability of the findings to the targeted population. Because of this inference, the sample that participated in the study was assumed sufficient. Considering Omona, (2013) the response rate was good and therefore the study could be conducted since the response rate was above 70%, while the response rate for interview respondents is 100%. The data therefore still remained representative of the population with a new calculated margin of error being 10% as opposed to the original 5%.

• Background information

This section presents analysis of the study;

4.2.1 Demographic Information of Respondents

Demographics information is vital to ensure that the samples participating in the study have a distribution similar to the population from which the participants are based on their characteristics. This determines the accuracy and representativeness of the information from the sample of the population.

In this section, participants were asked about their age, gender, type of enterprise and source of fund for their enterprises.

Table 4.1 Respondents’ age, sex type of business, sources of business funds, date of registration

Source: Field primary (2022)

Sex of respondents: The findings in the study indicates that majority of the respondents in the study were male 95 (62.3%) while only 60(38.7%) were female. this finding therefore shows that both gender participated in the study. In this study therefore, this implied that all the gender was represented and therefore, the study is not biased.

Age of respondents: The study revealed that 36% of the group members were between the ages of 25 to 35 years, 62% were between the ages of 18 to 25 years, and then 2% were below 18 years. This implied that the majority of the group members were between the ages of 18 to 25 years, justifying the fact that the group enterprises are youth owned, and the Uganda constitution posits that youth range from the ages of 18 to 35 years.

Date of registration: 12.5% of youth group enterprises were registered with the ministry of labour, gender and social development office in Kotido district between 2012 and 2015, 27.9% between 2016 and 2018, and 59.6% from 2019 onwards. This implied that the majority of the youth owned groups were registered with the district gender and social development office from the year 2019 and above.

Type of enterprise: results showed that, 35% stated that their groups were in agriculture for the purpose of selling and buying of animals, 19% in cereal banking, then 46% for small retailing business like shops. This meant that the youth enterprises were embracing the concept of turning their agricultural activities into commercial activities to give their enterprises a going concern to help them earn an income.

Sources of funds: 21% stated that they got their funding from non-governmental organizations, 53% stated that they got their funds from government, youth livelihood fund, and 26% stated that they got their funds from other sources. This implied that most of the youth owned enterprises got their funding from government, and youth livelihood fund. However, among a moderate number of respondents that pointed out getting funding from other source, all of them pointed out that they got it from Village savings and loan Association (VSLA).

• Empirical results on each of the variables in this study

Empirical findings as per objectives of the study were presented in tables. Respondents were presented with items and requested to either agree or disagree basing on a five Likert scale of; Strongly Agree(SA), Agree(A), Neutral (N), Disagree(D) ,  Strongly Disagreed(SD). SA+A= Agreed,   SD+D= Disagreed, N=Undecided/neutral.  The study grouped SA and A to mean agreed, SD and D to mean disagree, and N to mean respondents who were undecided.  Percentages, Mean and standard deviation were used to interpret empirical results.  The mean above 3 implied that majority agreed, and that below 3 means disagreed while 3 imply undecided/neutral.

4.3 Descriptive analysis

This section presents the analysis of respondents of the study;

4.3.1        Descriptive results about communication and performance of youth owned enterprises Group.

Table 4.2: Relationship between communication and performance of youth owned enterprises

Source: Primary Data

The table results shows that majority of the members asserted that they sometimes communicate to group members because of certain identities (sex, age, affiliations), this is indicated by a high mean value off 4.32 therefore in a nutshell members communicate to the group members on specific affiliations like sex and age further showing that there is need for further training of members to understand the main purpose of the group as sex and age are the key core reasons for the participation in the group.

On findings out if the members often communicate to the group members regularly the study results indicates that, members do not often communicate to the group members, this further showed that members do not communicate with their fellow members.

On finding whether Members of the group communicate freely, the results from the mean value of 4.1 indicated that majority of the respondents strongly agreed that members communicate freely.

Frequency of respondents’ communication with other group members. The figure 4.3 shows whether respondents often communicate with other group members regularly (meaning weekly). 49(31.6%) strongly disagreed to the statement that they often communicated with other group members regularly, 61(39.4%) disagreed to the statement, then 26 (16.8%) agreed and 19(12%) strongly agreed. This implied that since most of the respondents strongly disagreed and disagreed to the statement 31.6% and 39.4% respectively, it was evident that respondents did not communicate with other group members regularly on a weekly basis.

The information got from interviews showed some of the leaders saying that communication among group members with other youth groups creates good relationship, in-terms of sharing ideas. As it was indicated from one of the respondents who indicated that;

“communication shared among groups was to allow inform member about the fines and laws on the loans accessed and loan payment periods and most of the times most members do not communicate amongst each other since most of them are engaged in different business”.

While another group embers further stated that;

“We do not have platform were we share communication we only receive communication from the share person during meetings”

This therefore meant that since group members barely communicate with other group members, the flow of vital information about loan repayments, laws that govern loan repayment, and sharing of new ideas to run the youth enterprises was limited, thus affecting the performance of the group.

Communication among group members:  when respondents were asked whether they communicated freely with members in their same groups, 107(69%) agreed that they communicated freely, 27(17.4%) strongly agreed, 4.8% were not sure, 2(1.3%) disagreed, and 13(8.4%) strongly disagreed. This meant that the youth communicated amongst themselves in their groups since most of the respondents agreed to the statement.

In the information from the interviews, top officials pointed out that communication among members usually helps them to solve internal issues/challenges, and creates unity among individual group members. This was further pointed out by one of the top officials who asserted that;

 “Communication in the groups is highly encouraged and members are free because they know themselves, that is why they freely communicate”

This meant that since the youth group members communicated freely among themselves in their groups, challenges and issues are solved, and unity among the members is achieved.

This was further quoted during the interview were he members indicated that;

“Everyone in the group is allowed to air out their grievances so eliminate discontentment among the group members as that has the potential of breaking the group’s cohesion and future survival any disagreement aired out is resolved there and then”.

• Descriptive results about cohesion and performance of youth owned enterprises

4.3 Relationship between cohesion and performance of youth owned enterprises

Source: primary data

Findings from the study revealed that the mean value was 2.55 indicating majority of the respondents disagreed with the statement that they engage in setting up goals and agree on them with the rest of group,  This could imply that during decision making some members dominate the decision-making process. On checking the frequency results further showed that; 92 (59.6%) of the respondents disagreed, while 17(11.5%) strongly disagreed and only 28(18.3%) Agreeing, 14(9.6%) strongly agreeing.

According to the information got from the interviews, the leaders and district heads stated that abiding by the rules/norms; vision and mission were done through coordination among members to support the groups in realizing their objectives. The interviews also pointed out that through following rules/norms, the youth can be mobilized, and this was done through community sensitization.

This information about cohesiveness showed that the youth in the youth owned enterprises abide by the group enterprise norms/rules, and are also made to feel comfortable being part of their groups. Following the group rules and comfort members of the groups feel, means that the youth group enterprises are run according to set guidelines.

This study results correlates with the interview findings were one of the members assert that;

“not everyone makes the decision, the chairperson and the treasurer and the final people who decide for us because we elected them to speak on behalf us, due to many members if all groups members make decision we shall delay and keep on rotating in one thing.

On findings out if members could abide by the group norms/rules the study results mean value of 4.2 indicated that majority of the respondents disagreed with the findings that they often interact with members of their group. It is therefore fair to say that members do not interact with the members of their group.

The frequency findings further indicated that; 105 (68.3%) of the members Agreed and 46 (29.8) strongly agreed that they abide by group rules and norms. This further indicated that the members are committed to the group, in a nutshell indicating that members in the group follow rules and regulations.

The findings from Interview further indicted that one of the respondents during the interview asserted that;

“The group is bigger than all of us and that is why it is imperative for all the members to obey the rules and regulations of the group”

According to the findings in the study majority 4.32 strongly agreed with the fact that they feel being part of the group, which therefore indicates that members are united and feel valued in their different groups. This further supported by the fact that the group members know each other and therefore they are able to feel part of the group.

The frequency findings if members feel being part of the group, it was discovered that majority 95(61.5%) of the respondents agreed and 31(20%) strongly agreed, this study results further indicated that members indeed feel part of the group.

This was also further indicated by one of the respondents in the interview who echoed that;

 “We are all in the group for the same purpose therefore I personally feel part of the group because my friends and me all have the same target to better our lives since we are from the same village”.

• Membership and performance of youth owned enterprises.

This section provides information about membership of the respondents.

Table 4.4: Membership and performance of youth owned enterprises

Source: field primary data

Table 4.4 showed that respondents agreed 67(64.4%) with a mean of 4.2 that membership to their groups was restricted. Respondents also agreed 67(64.4%) with a mean of 4.3 that they understood requirements for entry to their group. Respondents strongly disagreed 75(72.1%) with a mean of 1.6 that they understood requirements for exit from their groups.

One of the interviewed respondents said that “strict adherence to group entry requirements ensures that only validated group members join the group enterprises”.

Another respondent said that “adherence to group rules enables the group to achieve its objectives, and can attract investors”.

This implied that most of the respondents agreed that they understood requirements for entry to their group, and that that they understood requirements for entry to their group enterprises. However, respondents disagreed that they understood requirements for exit from the group.

The interview information pointed out that some group members exit groups without understanding exit requirements, and in the end, when group members exit the groups, the savings funds and social funds are affected, and this also affects the group’s activities derailing their progress to improving the enterprise’s performance.

This could mean that respondents rush to enter the groups for the search of daily income businesses, but do not read both rules for entry and exit. This affects performance of the group since the youth do not fully understand the objectives of the group.

Information from the interview differed from this statement and leaders stated that youth members communicated to them saying that they were not satisfied with what their groups do, and the members gave a reason stating that they did not think that their individual group members were transparent with them on finances received to help their groups. The information from the interviews also pointed out that there were some misunderstandings among group members.

This implied that group budgets and expenditure information were shared with group members, and that group members were satisfied with their groups’ achievements and work. But the information also implied that the group members did not feel that their group finances were utilized properly. The information from the respondents added that group planned tasks were not completed in time.

This view was also justified but some leaders when they were interviewed, and they noted that the groups did not complete their planned groups in time, and they provided a reason that the tasks were not completed because youth group members had inadequate resources (financing), and limited guidance from relevant stakeholders.

This means that failing to complete tasks in time, the limited transparency between group leaders and m

embers, and the misunderstandings among members in the groups derailed the performance of youth owned enterprises.

• Performance of youth owned enterprises

This section provides information about the dependent variable performance of youth owned enterprises using a descriptive statistics table.

• PERFORMANCE of youth owned enterprises

Source: Primary Data

The descriptive statistics table 4.11 showed that respondents agreed 66(63.5%) that their group budgets and expenditures information are shared with group members weekly with a mean of 4.1. the table also showed that respondents 61(58.7%) strongly disagreed to the statement that they felt their group finances were utilized appropriately, with a mean of 1.9. Respondents also strongly disagreed 57(54.8%) that group planned tasks were completed in time, with a mean of 1.8. Finally, respondents agreed 60(57.7%) that they were satisfied with their group, for-example with work and achievements (mean=4.3).

Information from the interview differed from this statement and leaders stated that youth members communicated to them saying that they were not satisfied with what their groups do, and the members gave a reason stating that they did not think that their individual group members were transparent with them on finances received to help their groups. The information from the interviews also pointed out that there were many misunderstandings among group members.

This implied that group budgets and expenditure information were shared with group members, and that group members were satisfied with their groups’ achievements and work. But the information also implied that the group members did not feel that their group finances were utilized properly. The information from the respondents added that group planned tasks were not completed in time.

This view was also justified but some leaders when they were interviewed, and they noted that the groups did not complete their planned groups in time, and they provided a reason that the tasks were not completed because youth group members had inadequate resources (financing), and limited guidance from relevant stakeholders.

This means that failing to complete tasks intime, the limited transparency between group leaders and members, and the misunderstandings among members in the groups derailed the performance of youth owned enterprises.

• Inferential analysis – multiple regression

In this section, analysis of data on the three null hypotheses is done and accordingly interpreted: Pearson correlation was used in establishing the relationship between the independent variables and dependent variables, and regressions (model summary) were run to establish the variance (contribution) of the IV on the DV.

• Inferential results about communication and performance of youth owned enterprises.

Considering the first objective, the null hypothesis tests between communication and performance of youth owned enterprises can be seen as below

Table 4.6: Communication and performance of youth owned enterprises.

Model summary Table 4.6 provides the R and R2 (R-squared) values, where the R value represents a simple correlation of 0.221; this indicates a lower correlation between communication and performance in youth-owned firms. The R2 value shows how much the performance of youth-owned businesses varies, which can be explained by the communication variable under group dynamics. From Table 4.3, it can be seen that the coefficient of determination is 0.049, that is, about 4.9% of the changes in the performance of young enterprises are explained by communication, and the remaining 51% are explained by other factors.

Table 4.7; Anova test

Table 4.7 is an Anova table, shows a whether the hypothesis test between communication and performance of youth owned businesses. The Anova table information revealed that at p-value of 0.024, the null hypothesis was rejected. With an alpha of P=.05 level significance acceptance level, there is enough evidence to conclude that there is a statistically significant relationship between communication and performance of youth owned businesses. The meant that communication predicts the performance of youth owned enterprises

• Inferential results about cohesion and performance of youth owned enterprises

Considering the first objective, the null hypothesis (H_O), this section presents hypothesis tests between cohesion and performance of youth owned enterprises.

Table 4.8: Model summary cohesion and performance of youth owned enterprises

The model summary table 4.8 provided the R and R² values where the R value represents a simple correlation of 0.359, indicating that there is a high degree correlation between cohesion and performance of youth owned enterprises. The R² value indicated how much variation in performance of youth owned enterprises that could be explained by the cohesion variable under group dynamics. From the table 4.6, the coefficient of determination was 0.129, meaning that about 12.9% of the variation in performance of youth owned enterprises was explained by cohesion, and the remaining 87.1% was explained by other factors.

Table 4.9: Anova tests cohesion and performance of youth owned enterprises

Table 4.9 is an Anova table, shows a whether the hypothesis test between cohesion and performance of youth owned businesses. The Anova table information revealed that at p-value of 0.000<0.05, the null hypothesis was rejected. With an alpha of P=.05 level significance acceptance level, there is enough evidence to conclude that there is a statistically significant relationship between cohesion and performance of youth owned businesses. The meant that cohesion predicts the performance of youth owned enterprises.

• Inferential results about membership and performance of youth owned enterprises

Inferential statistics for membership and performance of youth owned enterprises considering the  third objective, the null hypothesis (H_O), membership and performance is discussed.

This section presents the inferential statistics for membership and performance of youth owned enterprises in key areas like ANOVA, regression and chi-square test

Table 4.10: ANOVA analysis of membership and performance of youth owned enterprises

In analysis of the variables membership and performance it was revealed that the significance value (P-value 0.000<0.05, indicating that there membership influences performance of youth owned enterprise. This study results further indicates that the null hypothesis is rejected and therefore the alternative hypothesis is accepted. The findings further shows that membership has a significant influence on performance on youth owned enterprises.

Table 4.11: Regression analysis of the of the relationship between communication and performance

In analysis on the regression of the study it was discovered that a unit improvement in communication would on average lead to 0.314 increase in performance, this study results shows that when communication improves there is an increase in performance. This is also further statistically significant since P-value 0.024<0.05. Showing that there is a significant relationship between communication and performance. Therefore reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis.

Table 4.13: Regression analysis of the relationship between cohesion and performance

In the regression analysis of the relationship between cohesion and performance it was discovered that a unit increase in cohesion will lead to 0.379 improvement in performance this findings further shows cohesion improves performance by a considerable amount. This is statistically significant since P-value 0.000<0.379 indicating that there is a significant relationship between cohesion and performance this findings further rejects null hypothesis and accepts the alternative hypothesis.

Table 4.14: Regression analysis between membership and performance

Dependent variable: Performance

According to regression analysis results it has been observed that a unit improvement in membership will lead to 0.465 increase in performance. This further shows that membership enhance performance of youth projects. This is statistically significant since the P-value of 0.000< 0.05 , indicating membership has a significant relationship with performance. This finding further rejects null hypothesis and accepts the alternative hypothesis.

• Findings of correlation analysis

This section presents the correlation analysis f the study variables

Table 4.15: Correlation analysis of the relationship between communication and performance

Table 4.16: Correlation analysis of the relationship between cohesion and performance

In the analysis of Pearson correlation on table 4.9, it was discovered that cohesion and performance have Pearson correlation coefficient which 0.367**, indicating that there is a weak positive relation between performance and cohesion, however this is statistically significant.

Table 4.17: Relationship between Membership and performance

From the analysis of the Pearson correlation in table 4.10, there is slightly weak, positive and significant relationship between performance and membership. This factor shows that performance is affected by many factors not necessarily only membership, there are other factors. This is also statistically significant since the P-value 0.000<0.005.

4.10 Conclusion

This chapter provided an analysis of the data from the questionnaires, and displayed it via frequency tables, descriptive statistics tables, and pie charts. This information was aided with data from the interview guides that helped in providing a wider understanding of the information in the questionnaires. In addition, the chapter provided linear regression tables that showed the variation between the group communication, cohesion, membership, and performance of youth owned enterprises. The linear regression also tested for significance between the variables to provide information about the hypothesis tests.

From the analysis, the following can be drawn.

There is a significant relationship between communication and performance,

There is a significant relationship between communication and performance,

From the Pearson correlation, cohesion and performance have Pearson correlation coefficient which 0.367**, indicating that there is a weak positive relation between performance and cohesion, though this is statistically significant.

There is a positive and significant relationship between membership and performance.

Hence performance is affected by many factors not necessarily only one variable such as membership.

The next chapter five provides a summary, discussion, conclusion and recommendations of the findings in , and in addition, chapter five provides areas of further study.