analysis with calculation) with comment
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
1/19
This chapter presents and discusses findings of the research in a systematic way. It starts by
briefly discussing the profiles of the employees. The subsequent three sections present and
discuss findings that relates to research objectives; components of performance of operations
management, components of business development, relationship among the performance of
business development and business development and to find out the fact whether operations
management of Ladbrokes has the ability to develop businesses.
Employee profile:
Gender:
The majority of the employees were representing male 75% and female 25%
Gender Frequency Percentage
Male 23 75%Female 7 25%Total 30 100%
Experience group:
Number of Years Frequency Percentage
1 2 years 2 6.67%3 5 years 4 13.33%6 8 years 8 26.67%
9 11 years 11 36.67%More than 12 years 5 16.66%
Total 30 100%
Position Group:
Level Position Frequency Percentage
Junior Deputy Manager 13 43.33%
Senior
Manager 14 46.66%
Supervisor 2 6.66%
Area Manager 1 3.33%
Total 30 100%
Comment [m1]: I have change that on entire
document junior level manager and senior level
manager
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
2/19
Components of Operations Management
To identify the components of operations management that influence the business development
of Ladbrokes the author has interviewed the employees of Ladbrokes. The author has also used
previous related literature to determine the components of operations management.
SL Components of Operations Management
1 Service quality & customer-satisfaction
2 Fast delivery time
3 On-time delivery
4 Awareness about operational procedures
5 Resource allocation & utilization
6 Maintain a sound working environment
7 Service quality & customer focus
8 Productivity & efficiency
9 Low cost operations
10 High-performance design
11 Consistent quality management
12 Development speed
13 Motivational & Leadership skill
14 Awareness about operational procedures
15 Creativity & Innovation
Components of Business Development:
To identify the components of Business development the author has used the information given by the
employees of Ladbrokes during the interview. The author has also used previous study about business
development.
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
3/19
SL Components of Business Development
1 Market share
2 Customer retention & acquisition
3 Customer profitability
4 Product/service profitability
5 New Product development & Product diversification
6 Increased sales & promotional activities
Measuring the Performance of Operations Management of Ladbrokes:
To measure the performance of operations management the author has used 15 statements against which
the employees are requested to mark a rating that will evaluate the performance based on the identified
components of operations management. The employees were asked for a self-assessment of their
performance. The 5 Likert Scale was used to convert their performance in to measurable values in order
to perform a quantitative analysis.
Score criteria were as below:
1- Performance does not meet the criteria.
2- Performance is less than the standard criteria.
3- Performance is meeting the standard criteria.
4- Performance is above the standard criteria.
5- Performance is above the standard criteria and meeting more than expectations.
The 15 statements were sub-divided in to four groups to measure the performance of operations
management based on: Customer base, Procedures & practices, Business & productivity and
Leadership ability . These four groups were again categorized in to more attributes from which it has
become very easy to measure the performance of operations management.
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
4/19
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
5/19
Major attributes that describes the measurement of performance management in the context of business
development are customer based, procedures & practices, business & productivity and leadership
behavior. Findings shows that 20.25% score was associated with customer base, 26.08% score associated
with procedure & practices, business & productivity comprised of 33.53 score and leadership behavior
comprised of 20.14% score.Appendix D & E
Table: Performance Management
Performance Criteria
Attributes
Frequency as per Likert
Scale
Mean for
eachcategory
Interpretatio
n
Customers based 1 2 3 4 5
Provide, manage and sustain the
front-line service to customers that
will enhance the companys
positions as well as to encourage
repeat business.
Service quality &
customer-
satisfaction
0 1 8 11 10 4.00
Performance
is above the
standard
criteria
Develop and maintain a working
knowledge of products and
services to support business
operations.
Product & service
knowledge0 3 8 13 6 3.73
Performance
is meeting the
standard
criteria
Identify opportunities to offerappropriate products and services
to meet customer needs and
expectations.
New product orservices
development &
diversification
0 3 9 13 5 3.67
Performanceis meeting the
standard
criteria
Procedures and practices
Manage the use of related
equipment to support the business
plan
Resource
allocation,
utilization & cost
minimization.
0 3 11 9 7 3.67
Performance
is meeting the
standard
criteria
Carry out relevant procedures in
the event of emergency.Awareness about
operational
procedures
0 2 9 12 7 3.80
Performance
is meeting the
standard
criteria
Develop and maintain a health and
safety working environment
Developing &
Maintaining a
safety working
0 2 9 14 5 3.73Performance
is meeting the
standard
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
6/19
environment criteria
Develop and maintain positive
work environment.
Developing a
customer friendly
working
environment
0 3 10 9 8 3.73
Performance
is meeting the
standard
criteria
Business and productivity
Control of business margin in
order to achieve plan Goal achieving
attitude & effort0 2 13 8 7 3.67
Performance
is meeting the
standard
criteria
Monitor, anticipate and respond to
competitor activity as appropriate.
Review and spot opportunities for
business development.
Selecting
appropriate
courses of actions
to gain
competitive
advantages over
the rivals.
0 1 7 17 5 3.87
Performanceis meeting the
standard
criteria
Implement staff activities to
achieve objectives within the
business plan.
Sound Team work
to achieve
business plan
0 2 8 7 13 4.03
Performance
is above the
standard
criteria
Implementing Human Resources
policies and procedure within the
authority levels
Comply with
human resources
policies & rules
0 4 7 12 7 3.73
Performance
is meeting the
standard
criteria
Lead meetings and group
discussions of the team to solve
problems and make decisions.
Problem solving
& Decision
making skill.
0 0 9 15 6 3.90
Performance
is meeting the
standard
criteria
Leadership Behaviors
Motivates and develops the team.Leadership &
Motivational skill0 1 10 12 7 3.83
Performance
is meeting the
standard
criteria
Aware of attitudes and views of
others and able to adjust approach
accordingly.
Relationship with
the co-workers.0 1 11 11 7 3.80
Performance
is meeting the
standard
criteria
Comes up with creative ideas for
improvements
Creativity &
Innovation0 2 7 13 8 3.90 Performance
is meeting the
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
7/19
standard
criteria
From the above table it is found that the performance is meeting the standard criteria for the
employees of the operations management of Ladbrokes.
Relationship between Performance of Operations management and business development
in the context of Ladbrokes:
One of the objectives of this research was to find out whether there is a relationship between performance
of operations management and business development. The researcher has conducted a survey among the
employees of Ladbrokes in order to measure their performance and also the employees were asked to give
their view based on their performance and experience whether Ladbrokes has the ability to maximize
profitability and turnover by sustaining the provision of products.
The question was: As a result of your experience, does management performance affects the ability to
maximize profitability and turnover by sustaining the provision of products? The employees were
given opportunity to show their view based on the following scores:
1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=neutral, 4=agree, 5=strongly agree
Strongly Strongly
Disagree Agree
1 2 3 4 5
After collecting the information from questionnaires and interview sheet, the score of performance
measurement and the score of business development was processed and analyzed. The researcher has
developed a structured model, where business development was a dependent variable that depends on the
independent variable performance of operations management.
Business development (Y) Performance of Operations management (X)
Depends on
The score obtained from the business development was indicated by Y and the score obtained from the
performance measurement was indicated by X. The researcher then analyzed the scores and tried to find
out whether there is a relationship between X and Y through the use ofcorrelation of co-efficient (r). In
1890 A.D. Karl Pearson first introduced a formula to measure the relationship between two
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
8/19
variables. The formula is described in Appendix:F. Karl-Pearson Correlation of co-efficient is used
to find out a relationship between two (2) variables. The value of r is between +1 and -1. Where +1
indicates a positive relation and -1 indicates a negative relation.
After processing and analyzing of data the researcher found the value ofr = +0.91, which indicates that
there exists a positive and strong relationship between Business development and Performance of
Operations Management. The calculation of correlation co-efficient of r is described in Appendix: F.
From the above description it can be concluded that greater performance ofOperations Management
leads to a remarkable and sound Business Development.
Business Development ability of Ladbrokes:
Based on their performance and experience the employees were asked a question to explore their view
whether their performance is in a standard level to develop more business by their organization in East
London.
Total score obtained from the 30 employees was 126. Average Mean was 4.20 which fall in the category
4.20 (Agree). That means the employees view about business development against their performance and
experience was that Ladbrokes will be able to develop their business in East London.
Business DevelopmentFrequency as per Likert
Scale Mean Interpretation
Statement Attributes 1 2 3 4 5
As a result of your experience,
does management performance
affects the ability to maximize
profitability and turnover by
sustaining the provision of
products?
Business
Development
ability0 0 7 10 13 4.20 Agree
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
9/19
All the employees were divided into 2 groups:
(i) Senior level employee and
(ii) Junior level employee.
The number of senior level employee was 17 & their total score about Ladbrokes Business development
ability was 69. The number of junior level employee was 13 and their total score on business development
was 57.
Employee Category No of Employees Percentage Points (%)
Senior Level Employee 17 54.76
Junior Level Employee 13 45.24
Total 30 100
Business DevelopmentFrequency as per Likert
ScaleMean for
each
category
Interpretation
Employee Category 1 2 3 4 5
Senior Level Employee0 0 4 8 5
4.06Agree
Junior Level Employee0 0 3 2 8
4.38Agree
Now the author will test whether there is any significant difference between the expressions of these 2
groups about the business development ability of Ladbrokes. The expression is measured in terms of
Mean. The mean of score collected from Manager level employees about business development ability of
Ladbrokes was 4.38 and the mean of score collected from Officer level employees about business
development ability of Ladbrokes was 4.06.
t-test was first introduced by W.S. Gosset in 1908 A.D. t-statistics is used to evaluate means
collected from 2 groups when sample size is small, i.e. less than 30. In short, Gosset developed a test
statistic that took into account the greater sampling error associated with small samples. Box, J. F.
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
10/19
(1987). We use this test for comparing the means of two samples. Generally speaking, the t-test
compares the actual difference between two means in relatio n to the variation in the data,
expressed as the standard deviation of t he difference between the means .
John Berry and Pasi Sahlberg (1996) have used t-statistics in their research to investigate whether there
is any significant difference in ideas of learning between 2 students group. In our research we will use t-
statistics to find out whether there is any significant difference between the comments of Junior level
employees and Senior level employees. The formula of t-statist ics is described in Appendix G.
Employee Category Junior Level Employee Senior Level Employee
Sample Size 13 17
Mean 4.38 4.06
Standard Deviation 0.730.84
Two Hypotheses was constructed, Null Hypothesis and Alternative Hypothesis. In Null Hypothesis it is
assumed that there is no significant difference between these two mean and in Alternative Hypothesis it is
assumed that there exists a significant difference between these two mean.
Construction of Hypothesis:
H ypothesis testingor significance testing is a rule that decides on the acceptance or rejection of the null
hypothesis based on the results of random samples of the population under consideration . The result is
found by using statistical tools.Professor John Berry (2005).
According to SP Gupa A hypothesis which states that there is no difference between assumed and
actual value of the parameter is the null hypothesis . Prabir Roy & M.A. Kalam, (2001)
As per V.K. Kapoor Any hypothesis which is complementary to the null hypothesis is called an
alternative hypothesis. Prabir Roy & M.A. Kalam (2001)
Null Hypothesis
Comment [m2]: Can you please double check
argument on both hypothesis done on proper
academic way. Find out i t from any reliable sourc
like journals, research methodology documents,
other dissertation etc
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
11/19
H0: There is no significant difference between the mean of senior level employees and junior level
employees.
Alternative Hypothesis
H1: There is a significant difference between the mean of senior level employees and junior level
employees.
T-statistics was used to test these 2 hypothesis as the sample size of junior level employee is n1=13 which
is less than 30 and the sample size of Senior level employee is n2=17 which is also less than 30. After
necessary calculations the value oftwas found t=1.14. On the other hand at 5% level of significance and
at 28 (13+17-2) degree of freedom the table value of t = 1.701 . As calculated value oft=1.14 is less than
the table value of t = 1.701, so Null Hypothesis H0 is accepted. And alternative Hypothesis H1 is
rejected. Appendix G
Null Hypothesis
H0: There is no significant difference between the mean of junior level employees and senior level
employees. (Accepted)
Alternative Hypothesis
H1: There is a significant difference bet ween the mean of junior level employees and senior level
employees. (Rejected)
That means there is no significant difference between the two means. Hence the comments about business
development ability of Ladbrokes obtained from the two groups of Senior level Employees and Junior
level employees dont have any disagreement.
So, from the employees point of view it can be concluded that Ladbrokes has the ability to develop their
business in East London area.
Business Performance Analysis:
The author has taken interview of Ladbrokes management in order to find out the status of some business
performance indicators.
Business Development factors Status
Number of shops Increasing
Number of products Increasing
Product Diversification & new product Increasing
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
12/19
Implementation
Market share Increasing
Customer retention Increasing
Service quality Increasing
Employee efficiency Increasing
Cost control Optimum
Volume of sales Increasing
Profitability Increasing
Economic Decision Making Skill Improving
Financial condition Increasing
Resource availability Increasing
Creativity & Innovation Increasing
Fig: Business Performance Analysis Table
For security & privacy reasons many information was not disclosed by the management. But It was found
that the status of most of the indicators was sound and in an increasing condition.
Please do a swot analysis hereand make
comments about business development ability of Ladbrokes based on swot
analysis.
Summary:
In this chapter the researcher processed and analyzed the collected data to find out the answers of
the research objectives. The chapter starts by presenting the profiles of the employees of the
Ladbrokes operations management by showing their gender and length of service. The researcher
has identified the components of operations management and the components of business
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
13/19
development. Then the researcher measured the performance of operations management by using
questionnaires. The author has measured the performance of operations management based on
four criteria: (i) Customer based (ii) Procedures & practices (iii) Business & productivity (iv)
Leadership behavior. A 5 point Likert scale was used to measure the performance. Finding
shows that 20.25% score was associated with customer base, 26.08% score associated with
procedure & practices, business & productivity comprised of 33.53 score and leadership
behavior comprised of 20.14% score. The mean performance of the operations management was
found 3.80 (Performance meets standard criteria). Next the author found a positive relationship
between Business Development and Performance of Operations Management by using the correlation of
co-efficient (r). The value of r was +0.91 which indicates a strong relationship between Business
Development and Performance of Operations Management. Then the author analyzed the comments of
two employee groups: Senior level employees and junior level employees about business development
ability of Ladbrokes using 5 Likert Scale and found a Mean = 4.2 indicate employees have a positive
attitude and standard performance level in business development capability. The Mean of Senior level
employees and junior level employees about business development ability was 4.06 & 4.38 respectively.
The author then tested these two mean by using t statistics and developed Hypothesis to check whether
there is any significant difference between the comments of these 02 (two) groups of employee category
and found that there is no significant difference. In the next section the author has drawn a business
performance analysis of Ladbrokes by measuring the status of the various business factors and found that
all the indicators are in an increasing trend which points out positive business development ability.
Considering the above facts it can be concluded that the performance of operations management of
Ladbrokes is above standard level to develop businesses in East London area
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
14/19
Reference:
1. Box, J. F. (1987), Guinness, Gosset, Fisher, and small samples. StatisticalScience, 2(1), 4552.
2. Cox, J.F., Blackstone, J.H. and Schleier, J.G. (2003), Managing Operations: A Focus onExcellence.
3. Colin Armistead and Simon Machin (2007), Implications of business process management foroperations management, The Business School at Bournemouth University, Bournemouth, UK.
4. John Berry and Pasi Sahlberg (1996), Investigating pupils ideas of learning, Centre forTeaching Mathematics, University of Plymouth, UK.
5. Lynch, R.L. and Cross, K.F. (1991), Measure up! The Essential Guide to Measuring BusinessPerformance, Mandarin, London.
6. Larry P. Ritzman, Lee J. Krajewski, (2006), Operations Management, Strategy and Analysis.
7. Mahesh C. Gupta and Lynn H. Boyd (2006), Theory of constraints: A theory for operationsmanagement, College of Business, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, USA.
8. Nottingham University UK. 2010. [online] Available athttp://www.nottingham.ac.uk/nubs/Divisions/OpsMan/Research.html, [Accessed December 03
2010]
9. Porter, L., Oakland, J. and Gadd, K. (1998), ``Unlocking business performance with self-assessment'', Management Accounting, Vol. 76 No. 8, pp. 35-7.
10.Professor John Berry (2005), Quantitative Methods in Education Research, Centre forTeaching Mathematics, University of Plymouth.
11.Prabir Roy & M.A. Kalam, (2001), Business Statistics.
12.Schroeder, R. (2008), Operations Management, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, New York, NY.
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
15/19
Appendix D:
Questionnaires
Employee
Category
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
TotalPerformance
ManagementScore(X)
AveragePerformance
ManagementScoreper
Employee
BusinessDevelopment
Score(Y)
1
S
eniorlevelemployee
4 5 4 5 5 5 4 4 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 66 4.40 5
2 3 4 3 5 4 4 3 5 3 5 4 3 4 3 4 57 3.80 4
3 4 5 5 4 4 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 70 4.67 5
4 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 51 3.40 4
5 5 3 4 3 4 2 4 3 4 5 4 3 4 3 3 54 3.60 4
6 5 2 2 3 4 2 3 3 4 3 4 3 3 3 2 46 3.07 3
7 3 4 3 3 4 3 2 3 4 3 2 3 3 4 3 47 3.13 3
8 2 4 4 5 3 4 5 2 3 5 4 5 4 3 3 56 3.73 4
9 4 3 5 4 5 3 3 4 3 4 5 4 4 3 4 58 3.87 4
10 3 2 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 40 2.67 3
11 5 4 4 3 4 3 3 5 4 4 5 4 4 3 5 60 4.00 4
12 4 3 4 4 3 4 5 3 3 4 2 3 4 4 5 55 3.67 4
13 3 4 2 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 4 3 3 3 2 42 2.80 3
14 4 4 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 3 4 4 3 52 3.47 5
15 3 4 4 3 5 3 3 2 4 5 4 4 5 3 4 56 3.73 4
16 5 4 3 4 3 4 5 4 4 5 3 5 4 3 4 60 4.00 5
17 4 5 3 4 5 4 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 4 66 4.40 5
18
Juniorlevelemployee
4 3 3 4 3 3 4 5 4 3 3 4 3 4 5 55 3.67 4
19 5 4 4 3 4 5 4 4 4 3 5 4 5 4 4 62 4.13 5
20 5 5 4 5 5 4 5 5 4 4 5 4 5 5 5 70 4.67 5
21 5 4 5 5 4 4 5 4 5 4 5 5 4 4 5 68 4.53 5
22 3 4 2 3 2 4 3 3 4 2 3 4 3 2 4 46 3.07 3
23 4 5 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 5 5 4 67 4.47 5
24 3 2 3 3 2 3 3 3 4 2 3 3 3 4 3 44 2.93 3
25 5 4 3 3 3 4 5 3 5 5 4 4 3 5 4 60 4.00 5
26 4 3 4 5 4 4 4 3 4 5 3 4 3 4 4 58 3.87 4
27 4 5 4 5 4 5 3 5 4 5 4 4 4 5 5 66 4.40 5
28 5 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 67 4.47 5
29 3 3 4 2 3 4 4 3 3 3 2 4 3 3 4 48 3.20 3
30 5 3 4 4 5 4 3 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 5 65 4.33 5
Total 120 112 110 110 114 112 112 110 116 118 115 117 115 114 117 1712 114.13 126
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
16/19
Average
Score3.80 4.20
Appendix E:
Performance
ManagementAttributesFrequency as per Likert Scale fx
Mean for
each
attribute
Mean
for each
category
Customers based: 1 2 3 4 5 3.80
1. Service quality & customer-satisfaction
0 1 8 11 10 120 4.00
2. Product & service knowledge 0 3 8 13 6 112 3.73
3. New product or servicesdevelopment & diversification
0 3 9 13 5 110 3.67
Procedures and practices: 3.73
4. Resource allocation, utilization& cost minimization.
0 3 11 9 7 110 3.67
5. Awareness about operationalprocedures
0 2 9 12 7 114 3.80
6. Developing & Maintaining asafety working environment
0 2 9 14 5 112 3.73
7. Developing a customer friendlyworking environment
0 3 10 9 8 112 3.73
Business and productivity: 3.84
8. Goal achieving attitude &effort
0 2 13 8 7 110 3.67
9
. Selecting appropriate coursesof actions to gain competitiveadvantages over the rivals.
0 1 7 17 5 116 3.87
10. Sound Team work to achievebusiness plan
0 2 8 7 13 121 4.03
11. Comply with humanresources policies & rules
0 4 7 12 7 112 3.73
12. Problem solving & Decisionmaking skill.
0 0 9 15 6 117 3.90
Leadership behaviours: 3.84
13. Leadership & Motivationalskill
0 1 10 12 7 115 3.83
14. Relationship with the co-workers.
0 1 11 11 7 114 3.80
15. Creativity & Innovation 0 2 7 13 8 117 3.90
Average
Mean3.80
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
17/19
Appendix F:
No. of
Employees
Performance
Management
Score (X)
Business
Development
Score (Y)
X.Y X2
Y2
1 66 5 330 4356 25
2 57 4 228 3249 16
3 70 5 350 4900 25
4 51 4 204 2601 16
5 54 4 216 2916 16
6 46 3 138 2116 9
7 47 3 141 2209 9
8 56 4 224 3136 16
9 58 4 232 3364 16
10 40 3 120 1600 9
11 60 4 240 3600 16
12 55 4 220 3025 16
13 42 3 126 1764 9
14 52 5 260 2704 25
15 56 4 224 3136 16
16 60 5 300 3600 25
17 66 5 330 4356 25
18 55 4 220 3025 16
19 62 5 310 3844 25
20 70 5 350 4900 25
21 68 5 340 4624 25
22 46 3 138 2116 9
23 67 5 335 4489 25
24 44 3 132 1936 9
25 66 5 330 4356 25
26 58 4 232 3364 16
27 66 5 330 4356 25
28 67 5 335 4489 25
29 48 3 144 2304 9
30 65 5 325 4225 25
X = 1718 Y = 126 X.Y = 7404 X2
=100660 Y2
= 548
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
18/19
Appe
ix G:
Se i
rLevel
E pl
yees
Sa
pleSize,n1=17
Business Devel
pmentSc
re
(
)Mean X x=X-X x
2
1 5 0.94 0.89
2 4 -0.06 0
3 5 0.94 0.89
4 4 -0.06 0
5 4 -0.06 0
6 3 -1.06 1.12
7 3 -1.06 1.12
8 4 -0.06 0
9 4 4.06 -0.06 0
10 3 -1.06 1.12
11 4 -0.06 0
12 4 -0.06 0
13 3 -1.06 1.12
14 5 0.94 0.89
15 4 -0.06 0
16 5 0.94 0.89
17 5 0.94 0.89
T
talSc
re= 69 X2 8.94
x2
S1 = n1 =0.73
Juni
rlevel
Empl
yees
SampleSize,n2=
Business Devel
pment
Sc
re(
)Mean Y y=Y-Y y
2
1 4 -0.38 0.152 5 0.62 0.38
3 5 0.62 0.38
4 5 0.62 0.38
5 3 -1.38 1.92
6 5 0.62 0.38
Comment [m3]:Wherethiseq ation from?
Whose?Why we usingit?Pleaseexplain the
esta lishmentofthisequation
Comment [m4]: How you gettingthiss1fro
theequation and why?
-
8/6/2019 Analysis With Calculation) With Comment
19/19
7 3 4.38 -1.38 1.92
8 5 0.62 0.389 4 -0.38 0.15
10 5 0.62 0.38
11 5 0.62 0.38
12 3 -1.38 1.92
13 5 0.62 0.38
Total Score=57 y2 9.08
y2
S2 = n2 = 0.84
Employee Category Junior Level Employee Senior Level Employee
Sample Size 13 17
Mean 4.38 4.06
Standard Deviation 0.73 0.84
S = (n1-1) S12+ (n2-1) S2
2
n1+n2-2
X - Y n1. n2
t =
S n1 + n2
=0.77
=1.14
Comment [m5]: You need explain a bit of det
and reason of establishment about the formula,
whose formula are they that we are u sing here,
reliability of formula, how this formula useful to
out the figure..etc