For this assignment, you will identify a specific organizational problem that could be addressed through statistical applicat
For this assignment, you will identify a specific organizational problem that could be addressed through statistical applications, and you will create a business case (justification for why your problem is important and should be prioritized above other projects requiring resources) to support the need for the analysis. For example, you might want to explore how a working team could be more efficient in their productivity or how your company could generate incremental revenue through better product design and/or advertising campaigns. As such, you would want to explain the problem, why it is important, and how it could be addressed through the use of statistical applications. You can use the dataset provided for this assignment and all subsequent assignments, or you may use your own dataset. Whichever dataset you use, it should be used throughout the course given that the assignments build upon prior assignments.
Your business case should consist of the following components:
- Description of the problem statement
- Justification as to why solving the problem is important, which should be connected to an organizational strategic initiative
- Explanation of how statistical applications could be used to solve the problem (e.g., how you would descriptively analyze your data and run statistical tests for hypothesis testing)
- Summary
Length: 6 pages, not including title or reference pages
References: Include a minimum of 5 scholarly resources not more than 5 years old.
The completed assignment should demonstrate thoughtful consideration of the ideas and concepts presented in the course by providing new thoughts and insights relating directly to this topic. The content should reflect scholarly writing and current APA 7th edition standards. Include a plagiarism report.
Scoring Definitions
Growth Opportunity Scoring Definitions | |||||
Evaluation Criteria | Higher Attractiveness / Fit (5 Points) | Medium Attractiveness / Fit (3 Points) | Lower Attractiveness / Fit (1 Point) | ||
Attractiveness | Revenue Potential | 3 Year revenue potential of $1,000,000 or more | 3 Year revenue potential of $999,999 – $400,000 | 3 Year revenue potential of $399,999 or less | |
Pretax Potential | More than 40% | Between 30% – 40% | Less than 30% | ||
Strategic Alignment | Fits a key strategic growth initiative / lever and it fits our culture / business model | Fits a strategic growth initiative / lever | Unclear fit with current business strategies | ||
Client Need | Unmet need validated by potential customers; unmet need with customer request for service | Unmet need identified and confirmed (not with customer); met need with customer openess to service | Unmet need may exist but has not been confirmed; met need with customer not intersted in service | ||
Customers | Targets customer inside domain of interest, and decision maker is in a function we are very familiar with | Targets customer inside our domain of interest and the decision maker is unfamiliar with us | Targets customer outside our domain of interest | ||
Time to Revenue | Less than 6 months to initial revenue | 7- 18 months to initial revenue | Greater than 18 months to initial revenue | ||
Investment Required (non employee) | Minor (0 – 10% of revenue potential) | Moderate (10-20% of revenue potential) | Significant (>20% revenue potential) | ||
Progressive | Cutting Edge – Viewed as progressive by the target customer | Leading Edge – Viewed as "second" to the market but considered progressive | Standard – Effective and proven but not progressive | ||
Ability to Execute / Business Fit | Capabilities – Process | Does not require any significant additions to, or enhancement of, our existing processes | Requires enhancement of existing processes, but does not require new processes | Depends on process that do not exist in the business today | |
Capabilities – Technology Tools | Does not require any significant additions or upgrades to current tools | Requires substantial upgrades to existing tools, but no new tools | Requires new technology tools | ||
Capabilities – Skillsets | Only requires existing leadership, management, and operational skillsets | Requires new skillsets / talent from a leadership/management or an operational perspective (not both) | Requires the addition or new skillsets / talent from both a leadership/management and an operational perspective | ||
Competitors | Competitive set is limited or does not exist (less than 2) | Competitive set is moderate (2-6) | Competitive set is is very robust for our currents offering(s) (7+) | ||
Pricing Model | Pricing terms and mechanics are consistent with current offerings and familiar to the target customer set | Pricing terms and mechanics are different from current offerings or unfamiliar to the target customer set (not both) | Pricing terms and mechanics are different from current offerings and will be unfamiliar to the target customer set | ||
Template
Growth Opportunity Scoring Sheet | ||||||||
Score Confidence | ||||||||
Growth Opportunity Name: | ||||||||
Instructions: For each of the evaluation criteria listed, please provide a score in the 'Score' column based on the criteria provided in the 'Scoring Definitions' tab | ||||||||
as well as a brief rationale for why you entered each score | ||||||||
Evaluation Criteria | Weight | Score (1,3,5) | Weighted Score | Rationale for Score | Score (10/6/2) | Weighted Score | ||
Economic Fit / Attractiveness | Revenue Potential | 10% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | |||
Pretax Potential | 10% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
Strategic Alignment | 10% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
Client Need | 10% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
Customers | 10% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
Time to Revenue | 5% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
Investment Required | 5% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
Progressive | 10% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
Total | 70% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||
Ability to Execute / Business Fit | Capabilities – Process | 5% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | |||
Capabilities – Technology | 5% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
Capabilities – Skillsets | 10% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
Competitors | 5% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
Pricing Model | 5% | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | ||||
Total | 30% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||
Total Score | 100% | 0.0 | 0.0 |
,
Master Scoring Summary
ID | Initiative Name | Score | ||
Economic Fit/ Attractiveness (70) | Ability To Execute / Business Fit (30) | Confidence Rating | ||
1 | Initiative 1 | 38 | 22 | 90 |
2 | Initiative 2 | 44 | 14 | 55 |
3 | Initiative 3 | 52 | 28 | 80 |
4 | Initiative 4 | 44 | 10 | 75 |
5 | Initiative 5 | 60 | 18 | 80 |
6 | Initiative 6 | 38 | 28 | 75 |
7 | Initiative 7 | 50 | 12 | 65 |
8 | Initiative 8 | 50 | 12 | 65 |
9 | Initiative 9 | 52 | 28 | 80 |
10 | Initiative 10 | 48 | 26 | 65 |
11 | Initiative 11 | 48 | 22 | 60 |
12 | Initiative 12 | 48 | 22 | 60 |
13 | Initiative 13 | 50 | 28 | 75 |
14 | Initiative 14 | 52 | 28 | 70 |
15 | Initiative 15 | 58 | 26 | 85 |
16 | Initiative 16 | 42 | 24 | 90 |
17 | Initiative 17 | 58 | 28 | 90 |
18 | Initiative 18 | 54 | 28 | 95 |
19 | Initiative 19 | 54 | 28 | 95 |
20 | Initiative 20 | 54 | 28 | 100 |
21 | Initiative 21 | 50 | 26 | 100 |
22 | Initiative 22 | 46 | 26 | 80 |
23 | Initiative 23 | 58 | 28 | 100 |
24 | ||||
25 |
[CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 38 44 52 44 60 38 50 50 52 48 48 48 50 52 58 42 58 54 54 54 50 46 58 22 14 28 10 18 28 12 12 28 26 22 22 28 28 26 24 28 28 28 28 26 26 28 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Economic Fit/Attractiveness Ability to Execute/Business Fit
,
TIM-7101_Video_Game_Data
Date | Visits | VisitTime | TotalTime | Game | Advertising |
Friday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | Yes |
Saturday | 1 | 0.76 | 0.76 | Police | Yes |
Sunday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | Yes |
Monday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | No |
Tuesday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | No |
Wednesday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | No |
Thursday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | No |
Friday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | No |
Saturday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | No |
Sunday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | No |
Monday | 6 | 1.33 | 7.95 | Police | Yes |
Tuesday | 5 | 2.98 | 14.9 | Police | Yes |
Wednesday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | Yes |
Thursday | 7 | 2.4 | 16.83 | Police | Yes |
Friday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | Yes |
Saturday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | Yes |
Sunday | 1 | 0.82 | 0.82 | Police | Yes |
Monday | 8 | 1.93 | 15.45 | Police | Yes |
Tuesday | 3 | 1.33 | 3.99 | Police | No |
Wednesday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | No |
Thursday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | No |
Friday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Police | No |
Friday | 1 | 1.68 | 1.68 | Theif | Yes |
Saturday | 1 | 0.67 | 0.67 | Theif | Yes |
Sunday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | Yes |
Monday | 1 | 1.16 | 1.16 | Theif | No |
Tuesday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | No |
Wednesday | 1 | 2.88 | 2.88 | Theif | No |
Thursday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | No |
Friday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | No |
Saturday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | No |
Sunday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | No |
Monday | 8 | 1 | 7.97 | Theif | Yes |
Tuesday | 3 | 1.41 | 4.22 | Theif | Yes |
Wednesday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | Yes |
Thursday | 10 | 2.85 | 28.45 | Theif | Yes |
Friday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | Yes |
Saturday | 1 | 4.44 | 4.44 | Theif | Yes |
Sunday | 1 | 1.23 | 1.23 | Theif | Yes |
Monday | 6 | 2.15 | 12.89 | Theif | Yes |
Tuesday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | No |
Wednesday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | No |
Thursday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | No |
Friday | 0 | 0 | 0 | Theif | No |
,
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 2007, 2:1
32
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice Feature Article A Statistical Primer: Understanding Descriptive and Inferential Statistics Gillian Byrne Information Services Librarian Queen Elizabeth II Library Memorial University of Newfoundland St. John’s, NL , Canada Email: [email protected] Received: 13 December 2006 Accepted: 08 February 2007 © 2007 Byrne. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract As libraries and librarians move more towards evidence‐based decision making, the data being generated in libraries is growing. Understanding the basics of statistical analysis is crucial for evidence‐based practice (EBP), in order to correctly design and analyze research as well as to evaluate the research of others. This article covers the fundamentals of descriptive and inferential statistics, from hypothesis construction to sampling to common statistical techniques including chi‐square, correlation, and analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Introduction Much of the research done by librarians, from bibliometrics to surveys to usability testing, requires the measurement of certain factors. This measurement results in numbers, or data, being collected, which must then be analyzed using quantitative research methods. A basic understanding of statistical techniques is essential to properly designing research, as well as accurately evaluating the research of others.
This paper will introduce basic statistical principles, such as hypothesis construction and sampling, as well as descriptive and inferential statistical techniques. Descriptive statistics describe, or summarize, data, while inferential statistics use methods to infer conclusions about a population from a sample. In order to illustrate the techniques being
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 2007, 2:1
33
Great Job Lousy Job If you accept the job Have a great experience Waste time & effort
If you decline the job Waste an opportunity Avoid wasting time & effort
Figure 1. Illustration of Type I & II errors. described here, an example of a fictional article will be used. Entitled Perceptions of Evidence‐Based Practice: A Survey of Canadian Librarians, this article uses various quantitative methods to determine how Canadian librarians feel about Evidence‐ based Practice (EBP). It is important to note that this article, and the statistics derived from it, is entirely fictional. Hypothesis Hypotheses can be defined as “untested statements that specify a relationship between two or more variables” (Nardi 36). In social sciences research, hypotheses are often phrased as research questions. In plain language, hypotheses are statements of what you want to prove (or disprove) in your study. Many hypotheses can be constructed for a single research study, as you can see from the example in Fig. 1. In research, two hypotheses are constructed for each research question. The first is the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis (represented as H0) assumes no relationship between variables; thus it is usually phrased as “this has no affect on this”. The alternative hypothesis (represented as H1) is simply stating the opposite, that “this has an affect on this.” The null hypothesis is generally the one constructed for scientific research. Type I & II Errors Anytime you make a decision in life, there is a possibility of two things going wrong. Take the example of a job offer. If you
decide to take the job and it turned out to be lousy, you would have wasted a lot of time and energy. However, if you decided to pass on the job and it was great, you would have wasted an opportunity. It’s best illustrated by a two by two box (Fig. 1). It is obvious that, despite thorough research about the position (speaking to people that work there, interview process, etc.), it is possible to come to the wrong conclusion about the job. The same possibility occurs in research. If your research concludes that there is a relationship between variables when in fact there is no relationship (i.e., you’ve incorrectly assumed the alterative hypothesis is proven), this is a Type I error. If your research concludes that there is no relationship between the variables when in fact there is (i.e., you’ve incorrectly assumed the null hypothesis is proven), this is a Type II error. Another way to think of Type I & II errors is as false positives and false negatives. Type I error is a false positive, like concluding the job is great when it’s lousy. A Type II error is a false negative; concluding the job is lousy when it’s great. Type I errors are considered by researchers to be more dangerous. This is because concluding there is a relationship between variables when there is not can lead to more extreme consequences. A drug trial illustrates this well. Concluding falsely that a drug can help could lead to the drug being put on the market without being beneficial to the public. A Type II error would lead to a promising drug being left off the market,
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 2007, 2:1
34
which while serious, isn’t considered as dire. To help remember this, think of the conservative nature of science. Inaction (and possibly more testing) is less dangerous than action. Thus, disproving the null hypothesis, which supposes no relationship, is preferred to proving the alternative hypnosis. There are many safety features built in to research methodology which help minimize the possibility of committing both errors, including sampling techniques and statistical significance, both of which you will learn about later. Dependent and Independent Variables Understanding hypotheses help you determine which variables are dependent and which are independent (why this is important will be revealed a bit later). Essentially it works like this: the dependent variable (DV) is what you are measuring, while the independent variable (IV) is the cause, or predictor, of what is being measured. In experimental research (research done in controlled conditions like a lab), there is usually only one hypothesis, and determining the variables are relatively simple. For example, in drug trials, the dosage is the independent variable (what the researcher is manipulating) while the effects are dependent variables (what the researcher is measuring). In non‐experimental research (research which takes place in the ‘real world’, such as survey research), determining your dependent variable(s) is less straightforward. The same variable can be considered independent for one hypothesis while dependent for another. An example – you might hypothesize that hours spent in the library (independent variable) are a predictor of grade point average (dependent variable). You might also hypothesize that
major (independent variable) affects how much time students spend in the library (dependent variable). Thus, your hypothesis construction dictates your dependent and independent variables. A final variable to be aware of in quantitative research is the confounding variable (CV). Also know as lurking variables, a confounding variable is an unacknowledged factor in an experiment which might affect the relationship between the other variables. The classic example of a confounding example affecting an assumption of a relationship is that murder rates and ice cream purchased are highly correlated (when murder rates go up, so does the purchase of ice cream?). What is the relationship? There isn’t one; both variables are affected by a third, unacknowledged variable: hot weather. Population, Samples & Sampling Although it is possible to study an entire population (censuses are examples of this), in research samples are normally drawn from the population to make experiments feasible. The results of the study are then generalized to the population. Obviously, it is important to choose your sample wisely! Population This might seem obvious, but the first step is to carefully determine the characteristics of the population about which you wish to learn. For example, if your research involves your university, it is worthwhile to investigate the basic demographic features of the institution; i.e., what is the percentage of undergraduate students vs. graduate students? Males vs. females? If you think these are groups you would like to compare in your study, you must ensure they are properly represented in your sample. Sampling Techniques Probability Sampling
Evidence Based Library and Information Practice 2007, 2:1
35
Probability sampling means that each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected for the survey. There are several flavors of probability sampling; the common characteristic being that in order to perform probability sampling you must be able to identify all members of your population Random sampling is the most basic form of probability sampling. It involves identifying every member of a population (often by assigning each a number), and then selecting sample subjects by randomly choosing numbers. This is often done by computer programs. Stratified random sampling ensures the sample matches the population on characteristics important to a study. Using the example of a university, you might separate your population into graduate students and undergraduate students, and then randomly sample each group separately. This will ensure that if your university has 70% undergraduates and 30% graduates, your sample will have a similar ratio. Cluster sampling is used when a population is spread over a large geographic region. For
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.