## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Discriminant analysis

Discriminant Analysis

• Discriminant analysis is a statistical procedure which

allows us to classify cases/observations/respondents in

separate categories to which they belong on the basis of

a set of characteristic independent variables called

predictors or discriminant variables

• The target variable (the one determining allocation into

groups) is a qualitative (nominal or ordinal) one, while

the characteristics are measured by quantitative

variables.

• DA looks at the discrimination between two groups

• Multiple discriminant analysis (MDA) allows for

classification into three or more groups.

Objective

• Development of discriminant functions, or linear

combinations of the predictor or independent

variables, which will best discriminate between the

categories of the criterion or dependent variable

(groups).

• Examination of whether significant differences exist

among the groups, in terms of the predictor variables.

• Determination of which predictor variables contribute

to most of the intergroup differences.

• Classification of cases to one of the groups based on

the values of the predictor variables.

• Evaluation of the accuracy of classification.

• When the criterion variable has two categories, the technique is

known as two-group discriminant analysis.

• When three or more categories are involved, the technique is

referred to as multiple discriminant analysis.

• The main distinction is that, in the two-group case, it is possible

to derive only one discriminant function. In multiple

discriminant analysis, more than one function may be

computed. In general, with G groups and k predictors, it is

possible to estimate up to the smaller of G - 1, or k, discriminant

functions.

• The first function has the highest ratio of between-groups to

within-groups sum of squares. The second function,

uncorrelated with the first, has the second highest ratio, and so

on. However, not all the functions may be statistically

significant.

Discriminant Analysis

Geometric Interpretation

X

2

X

1

G1

G2

D

G1

G2

2

2

2

2 2

2

2 2

2 2

2

1 1

1

1

2 2 2

2 1

1 1

1 1

1 1 1

1

1

6

Applications

• DA is especially useful to understand the differences

and factors leading consumers to make different

choices allowing themto develop marketing

strategies which take into proper account the role of

the predictors.

• Examples

• Determinants of customer loyalty

• Shopper profiling and segmentation

• Determinants of purchase and non-purchase

Applications

– Whether a bank should offer a loan to a new

customer?

– Which customer is likely to buy?

– Identify patients who may be at high risk for

problems after surgery

Assumptions

• Multivariate normality of the independent

variables.

• Equal variance and covariance for the

groups.

Box M test : test of homogeneity of

variance-covariance matrices

Insignificant test implies use of

discriminant analysis

Discriminant Analysis Model

The discriminant analysis model involves linear combinations of

the following form:

D = b

0

+ b

1

X

1

+ b

2

X

2

+ b

3

X

3

+ . . . + b

k

X

k

Where:

D = discriminant score

b 's = discriminant coefficient or weight

X 's = predictor or independent variable

• The coefficients, or weights (b), are estimated so that the groups differ as

much as possible on the values of the discriminant function.

• This occurs when the ratio of between-group sum of squares to within-group

sum of squares for the discriminant scores is at a maximum.

• Canonical correlation. Canonical correlation measures the

extent of association between the discriminant scores and the

groups. It is a measure of association between the single

discriminant function and the set of variables that define the

group membership.

• Centroid. The centroid is the mean values for the discriminant

scores for a particular group. There are as many centroids as

there are groups, as there is one for each group. The means

for a group on all the functions are the group centroids.

• Classification matrix. Sometimes also called prediction matrix,

the classification matrix contains the number of correctly

classified and misclassified cases.

Statistics Associated with

Discriminant Analysis

• Discriminant function coefficients. The discriminant function

coefficients (unstandardized) are the multipliers of variables,

when the variables are in the original units of measurement. It

is used to determine to determine discriminant score

• Discriminant scores. The unstandardized coefficients are

multiplied by the values of the variables. These products are

summed and added to the constant term to obtain the

discriminant scores.

• Eigenvalue. For each discriminant function, the Eigenvalue is

the ratio of between-group to within-group sums of squares.

Large Eigenvalues imply superior functions.

Statistics Associated with

Discriminant Analysis

• F values and their significance. These are calculated from a

one-way ANOVA, with the grouping variable serving as the

categorical independent variable. Each predictor, in turn,

serves as the metric dependent variable in the ANOVA.

• Group means and group standard deviations. These are

computed for each predictor for each group.

• Pooled within-group correlation matrix. The pooled within-

group correlation matrix is computed by averaging the separate

covariance matrices for all the groups.

Statistics Associated with

Discriminant Analysis

• Standardized discriminant function coefficients. The standardized

discriminant function coefficients are the discriminant function coefficients

and are used as the multipliers when the variables have been standardized

to a mean of 0 and a variance of 1. It is used to determine rank of the

variables

• Structure matrix (correlations). Also referred to as discriminant loadings,

the structure correlations represent the simple correlations between the

predictors and the discriminant function.

• Total correlation matrix. If the cases are treated as if they were from a

single sample and the correlations computed, a total correlation matrix is

obtained.

Statistics Associated with Discriminant Analysis

Wilks‘ λ

Sometimes also called the U statistic, Wilks' λ

for each predictor is the ratio of the within-

group sum of squares to the total sum of

squares. Its value varies between 0 and 1.

Large values of λ(near 1) indicate that group

means do not seem to be different. Small

values λ (near 0) indicate that the group

means seem to be different. It adds predictive

power to the discriminant function

Conducting Discriminant Analysis

Assess Validity of Discriminant Analysis

Estimate the Discriminant Function Coefficients

Determine the Significance of the Discriminant Function

Formulate the Problem

Interpret the Results

Conducting Discriminant Analysis

Formulate the Problem

• Identify the objectives, the criterion variable, and the

independent variables.

• The criterion variable must consist of two or more mutually

exclusive and collectively exhaustive categories.

• The predictor variables should be selected based on a

theoretical model or previous research, or the experience of the

researcher.

• One part of the sample, called the estimation or analysis

sample, is used for estimation of the discriminant function.

• The other part, called the holdout or validation sample, is

reserved for validating the discriminant function.

• Often the distribution of the number of cases in the analysis and

validation samples follows the distribution in the total sample.

Example

• To determine the salient characteristics of

families visited a vacation resort during the

last two years.

• Visited-1

not visited 2

Information on Resort Visits: Analysis Sample

Annual Attitude Importance Household Age of Amount

Resort Family Toward Attached Size Head of Spent on

No. Visit Income Travel to Family Household Family

($000) Vacation Vacation

1 1 50.2 5 8 3 43 M (2)

2 1 70.3 6 7 4 61 H (3)

3 1 62.9 7 5 6 52 H (3)

4 1 48.5 7 5 5 36 L (1)

5 1 52.7 6 6 4 55 H (3)

6 1 75.0 8 7 5 68 H (3)

7 1 46.2 5 3 3 62 M (2)

8 1 57.0 2 4 6 51 M (2)

9 1 64.1 7 5 4 57 H (3)

10 1 68.1 7 6 5 45 H (3)

11 1 73.4 6 7 5 44 H (3)

12 1 71.9 5 8 4 64 H (3)

13 1 56.2 1 8 6 54 M (2)

14 1 49.3 4 2 3 56 H (3)

15 1 62.0 5 6 2 58 H (3)

Information on Resort Visits: Analysis Sample

Table 18.2, cont.

Annual Attitude Importance Household Age of Amount

Resort Family Toward Attached Size Head of Spent on

No. Visit Income Travel to Family Household Family

($000) Vacation Vacation

16 2 32.1 5 4 3 58 L (1)

17 2 36.2 4 3 2 55 L (1)

18 2 43.2 2 5 2 57 M (2)

19 2 50.4 5 2 4 37 M (2)

20 2 44.1 6 6 3 42 M (2)

21 2 38.3 6 6 2 45 L (1)

22 2 55.0 1 2 2 57 M (2)

23 2 46.1 3 5 3 51 L (1)

24 2 35.0 6 4 5 64 L (1)

25 2 37.3 2 7 4 54 L (1)

26 2 41.8 5 1 3 56 M (2)

27 2 57.0 8 3 2 36 M (2)

28 2 33.4 6 8 2 50 L (1)

29 2 37.5 3 2 3 48 L (1)

30 2 41.3 3 3 2 42 L (1)

Information on Resort Visits:

Holdout Sample

Annual Attitude Importance Household Age of Amount

Resort Family Toward Attached Size Head of Spent on

No. Visit Income Travel to Family Household Family

($000) Vacation Vacation

1 1 50.8 4 7 3 45 M(2)

2 1 63.6 7 4 7 55 H (3)

3 1 54.0 6 7 4 58 M(2)

4 1 45.0 5 4 3 60 M(2)

5 1 68.0 6 6 6 46 H (3)

6 1 62.1 5 6 3 56 H (3)

7 2 35.0 4 3 4 54 L (1)

8 2 49.6 5 3 5 39 L (1)

9 2 39.4 6 5 3 44 H (3)

10 2 37.0 2 6 5 51 L (1)

11 2 54.5 7 3 3 37 M(2)

12 2 38.2 2 2 3 49 L (1)

Conducting Discriminant Analysis

Estimate the Discriminant Function Coefficients

• The direct method involves estimating the discriminant

function so that all the predictors are included

simultaneously.

• In stepwise discriminant analysis, the predictor

variables are entered sequentially, based on their ability

to discriminate among groups.

Direct method

Test Results

Box's M

28.744

F Approx.

1.048

df1

21

df2

2.884E3

Sig.

.400

Tests null hypothesis of equal

population covariance matrices.

Group Statistics

Resort visit Mean

Std.

Deviation

1 annual family

income

60.5200 9.83065

attitue towards

travel

5.4000 1.91982

importance

attached to family

vacation

5.8000 1.82052

household size

4.3333 1.23443

age of head of

household

53.7333 8.77062

amount spent on

family vacation

2.6000 .63246

2 annual family

income

41.9133 7.55115

attitue towards

travel

4.3333 1.95180

importance

attached to family

vacation

4.0667 2.05171

household size

2.8000 .94112

age of head of

household

50.1333 8.27101

amount spent on

family vacation

1.4000 .50709

Tests of Equality of Group Means

Wilks'

Lambda F df1 df2 Sig.

annual family

income

.453 33.796 1 28 .000

attitude towards

travel

.925 2.277 1 28 .143

importance

attached to

family vacation

.824 5.990 1 28 .021

household size .657 14.636 1 28 .001

age of head of

household

.954 1.338 1 28 .257

amount spent on

family vacation

.460 32.870 1 28 .000

Eigenvalues

Fun

ctio

n

Eigenva

lue

% of

Variance

Cumulativ

e %

Canonical

Correlatio

n

1 2.310

a

100.0 100.0 .835

a. First 1 canonical discriminant functions

were used in the analysis.

Wilks' Lambda

Test

of

Fun

ctio

n(s)

Wilks'

Lambda

Chi-

square df Sig.

1 .302 29.925 6 .000

Overall Model Fit

Interpretation of overall fit

• Square canonical correlation and get % of

variation in the dependent variable can be

accounted for by the model

Standardized Canonical Discriminant

Function Coefficients

Function

1

annual family income .130

attitude towards travel -.006

importance attached to family

vacation

.339

household size .560

age of head of household

.028

amount spent on family

vacation

.748

Canonical Discriminant Function Coefficients

Function

1

annual family income .015

attitue towards travel -.003

importance attached to family

vacation

.175

household size .510

age of head of household .003

amount spent on family vacation 1.304

(Constant) -6.212

Unstandardized coefficients

Standardized Canonical Discriminant

Function Coefficients

Function

1

annual family income .130

attitude towards travel -.006

importance attached to

family vacation

.339

household size .560

age of head of household .028

amount spent on family

vacation

.748

Structure Matrix

Function

1

annual family income

.723

amount spent on

family vacation

.713

household size

.476

importance attached

to family vacation

.304

attitue towards travel

.188

age of head of

household

.144

Discriminant Loadings

Discriminant loadings in structure matrix gives the unique impact of each

Independent variable. It gives association of each variable with discriminant score

Functions at Group Centroids

Resort visit

Function

1

1 1.468

2 -1.468

Unstandardized canonical discriminant

functions evaluated at group means

Group means of discriminant functions

Group centroids mesasure relative position of each group on the discriminant

functions such that overall average becomes zero. It is used to find out cut score

Classification Statistics

Prior Probabilities for Groups

Resort

visit Prior

Cases Used in

Analysis

Unweig

hted

Weight

ed

1 .500 15 15.000

2 .500 15 15.000

Total 1.000 30 30.000

Classification Function Coefficients

Resort visit

1 2

annual family income .801 .757

attitue towards travel 1.606 1.614

importance attached to family

vacation

.796 .282

household size 3.044 1.545

age of head of household .869 .860

amount spent on family

vacation

-2.692 -6.522

(Constant) -58.014 -39.771

Fisher's linear discriminant functions

Once the discriminant functions are determined

groups are differentiated, the utility of these

functions can be examined via their ability to

correctly classify each data point to their a priori

groups. Classification functions are derived from

the linear discriminant functions to achieve this

purpose. Different classification functions are

used and equations exist that are best suited for

equal or unequal samples in each group.

Fisher’s Linear Discriminant Function

Classification Results

b,c

Resort visit

Predicted Group

Membership

Total 1 2

Original Count 1

13 2 15

2

0 15 15

% 1

86.7 13.3 100.0

2

.0 100.0 100.0

Cross-

validated

a

Count 1

11 4 15

2

2 13 15

% 1

73.3 26.7 100.0

2

13.3 86.7 100.0

a. Cross validation is done only for those cases in the analysis.

In cross validation, each case is classified by the functions

derived from all cases other than that case.

b. 93.3% of original grouped cases correctly classified.

c. 80.0% of cross-validated grouped cases correctly

classified.

Conducting Discriminant Analysis

Determine the Significance of Discriminant Function

• The null hypothesis that, in the population, the means of all

discriminant functions in all groups are equal can be statistically

tested.

• In SPSS this test is based on Wilks' . If several functions are

tested simultaneously (as in the case of multiple discriminant

analysis), the Wilks' statistic is the product of the univariate for

each function. The significance level is estimated based on a chi-

square transformation of the statistic.

• If the null hypothesis is rejected, indicating significant

discrimination, one can proceed to interpret the results.

l

Conducting Discriminant Analysis

Interpret the Results

• The interpretation of the discriminant weights, or coefficients, is similar to that in

multiple regression analysis.

• Given the multicollinearity in the predictor variables, there is no unambiguous

measure of the relative importance of the predictors in discriminating between

the groups.

• With this caveat in mind, we can obtain some idea of the relative importance of

the variables by examining the absolute magnitude of the standardized

discriminant function coefficients.

• Some idea of the relative importance of the predictors can also be obtained by

examining the structure correlations, also called canonical loadings or

discriminant loadings. These simple correlations between each predictor and the

discriminant function represent the variance that the predictor shares with the

function.

• Another aid to interpreting discriminant analysis results is to develop a

Characteristic profile for each group by describing each group in terms of the

group means for the predictor variables.

Conducting Discriminant Analysis

Assess Validity of Discriminant Analysis

• Many computer programs, such as SPSS, offer a leave-one-out cross-

validation option.

• The discriminant weights, estimated by using the analysis sample, are

multiplied by the values of the predictor variables in the holdout

sample to generate discriminant scores for the cases in the holdout

sample. The cases are then assigned to groups based on their

discriminant scores and an appropriate decision rule. The hit ratio, or

the percentage of cases correctly classified, can then be determined

by summing the diagonal elements and dividing by the total number

of cases.

• It is helpful to compare the percentage of cases correctly classified

by discriminant analysis to the percentage that would be obtained

by chance. Classification accuracy achieved by discriminant analysis

should be at least 25% greater than that obtained by chance.

Conducting Discriminant Analysis

Assess Validity of Discriminant Analysis

Maximum Chance Criterion – based on sample size of largest

group. In case of equal proportion, 0.5.

Proportional Chance Criterion – assumption: cost of

misclassification is equal : Calculate ; p:

proportion cases in the total sample belong to first group

Note: Hit ratio (classification accuracy level) should exceed

selected comparison standard by 25%.. e.g. for proportional

chance criterion, classification accuracy should cross the

threshold of (cp*1.25)

2 2

) 1 ( p p c

p

New Observation

Mahalanobis distances (obtained from the Method

Dialogue Box) are used to analyse cases as it is the

distance between a case and the centroid for each

group of the dependent.

So a new case or cases can be compared with an

existing set of cases. A new case will have one distance

for each group and therefore can be classified as

belonging to the group for which its distance is

smallest. Mahalanobis distance is measured in terms of

SD from the centroid, therefore a case that is more

than 1.96 Mahalanobis distance units from the

centroid has a less than 5% chance of belonging to that

group.

Method: Stepwise

Stepwise Discriminant Analysis

• Stepwise discriminant analysis is analogous to stepwise multiple

regression in that the predictors are entered sequentially based

on their ability to discriminate between the groups.

• An F ratio is calculated for each predictor by conducting a

univariate analysis of variance in which the groups are treated

as the categorical variable and the predictor as the criterion

variable.

• The predictor with the highest F ratio is the first to be selected

for inclusion in the discriminant function, if it meets certain

significance and tolerance criteria.

• A second predictor is added based on the highest adjusted or

partial F ratio, taking into account the predictor already

selected.

• Each predictor selected is tested for retention based on its

association with other predictors selected.

• The process of selection and retention is continued until all

predictors meeting the significance criteria for inclusion and

retention have been entered in the discriminant function.

• The selection of the stepwise procedure is based on the

optimizing criterion adopted. The Mahalanobis procedure is

based on maximizing a generalized measure of the distance

between the two closest groups.

• The order in which the variables were selected also indicates

their importance in discriminating between the groups.

Stepwise Discriminant Analysis

Variables Entered/Removed

a,b,c,d

Step Entered Removed

Min. D Squared

Statistic

Between

Groups

Exact F

Statistic df1 df2 Sig.

1 annual

family

income

4.506 1.00 and 2.00 33.796 1 28.000 3.027E-6

2 househol

d size

5.978 1.00 and 2.00 21.616 2 27.000 2.484E-6

3 amount

spent on

family

vacation

7.681 1.00 and 2.00 17.832 3 26.000 1.711E-6

4 annual

family

income

7.452 1.00 and 2.00 26.947 2 27.000 3.686E-7

At each step, the variable that maximizes the Mahalanobis distance between the two closest groups is

entered.

a. Maximum number of steps is 12.

b. Minimum partial F to enter is 3.84.

c. Maximum partial F to remove is 2.71.

d. F level, tolerance, or VIN insufficient for further computation.

Variables in the Analysis

Step Tolerance

F to

Remove

Min. D

Squared

Between

Groups

1 annual family

income

1.000 33.796

2 annual family

income

.992 19.123 1.952

1.00 and

2.00

household size

.992 4.823 4.506

1.00 and

2.00

3 annual family

income

.489 .533 7.452

1.00 and

2.00

household size

.901 6.955 5.272

1.00 and

2.00

amount spent on

family vacation

.480 4.561 5.978

1.00 and

2.00

4 household size

.975 10.211 4.383

1.00 and

2.00

amount spent on

family vacation

.975 26.124 1.952

1.00 and

2.00

Variables Not in the Analysis

Step Tolerance Min. Tolerance F to Enter Min. D Squared

Between

Groups

0 annual family income 1.000 1.000 33.796 4.5061.00 and 2.00

attitue towards travel 1.000 1.000 2.277 .3041.00 and 2.00

importance attached to

family vacation

1.000 1.000 5.990 .7991.00 and 2.00

household size 1.000 1.000 14.636 1.9521.00 and 2.00

age of head of household 1.000 1.000 1.338 .1781.00 and 2.00

amount spent on family

vacation

1.000 1.000 32.870 4.3831.00 and 2.00

1 attitue towards travel .961 .961 .059 4.5241.00 and 2.00

importance attached to

family vacation

.992 .992 1.617 5.0001.00 and 2.00

household size .992 .992 4.823 5.9781.00 and 2.00

age of head of household 1.000 1.000 .672 4.7111.00 and 2.00

amount spent on family

vacation

.529 .529 2.511 5.2721.00 and 2.00

2 attitue towards travel .960 .953 .084 6.0091.00 and 2.00

importance attached to

family vacation

.988 .985 1.054 6.3711.00 and 2.00

age of head of household .998 .990 .680 6.2321.00 and 2.00

amount spent on family

vacation

.480 .480 4.561 7.6811.00 and 2.00

3 attitue towards travel .952 .476 .007 7.6851.00 and 2.00

importance attached to

family vacation

.931 .453 2.050 8.6171.00 and 2.00

age of head of household .930 .448 .063 7.7101.00 and 2.00

4 annual family income .489 .480 .533 7.6811.00 and 2.00

attitue towards travel .957 .933 .020 7.4611.00 and 2.00

importance attached to

Wilks' Lambda

Step

Number of

Variables

Lambd

a df1 df2 df3

Exact F

Statisti

c df1 df2 Sig.

1

1 .453 1 1 28 33.796 1 28.000 .000

2

2 .384 2 1 28 21.616 2 27.000 .000

3

3 .327 3 1 28 17.832 3 26.000 .000

4

2 .334 2 1 28 26.947 2 27.000 .000

Eigenvalues

Func

tion

Eigenval

ue

% of

Variance

Cumulativ

e %

Canonical

Correlation

1 1.996

a

100.0 100.0 .816

a. First 1 canonical discriminant functions were

used in the analysis.

Wilks' Lambda

Test of

Functio

n(s) Wilks' Lambda Chi-square df Sig.

1 .334 29.627 2 .000

Standardized Canonical Discriminant

Function Coefficients

Function

1

household size .650

amount spent on family

vacation

.870

Multiple Discriminant Analysis (MDA)

• Households are classified into three categories

viz. high, medium, low.

• Question of interest is whether the

households that spend high, medium or low

amounts on their vacations can be

differentiated in terms of annual income,

attitude towards travel, importance attached

to family vacations, household size and age of

the head of household.

Group Statistics

amount spent on family vacation Mean Std. Deviation

1 Resort visit 1.9000 .31623

annual family income 38.5700 5.29718

attitue towards travel 4.5000 1.71594

importance attached to family

vacation

4.7000 1.88856

household size 3.1000 1.19722

age of head of household 50.3000 8.09732

2 Resort visit 1.6000 .51640

annual family income 50.1100 6.00231

attitue towards travel 4.0000 2.35702

importance attached to family

vacation

4.2000 2.48551

household size 3.4000 1.50555

age of head of household 49.5000 9.25263

3 Resort visit 1.0000 .00000

annual family income 64.9700 8.61434

attitue towards travel 6.1000 1.19722

importance attached to family

vacation

5.9000 1.66333

household size 4.2000 1.13529

age of head of household 56.0000 7.60117

Total Resort visit 1.5000 .50855

annual family income 51.2167 12.79523

attitue towards travel 4.8667 1.97804

importance attached to family

vacation

4.9333 2.09981

household size 3.5667 1.33089

age of head of household 51.9333 8.57395

Tests of Equality of Group Means

Wilks'

Lambda F df1 df2 Sig.

Resort visit

.440 17.182 2 27 .000

annual family

income .262 37.997 2 27 .000

attitue towards

travel .788 3.634 2 27 .040

importance attached

to family vacation

.881 1.830 2 27 .180

household size

.874 1.944 2 27 .163

age of head of

household .882 1.804 2 27 .184

All-Groups Scattergram

-4.0

Across: Function 1

Down: Function 2

4.0

0.0

-6.0 4.0 0.0 -2.0 -4.0 2.0 6.0

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1

1

2

12

2

2

2

2 3 3

3

3

3

3

3

2

3

*

*

*

* indicates a group centroid

Territorial Map

-4.0

Across: Function 1

Down: Function 2

4.0

0.0

-6.0 4.0 0.0 -2.0 -4.0 2.0 6.0

1

1 3

*

-8.0

-8.0

8.0

8.0

1 3

1 3

1 3

1 3

1 3

1 3

1 3

1 1 2 3

1 1 2 2 3 3

1 1 2 2

1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 3

1 1 1 2 2

1 1 2 2

1 1 2 2

1 1 1 2 2

1 1 2 2

1 1 2 2

1 1 1 2 2

1 1 1 2 2

1 1 2 2 2

2 2 3

2 3 3

2 2 3 3

2 2 3

2 2 3

2 2 3

2 2 3 3

2 3 3

2 3 3

2 3 3

*

*

* Indicates a group

centroid

- how to analyze data
- unit 4 post test review
- ok
- ch07
- chapter 10 part 1
- Voice Activity Detection Identifying Speech Segments.pdf
- Session 4
- Statistics
- qlq30 validação para o portugues
- main-120718022005-phpapp01
- Impact of Interest Rate on Stock Exchange Research Final (MGT-799)
- Correlational Design1
- first sem final review stats
- Bebchuk, Lucian; Cremers, Martijn; And Peyer, Urs, CEO Centrality (2007). Harvard Law School John M. Olin Center for Law, CEO Centrality
- Divergence
- 67S29rodean
- 30000000000
- aihls2013
- thomas07a
- Burbey_IE_D_2011_2
- criteris A.doc
- NUEVO 5
- INVESTIGATING THE APPLICATION STATUS OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH LEARNING ORGANIZATION AMONG THE NONACADEMIC STAFF MEMBERS OF AHVAZ JUNDISHAPUR UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCESIN, SOUTHWEST IRAN
- Bdm
- Validity
- sTRATEGIC ORIENTATION AND PERFORMANCE
- Manchester BII Showcase 2010
- Act 09 Short Paper
- 1-s2.0-S0926580505001251-main.pdf
- Impact of Asymmetry of Internet Traffic for Heuristic Based Classification

- Keller SBM3 07
- Book 1
- MKTQs
- mtvcase-090831152513-phpapp01
- Cleaned Data
- Ibm
- Quiz Final
- The Indian Tyre Industry
- GIFT Slide Presentation
- Shrikrishna Commission Report on Babri Mosque Demolition Chapter III
- Moving Beyond Utility Facebook
- 1251583
- Myopia
- Opportunities and Challenges of Supply Chain Management
- Tata Steel Final Print
- Quality related aspects of a supermarket
- Technology Processing
- Tata Steel Final Print
- ITC Corporate Review
- multi criteria decision making
- BIG BAZAAR
- my mail
- Pschoanalysis for Beginners
- E-Choupal a Unique v2i Model of Scm by Itc

Close Dialog## Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

Loading