S no Regions Sales (in Crs)

1 Region 1 20
2 Region 3 34
3 Region 2 32
4 Region 1 22
5 Region 4 45
6 Region 3 32
7 Region 2 31
8 Region 1 22
9 Region 4 46
10 Region 4 32
11 Region 1 25
12 Region 4 24
13 Region 4 22
14 Region 1 27
15 Region 4 24
16 Region 4 26
17 Region 1 26
18 Region 1 25
19 Region 4 25
20 Region 2 34
21 Region 2 25
22 Region 3 31
23 Region 3 35
24 Region 2 28
25 Region 3 36
26 Region 3 35
27 Region 2 27
28 Region 2 25
29 Region 2 32
30 Region 2 36
 Anova: Two-Factor With Replication

SUMMARYMarket 1 Market 2 Market 3 Market 4 Total

stry Type I
Count 2 2 2 2 8
Sum 22 30 17 31 100
Average 11 15 8.5 15.5 12.5
Variance 2 18 0.5 0.5 12.57143

Count 2 2 2 2 8
Sum 19 31 17 25 92
Average 9.5 15.5 8.5 12.5 11.5
Variance 0.5 4.5 4.5 0.5 10

Count 2 2 2 2 8
Sum 22 27 29 22 100
Average 11 13.5 14.5 11 12.5
Variance 18 0.5 0.5 18 8

Count 2 2 2 2 8
Sum 35 26 32 27 120
Average 17.5 13 16 13.5 15
Variance 0.5 2 2 0.5 4.571429

Count 2 2 2 2 8
Sum 31 25 23 27 106
Average 15.5 12.5 11.5 13.5 13.25
Variance 0.5 0.5 40.5 4.5 9.071429

Total
Count 10 10 10 10
Sum 129 139 118 132
Average 12.9 13.9 11.8 13.2
Variance 12.76667 4.322222 15.73333 5.066667

ANOVA
Source of VariationSS df MS F P-value F crit
Sample 54.4 4 13.6 2.285714 0.095872 2.866081
Columns 22.9 3 7.633333 1.282913 0.307409 3.098391
Interaction 167.6 12 13.96667 2.347339 0.044196 2.277581
Within 119 20 5.95

Total 363.9 39
sample
H0- there is no significance difference in the mean of industry type 1 and 2
H1- there is a significance difference in the mean of industry type 1 and 2

p value(sample)= 0.095872
as p value is greater than 0.05 , so we will accept h0 and reject h1
thus,there is no significance difference in the mean of industry type 1 and 2

column
h0- there is no significance difference in the mean of market1,2,3 and 4
h1- there is a significance difference in the mean of market1,2,3 and 4

p value(column) 0.307409

as p value is greater than 0.05 so we will accept h0 and reject h1

thus,there is no significance difference in the mean of market1,2,3 and 4

Interaction
h0- there is no significance difference in the mean two industry returns on different market
h1- there is a significance difference in the mean two industry returns on different market

p value(interaction) 0.044196

as the p value is lesser than 0.05 , so we have to reject h0 and accept h1

thus, there is a significance difference in the mean two industry returns on different market
 Return Rate (%)

Market 1 Market 2
10 12
12 18
Industry Type I 10 17
9 14
8 14
14 13
17 12
Industry Type II 18 14
16 12
15 13
Return Rate (%)

Market 3 Market 4
8 15
9 16
10 12
7 13
15 14
14 8
15 14
17 13
16 12
7 15
2
Employees Level
Entry Level
Mid-Level
Senior Level
Upper Level
Top Level

Employees Level
Entry Level
Mid-Level
Senior Level
Upper Level
Top Level

null hypothesis
alternative hypothesis

p value

as p value is greater than the significance value which is 0.05 , so we will

thus -there is no association between perception of the appraisal syste
 observed value
Perception Level on Appraisal System
Very Highly Acceptable Highly Acceptable Neutral Not Acceptable
40 45 42 45
32 35 45 42
42 35 46 41
42 35 45 42
42 45 35 32
198 195 213 202

expected value
Perception Level on Appraisal System
Very Highly Acceptable Highly Acceptable Neutral Not Acceptable
40.59 39.975 43.665 41.41
38.61 38.025 41.535 39.39
41.382 40.755 44.517 42.218
40.59 39.975 43.665 41.41
36.828 36.27 39.618 37.572

h0-there is no association between perception of the appraisal system and employee levels
h1-there is an association between perception of the appraisal system and employee levels

0.804699919418167

an the significance value which is 0.05 , so we will accept h0 and reject h1

iation between perception of the appraisal system and employee levels
Highly Not Acceptable
33 205
41 195
45 209
41 205
32 186
192 1000

Highly Not Acceptable

39.36
37.44
40.128
39.36
35.712
 Perception Level on Appraisa
Employees Level Very Highly Acceptable Highly Acceptable
Entry Level 40 45
Mid-Level 32 35
Senior Level 42 35
Upper Level 42 35
Top Level 42 45
Perception Level on Appraisal System
Neutral Not Acceptable Highly Not Acceptable
42 45 33
45 42 41
46 41 45
45 42 41
35 32 32
t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means

Pre Strategy
Post Strategy
Mean 15.9 19.25
Variance 6.621053 23.14474
Observations 20 20
Pearson Correlation -0.095662
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 19
t Stat -2.642871
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.008022
t Critical one-tail 1.729133
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.016044
t Critical two-tail 2.093024

h0- there is no improvement in the sales

h1- there is an improvement in sales

under two tailed test ,

p value 0.016044

as p value is less than that of significance level of 0.05 , we

thus, there is an improvement in sales
gnificance level of 0.05 , we will reject h0 and accept h1
 Sales Data (in 100s) Monthly Bais
Regions Pre Strategy Post Strategy
#NAME? 21 22
#NAME? 15 23
#NAME? 12 24
#NAME? 11 25
#NAME? 14 26
#NAME? 17 27
#NAME? 15 24
#NAME? 14 13
#NAME? 18 17
#NAME? 18 17
#NAME? 17 16
#NAME? 21 20
#NAME? 16 14
#NAME? 14 16
#NAME? 18 16
#NAME? 17 18
#NAME? 15 16
#NAME? 16 25
#NAME? 14 12
#NAME? 15 14
t-Test: Two-Sample Assuming Unequal Variances

Product 1 Product 2
Mean 37.25 47.88235
Variance 9.986842 198.1103
Observations 20 17
Hypothesized Mean Difference 0
df 17
t Stat -3.049928
P(T<=t) one-tail 0.00362
t Critical one-tail 1.739607
P(T<=t) two-tail 0.00724
t Critical two-tail 2.109816

h0- there is no significance difference in the performanc

h1-there is a significance difference in the performance

under two tail test,

p value 0.00724

as p value is less than the significance value which is 0.0

thus,there is a significance difference in the performan
erence in the performance of two products and their rejection rates
ence in the performance of two products and their rejection rates

ficance value which is 0.05, so we will reject h0 and accept h1

erence in the performance of two products and their rejection rates
 Rejection Data (per 1000s)

Weeks Product 1 Product 2

1 35 32
2 34 34
3 36 37
4 38 42
5 42 56
6 32 78
7 33 31
8 34 39
9 36 38
10 37 65
11 36 64
12 39 58
13 40 57
14 41 36
15 42 42
16 43 43
17 35 62
18 36
19 37
20 39
1) year wise total returns
Data
Mutual Fund Sum of Year 1 Sum of Year 2 Sum of Year 3 Sum of Year 4 Sum of Year 5
Foreign Stock 10.06 13.12 13.47 45.42 -21.93
Intermediate-Term Bond 17.64 3.25 7.51 -1.33 7.36
Large-Cap Growth 32.41 18.71 33.28 41.46 -23.26
Large-Cap Value 32.36 20.61 12.93 7.06 -5.37
Small-Cap Growth 33.44 19.4 3.85 58.68 -9.02
Small-Cap Value 24.56 25.32 -6.7 5.43 17.31
Total Result 150.47 100.41 64.34 156.72 -34.91

2)portfolio wise total returns

Mutual Fund Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Foreign Stock 10.06 13.12 13.47 45.42 -21.93
Intermediate-Term Bond 17.64 3.25 7.51 -1.33 7.36
Large-Cap Growth 32.41 18.71 33.28 41.46 -23.26
Large-Cap Value 32.36 20.61 12.93 7.06 -5.37
Small-Cap Growth 33.44 19.4 3.85 58.68 -9.02
Small-Cap Value 24.56 25.32 -6.7 5.43 17.31
spark line 70
60
50
40
30
Data
20 Column C
10 Column D
Column E
0
d ck d th e th e Column F
-10 Fun to on w lu w lu
a l n
S B ro V a ro Va
ig m G p G p
ut
-20 u
re er p Ca p Ca
M Fo e-T - Ca g e- l - Ca a ll-
t e r al
-30 ia rg La Sm
ed La Sm
rm
te
In

Chart Title
return rate 120
60.14 80
34.43 40
102.6 0
67.59 k nd th e th e
oc lu lu
-40 St Bo ow Va ow Va
106.35 ig
n m Gr ap Gr p
re er p -C ap Ca
Fo e-
T Ca e l-C al
l-
65.92 at g e- rg al
ed
i r La Sm
La Sm
rm
te
In

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Year 4 Year 5 return rate
 th lu
e
ow Va
Gr p
ap l- Ca
l-C al
al Sm
Sm

Year 3
return rate
Mutual Fund Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Foreign Stock 10.06 13.12 13.47 45.42 -21.93
Intermediate-Term Bond 17.64 3.25 7.51 -1.33 7.36
Large-Cap Growth 32.41 18.71 33.28 41.46 -23.26
Large-Cap Value 32.36 20.61 12.93 7.06 -5.37
Small-Cap Growth 33.44 19.4 3.85 58.68 -9.02
Small-Cap Value 24.56 25.32 -6.7 5.43 17.31