Hypothesis Identification Article Analysis

Hypothesis Identification Article Analysis

June Spratt

RES 342 Research and Evaluation II

December 20, 2010

Instructor

In the University of Phoenix simulation (2010), the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and nonparametric tests analyze the effect of different factors on two response variables – productivity and client satisfaction. The results of the analysis are designed to help me, as a new manger, pinpoint areas that need improvement and make decisions that will improve the quality management process (University of Phoenix, 2010).

Three Lessons Learned Relative to ANOVA and Nonparametric Tests

Three lessons I learned relative to ANOVA and nonparametric tests are:

• The Kruskal-Wallis test analyzes three competencies – high, medium, and low (2010).

• The Kruskal-Wallis test is used when it is difficult to meet all the assumptions of ANOVA. The three major assumptions of ANOVA are (2010):

1. the errors are random and independent of each other

2. each population has a normal distribution

3. all populations have the same variance

• Although I made some good decisions while going through the simulation, I also made mistakes. I suggested Praxidike systems review project life cycle to find the cause for delay. Had I analyzed the results of the Kruskal-Wallis test correctly, I would have been able to confirm that the productivity of the software engineers changed with the level of competency. I should have suggested that Praxidike Systems provide training to increase competency because the training would have increased the productivity of the software engineers. I also learned that analyzing results is crucial. The consequence of analyzing results incorrectly is a waste of company resources, time, money, but also in results in erroneous information on which to make critical decisions (University of Phoenix, 2010).

Concepts and Analytic Tools I will use in the Workplace

I do not know how I will use the...