COMPUTER PRACTICAL

ASSIGNMENT
SUBMITTED BY ABHISHEK DHAWAN
12/BBS/0069
SEMESTER IV
SUBMITTED TO DR YOGIETA S MEHRA
BACHELOR OF BUSINESS STUDIES

YEAR
WPI
Gr__Rate_WPI
FISCAL_DEFICIT
GrRateGDP
Gr_Rate_M3
1971
7.66
1
1972
8.09
5.61
2
6.4
14.41
1973
8.9
10.01
1
10
16.35
1974
10.7
20.22
1
22.55
19.85
1975
13.4
25.23
1
17.71
13.62
1976
13.25
-1.12
1
6.21
12.48
1977
13.53
2.11
1
7.49
19.88
1978
14.23
5.17
1
14.13
19.92
1979
14.23
0.00
1
7.47
20.39
1980
16.67
17.15
2
9.12
20.2
1981
19.71
18.24
3
19.51
16.38
1982
21.55
9.34
2
17.08
17.32
1983
22.6
4.87
3
11.72
14.59
1984
24.3
7.52
3
16.97
17.6
1985
25.88
6.50
4
12.3
18.27
1986
27.02
4.40
4
11.74
16.58
1987
28.59
5.81
5
11.5
17.6
1988
30.92
8.15
5
13.36
17.26
1989
33.22
7.44
4
19.34
17.28
1990
35.7
7.47
4
15.2
19.02
1991
39.36
10.25
5
16.49
16.66
1992
44.77
13.74
3
15.37
17.2
1993
49.28
10.07
4
14.7
17.73
1994
53.39
8.34
5
16.23
15.92
1995
60.12
12.61
3
16.8
19.83
1996
64.92
7.98
3
17.08
15.63
1997
67.91
4.61
3
16.38
16.22
1998
70.9
4.40
4
11.2
17.02
1999
75.12
5.95
4
15.28
19.85
2000
77.58
3.27
4
10.7
17.17
2001
83.13
7.15
5
7.83
15.92
2002
86.12
3.60
5
8.82
16
2003
89.05
3.40
5
7.86
16.05
2004
93.91
5.46
4
12.15
12.96
2005
100
6.48
3
13.32
14.32
2006
104.5
4.50
3
14.1
15.54
2007
111.4
6.60
3
16.6
19.98
2008
116.6
4.67
2
15.91
22.14
2009
126
8.06
5
15.75
20.54
2010
130.8
3.81
6
15.18
19.21
2011
143.3
9.56
5
18.96
16.17
2012
156.07
8.91
14.95
15.83

Frequencies

Statistics
INFLATION
N

Valid

FISCAL_DEFICIT

40

40

Mean

7.9453

3.2250

Median

7.0207

3.0000

3.00

5.21722

1.49336

27.219

2.230

1.377

-.163

.374

.374

10

3.4217

1.0000

20

4.4240

1.2000

25

4.6212

2.0000

30

4.9628

2.3000

40

5.8671

3.0000

50

7.0207

3.0000

60

8.0307

4.0000

70

9.2082

4.0000

75

9.8984

4.7500

80

10.2164

5.0000

90

16.8067

5.0000

Missing

Mode

-1.12

Std. Deviation
Variance
Skewness
Std. Error of Skewness
Percentiles

a. Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown

CONCLUSION

Mean for Inflation = 7.9453 ; Mean for Fiscal Deficit = 3.2250

Distribution is skewed for Inflation, but not for Fiscal Deficit.

Histogram

Descriptive Statistics
N

Minimum

Maximum

Mean

Std. Deviation

Statistic

Statistic

Statistic

Statistic

Statistic

WPI

41

Valid N (listwise)

41

7.66

156.07

55.0439

42.61568

Skewness
Statistic

Kurtosis

Std. Error

.764

.369

Statistic

Std. Error

-.548

CONCLUSION : Negative value of kurtosis imply a platykurtic distribution.

* Chart Builder.
GGRAPH
/GRAPHDATASET NAME="graphdataset" VARIABLES=Gr_Rate_GDP INFLATION
MISSING=LISTWISE REPORTMISSING=NO
/GRAPHSPEC SOURCE=INLINE.
BEGIN GPL
SOURCE: s=userSource(id("graphdataset"))
DATA: Gr_Rate_GDP=col(source(s), name("Gr_Rate_GDP"), unit.category())
DATA: INFLATION=col(source(s), name("INFLATION"), unit.category())
GUIDE: axis(dim(1), label("Gr_Rate_GDP"))
GUIDE: axis(dim(2), label("INFLATION"))
ELEMENT: interval(position(Gr_Rate_GDP*INFLATION), shape.interior(shape.square))
END GPL.

.724

ROLL
NO.

BACKGROUND GRADE
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

1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5

2
3
1
3
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
3
3
3
1
2
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
2

Case Processing Summary

Cases
Valid
N
Education Background *

Missing
Percent

25

100.0%

Total

Percent
0

.0%

Percent
25

100.0%

GRADE

CONCLUSION : The Case Processing Summary shows the Valid, Missing, and Total cases.
The high percent of valid cases here reflects the people who were asked this particular
question in the survey. The Valid N (number of cases) is used in the table.

Education Background * GRADE Crosstabulation

Count
GRADE
A
Education Background

Total

BComm

Btech

B.Sc

BBS

BA

11

25

Total

Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2Value
Pearson Chi-Square
Likelihood Ratio
Linear-by-Linear Association

df

sided)

.089

15.581

.049

3.630

.057

13.750

N of Valid Cases

25

a. 15 cells (100.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum

expected count is 1.20.

We can see here that (1) = 13.750, p = 0.089. This tells us that there is statistically significant
association between Grade and Education Background
Directional Measures
Asymp. Std.
Value
Nominal by Nominal

Lambda

Error

Approx. T

Approx. Sig.

Symmetric

.265

.152

1.597

.110

Education Background

.250

.144

1.581

.114

GRADE Dependent

.286

.209

1.187

.235

Education Background

.137

.065

.105

.257

.096

.136

Dependent

Goodman and Kruskal tau

Dependent
GRADE Dependent
a. Not assuming the null hypothesis.
b. Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
c. Based on chi-square approximation

SALES
5
60
20
11
45
6
15
22
29
3
16
8
18
23
81

POTENTIAL DEALERS PEOPLE COMPETITOR SERVICE CUSTOMERS

25
1
6
5
2
20
150
12
30
4
5
50
45
5
15
3
2
25
30
2
10
3
2
20
75
12
20
2
4
30
10
3
8
2
3
16
29
5
18
4
5
30
43
7
16
3
6
40
70
4
15
2
5
39
40
1
6
5
2
5
40
4
11
4
2
17
25
2
9
3
3
10
32
7
14
3
4
31
73
10
10
4
3
43
150
15
35
4
7
70

Correlations
Correlations
SALES
SALES

Pearson

POTENTIAL

DEALERS
1

PEOPLE

COMPETITION

SERVICE

CUSTOMERS

.945**

.908**

.953**

-.046

.726**

.878**

.000

.000

.000

.872

.002

.000

15

15

15

15

15

15

**

**

.140

.613

.831**

.000

.000

.619

.015

.000

Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
POTENTIAL

Pearson

15
.945

**

.837

.877

Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
DEALERS

Pearson

.000
15

15

15

15

15

15

15

.908**

.837**

.855**

-.082

.685**

.860**

.000

.000

.000

.771

.005

.000

15

15

15

15

15

15

15

**

**

**

-.036

**

.854**

.897

.000

.000

Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
PEOPLE

Pearson

.953

.877

.855

.794

Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
COMPETITION

Pearson

.000

.000

.000

15

15

15

15

15

15

15

-.046

.140

-.082

-.036

-.178

-.015

.872

.619

.771

.897

.527

.959

15

15

15

15

15

15

15

**

**

**

-.178

.818**

Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
SERVICE

Pearson

.726

.613

.685

.794

Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)

.002

.015

.005

.000

.527

15

15

15

15

15

15

15

**

**

**

**

-.015

**

N
CUSTOMERS

Pearson

.878

.831

.860

.854

.000

.818

Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)

.000

.000

.000

.000

.959

.000

15

15

15

15

15

15

Regression

Variables Entered/Removed
Variables
Model

Variables Entered

CUSTOMERS,

Removed

Method
. Enter

COMPETITION,
SERVICE,
POTENTIAL,
DEALERS,
PEOPLE
a. All requested variables entered.

Model Summary

Model

Adjusted R

Std. Error of the

Square

Estimate

R Square
.989

.977

.960

4.391

a. Predictors: (Constant), CUSTOMERS, COMPETITION, SERVICE,

POTENTIAL, DEALERS, PEOPLE

CONCLUSION R=.989 indicates high correlation. R2 = 0.977 indicates 97.7% of variance can
be explained by variables taken
b

ANOVA
Model
1

Sum of Squares
Regression
Residual
Total

df

Mean Square

6609.485

1101.581

154.249

19.281

6763.733

14

F
57.133

Sig.
.000

a. Predictors: (Constant), CUSTOMERS, COMPETITION, SERVICE, POTENTIAL, DEALERS, PEOPLE

b. Dependent Variable: SALES

15

CONCLUSION : Statistically significant difference as Signifance<0.05

Coefficients

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model
1

B
(Constant)

Coefficients

Std. Error

Beta

-3.173

5.813

POTENTIAL

.227

.075

DEALERS

.819

PEOPLE
COMPETITION
SERVICE
CUSTOMERS

Sig.
-.546

.600

.439

3.040

.016

.631

.164

1.298

.230

1.091

.418

.414

2.609

.031

-1.893

1.340

-.085

-1.413

.195

-.549

1.568

-.041

-.350

.735

.066

.195

.050

.338

.744

a. Dependent Variable: SALES

EQUATION : Y=-3.173x+0.227(Potential)+0.819(Dealers)+1.091(People)1.893(Competiton)-0.549(Service)+0.066(Customers)
Regression

Variables Entered/Removed

Variables
Model

Variables Entered

PEOPLE

Removed

Method
. Forward
(Criterion:
Probability-of-Fto-enter <= .050)

POTENTIAL

. Forward
(Criterion:
Probability-of-Fto-enter <= .050)

a. Dependent Variable: SALES

Model Summary

Model
1
2

R Square

Adjusted R

Std. Error of the

Square

Estimate

.953

.909

.902

6.895

.980

.960

.953

4.753

a. Predictors: (Constant), PEOPLE

b. Predictors: (Constant), PEOPLE, POTENTIAL

Conclusion : R=.9539 indicates high correlation. R2 = 0.909 indicates 90.9% of variance can be
explained by variables taken

ANOVA
Model
1

Sum of Squares
Regression

Mean Square

6145.646

6145.646

618.087

13

47.545

Total

6763.733

14

Regression

6492.658

3246.329

271.075

12

22.590

6763.733

14

Residual

df

Residual
Total

Sig.

129.259

.000

143.709

.000

a. Predictors: (Constant), PEOPLE

b. Predictors: (Constant), PEOPLE, POTENTIAL
c. Dependent Variable: SALES

Coefficients

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model
1

B
(Constant)
PEOPLE

(Constant)
PEOPLE
POTENTIAL

Coefficients

Std. Error

-13.216

3.737

2.512

.221

-10.616

2.660

1.424

.317

.243

.062

Beta

Sig.

-3.537

.004

11.369

.000

-3.992

.002

.540

4.499

.001

.471

3.919

.002

.953

a. Dependent Variable: SALES

Excluded Variables

Collinearity
Statistics
Model
1

Beta In
POTENTIAL
DEALERS

Sig.

Partial Correlation

Tolerance

.471

3.919

.002

.749

.231

.347

2.567

.025

.595

.269

COMPETITION
SERVICE
CUSTOMERS
2

DEALERS
COMPETITION
SERVICE
CUSTOMERS

-.011

-.123

.904

-.035

.999

-.083

-.590

.566

-.168

.370

.236

1.541

.149

.406

.270

.221

2.102

.059

.535

.236

-.105

-1.869

.089

-.491

.871

.024

.234

.819

.070

.340

.105

.880

.398

.257

.241

a. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), PEOPLE

b. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), PEOPLE, POTENTIAL
c. Dependent Variable: SALES

Conclusion : t-test indicates Competition, Service should be excluded to get maximum

Significance

COMPENSATION EXPERIENCE
EDUCATION
1500
2
1650
3
1750
3
1400
2
2000
4
2200
5
2100
1
2750
5
2900
8
1100
3
1000
4
1350
6
1550
4
1375
8
1400
4

SUPERIOR

PROJECTS

5
6
3
3
4
6
5
8
9
3
2
4
6
4
3

4
5
5
3
6
6
4
7
8
2
1
4
4
8
5

10
10
12
9
15
14
12
15
25
7
5
12
11
13
10

Correlations
COMPENSATI
ON
COMPENSATION

EXPERIENCE

Pearson Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)
N
EXPERIENCE

15

Pearson Correlation

.295

Sig. (2-tailed)

.285

N
EDUCATION

15

Pearson Correlation

N
SUPERIOR

Pearson Correlation

N
PROJECTS

Pearson Correlation

N
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

Variables Entered/Removed
Model

Variables

Variables

Method

.711

**

.858

**

.003

.000

15

15

15

15

.382

**

15

.160

15

15
.655

**

.655

.605

.160

.008

.017

15

15

15

**

.650

.771

**

.009

.001

15

15

15

**

.650

.824

**

.003

.008

.009

15

15

15

15

15

**

**

**

.858

Sig. (2-tailed)

**

PROJECTS

.000

.000

**

.852

SUPERIOR

.285

.382

.711

Sig. (2-tailed)

.295

**

.852

Sig. (2-tailed)

EDUCATION

.605

.771

.000

.824

.000

.017

.001

.000

15

15

15

15

15

Entered
1

Removed

PROJECTS,

. Enter

EXPERIENCE,
EDUCATION,
SUPERIOR
a. All requested variables entered.

ENTER METHOD USED

Model Summary

Model

.942

Adjusted R

Std. Error of the

Square

Estimate

R Square
a

.888

.843

221.069

a. Predictors: (Constant), PROJECTS, EXPERIENCE, EDUCATION,

SUPERIOR

CONCLUSION : R=.942 indicates high correlation; 88.8% of variance is explained by the

variables entered.
b

ANOVA
Model
1

Sum of Squares
Regression
Residual
Total

df

Mean Square

3861033.355

965258.339

488716.645

10

48871.665

4349750.000

14

Sig.

19.751

.000

a. Predictors: (Constant), PROJECTS, EXPERIENCE, EDUCATION, SUPERIOR

b. Dependent Variable: COMPENSATION

Coefficients

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model
1

Std. Error

(Constant)

456.847

173.949

EXPERIENCE

-93.432

39.717

EDUCATION

110.270

SUPERIOR
PROJECTS

Coefficients
Beta

Sig.

2.626

.025

-.340

-2.352

.040

47.788

.392

2.307

.044

44.211

55.721

.159

.793

.446

77.515

28.216

.631

2.747

.021

a. Dependent Variable: COMPENSATION

EQUATION : Y=456.847x-93.432(Experience)+110.270(Education)+44.211(Superior)+77.515(Projects)

1
2
2
5
1
3
2
4
2
1
1
1
3
2
2
5
1
2
3
4

4
3
2
1
2
2
2
4
3
4
5
6
1
2
5
6
4
3
3
3

1
2
2
4
2
3
5
3
2
2
1
1
4
2
1
3
2
1
2
2

6
4
1
2
5
3
1
4
6
2
3
1
4
2
3
2
2
1
3
7

5
3
2
2
4
3
2
4
5
1
2
1
4
2
2
1
1
2
4
6

6
3
1
2
4
3
1
5
6
2
3
1
3
2
3
3
2
2
3
6

5
3
1
2
4
3
2
3
5
1
2
1
3
2
2
2
1
2
4
6

KMO and Bartlett's Test

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy.
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity

Approx. Chi-Square
df
Sig.

Communalities
Initial

Extraction

V1

1.000

.722

V2

1.000

.452

V3

1.000

.731

V4

1.000

.945

V5

1.000

.950

V6

1.000

.914

V7

1.000

.955

V8

1.000

.799

V9

1.000

.777

V10

1.000

.789

Extraction Method: Principal

Component Analysis.

.618
164.098
45
.000

2
5
7
3
1
6
4
2
1
4
2
1
6
1
2
5
1
3
3
2

3
5
6
2
1
5
4
3
4
4
2
2
5
3
1
5
1
2
3
3

2
2
2
3
2
3
5
3
1
1
1
2
3
2
6
4
3
2
3
6

Total Variance Explained

Component

Extraction

Rotation

Sums of

Sums of

Initial

Squared

Squared

Eigenvalues

Loadings

Loadings

% of

Cumulative

Variance

Total

Total

% of

Cumulative

Variance

Total

% of

Cumulative

Variance

3.883

38.828

38.828

3.883

38.828

38.828

3.841

38.409

38.409

2.777

27.770

66.598

2.777

27.770

66.598

2.429

24.294

62.703

1.375

13.747

80.346

1.375

13.747

80.346

1.764

17.643

80.346

.945

9.449

89.795

.479

4.793

94.588

.292

2.923

97.511

.117

1.166

98.677

.068

.680

99.356

.037

.374

99.730

10

.027

.270

100.000

Component Matrix

Component
1

V1

.176

.670

.493

V2

-.136

-.608

.254

V3

-.107

.820

.218

V4

.966

-.036

-.097

V5

.951

.166

-.136

V6

.952

-.084

-.025

V7

.971

.096

-.046

V8

-.322

.775

-.308

V9

-.069

.735

-.482

V10

.161

.319

.814

Extraction Method: Principal Component

Analysis.
a. 3 components extracted.

Rotated Component Matrix

Component
1

V1

.126

.313

.780

V2

-.181

-.639

-.107

V3

-.116

.604

.594

V4

.970

-.064

-.006

V5

.964

.131

.063

V6

.945

-.140

.030

V7

.971

.024

.106

V8

-.262

.848

.101

V9

.010

.881

-.044

V10

.063

-.149

.874

Extraction Method: Principal Component

Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser
Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 5 iterations.

Component Transformation Matrix

Component

.991

-.084

.099

.022

.860

.510

-.128

-.504

.854

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

CONCLUSION : Component Matrix - This table contains component loadings, which are the correlations
between the variable and the component. Because these are correlations, possible values range from -1 to
+1. On the /format subcommand, we used the option blank(.30), which tells SPSS not to print any of the
correlations that are .3 or less. This makes the output easier to read by removing the clutter of low
correlations that are probably not meaningful anyway. Rotation is a method used to simplify interpretation of
a factor analysis.