You are on page 1of 24

+234-703-430-2486

The Mentality Profile: Toward an Economy of HR Metrics


Keywords: Commitment, Concatenation, Effort, Order,

View my profile

Process, Productivity, Thought, Value, Values

By Peter Anyebe

AGAPE
WordPress

CONSULTANTS
Google Me

The basis for a precise HR

24th October, 2012

+234-703-430-2486

The Mentality Profile: Toward an Economy of HR Metrics


By Peter Anyebe

Abstract
Society is the product of the activities of humans in nature, but in time it becomes a monster that makes people; according to the culture, values, beliefs, norms, and mores which are not necessarily optimised Based on this dictum, this work investigates the following conclusions about nature, humanity, and the society:

The Sleep of Reason Produces Monsters Francisco de Goya

The universe is characterised by a continuous flux Because of the speed, there is an appearance of disorder, which is false The underlying order traces the normal curve and is bell shaped, an indication that the environment places a limit on all activities that must rise and fall Sustained growth would therefore require levitation, whichs analogue in this case is appreciation For the humans who come to this realisation, the following conditions would hold true: RES = RGT, Nu 4 Ps 20%
RES = Response to Stimuli RGT = Appropriateness of Response Nu = Number of Essentials Identified Ps = Position on the Pareto 80-20 Continuum

Theoretical simulations and initial empirical data fit these conclusions. View my profile Google Me WordPress

+234-703-430-2486

The Mentality Profile: Toward an Economy of HR Metrics


By Peter Anyebe

0.0 Preamble
The following dictums have been ascribed to Thorndike, E. L. (1874 1949): All science rests upon and begins with accurate description and measurement Whatever exists, exists in some quantity and can, in principle, be measured The only things that can be known for sure are those that can be measured Measurement involves the following two, 2 processes: Itemise the essential components of the phenomenon (Description?) Map these into the number line, according to the observed relationships between them (Quantification) For the typical human person, going beyond appearances to identify essentials is an ordeal that is not worth the effort. But it is the essential elements of phenomena that define their being. Until these are unravelled therefore, any claims to the knowledge of phenomena would be limited. With the generalisation of the scientific method that made the adoption of the quantitative approach in the arts and humanities unavoidable, the systems principle became the kernel of the research methodology. The first tentative inroads to this adoption involved a strategy that defined systems indirectly, by observing their inputs and outputs. With sufficient data, it was hoped, the systems black box would be defined adequately, to describe its being. Before then, the arena would be a free for all, an all comers affair. View my profile Google Me WordPress

HR has had its fair share of this rat race. Progress has depended a lot on leaps from psychology research into the personality, emotion, attitude and allied concepts. But psychology has also suffered limitations that made it shift emphasis from phenomenology to behaviourism. Behaviourism has almost remained stuck in the input-output, cause and effect approach to quantitative analysis; and this, with the attendant plethora of factors and concepts. To reintegrate phenomenology and the study of consciousness into psychology, to complement behaviourism, required that the following minimum conditions be satisfied: Trace the path from thought to behaviour Link perception to sensation Define the energy flow that drives these processes These challenges have been summarised in the age old riddle of mind and matter, as well as the controversy about determinism. Recall the following assertions from Cattell, R. B in his book, The Scientific Analysis of Personality, published by Penguin Books in 1968: The organism is a tremendously ingenious arrangement of protoplasm, set to seek only to maintain life in itself and to propagate itself Behaviour traits are necessary negotiations or compromises between the physiological demands of the organism on the one hand, and the physical and social demands of the environment on the other A trait is not something existing in a person, it is a concept and a measurement derived from his relations to his environment, though it hinges on him These statements derive from purely materialistic definitions of humans that group people with animals and plants as life forms, without a clear distinction between the three, 3. This attitude could be traced to Kantian philosophy, which distinguished between the natural order, N-O and the personal order, P-O but argued that the NO can not be known. Immanuel Kant differentiated between these concepts in the following definitions:

Phenomena: Things as they appear to our senses (The P-O?) Noumena: Things in themselves; that are purely objects of thought, independently of sense perception; which, by definition, we can never experience (The N-O?) This work presents an attempt at the resolution of these knotty difficulties in the following conceptions: The natural order, N-O The perception model of mind, PMM The concatenation model The phenomenology model The character model The path to soul The model human A model of learning The productivity model

The value creation paradigm

1.00 Natures Secret Plan and the Universal History


The history of mankind can be seen, in the large, as the realization of natures secret plan to bring forth a perfectly constituted state as the only condition in which the capacities of mankind can be fully developed, and also bring forth that external relation among states which is perfectly adequate to this end A philosophical attempt to work out a universal history according to a natural plan directed to achieving the civic union of the human race must be regarded as possible and, indeed, as contributing to this end of nature Immanuel Kant, 1784 Currently, society is the product of the activities of humans in nature, but in time it became a monster that makes people; according to the culture, values, beliefs, norms, and mores which are not necessarily optimised. But in agreement with Kant,

society has been undergoing an evolution, with the increase in knowledge. As people shift from the preoccupation with appearances to the perception of essentials, the nature of their contributions to the society changes, which results in changes in the socio-political and economy of societies. Recall Stephen Hawking on Charles Darwins natural selection as follows: In any population of self-reproducing organisms, there will be variations in the genetic material and upbringing that different individuals have These differences will mean that some individuals are better able than others to draw the right conclusions about the world around them and to act accordingly These individuals will be more likely to survive and reproduce and so their pattern of behaviour and thought will come to dominate The industrial revolution exposed the human inefficiency and ineffectiveness, via the waste that became apparent due to the crudity of the first set of machines. The six sigma, 6 principle suggested the process as the solution to the waste, inefficiency and ineffectiveness. The information revolution that is currently with us holds the potential to institutionalise this solution. For instance, when data is defined as information that includes numbers, text, images, and sounds then the process becomes the unit of data. Recall that the process is actually a series of actions, each of which can be represented by a text. The typical standard procedure presented in this work comprises six, 6 items, each of which is uniquely located in the series. Adopting this principle of the standard procedure expands the 6 principle from engineering to cover the other aspects of production, together with the attendant drop in waste and improvements in efficiency and effectiveness. Pareto, in the 80 20 Rule, argued that 80% of the work in most organisations is done by 20% of the personnel. This distinguishes the 80%ters who simply follow, from the 20%ters who form the strike team in the organisation. It is the 20%ters who perform at tasks by the standard procedure. They define the standard, which cultures ought to attain in the upbringing of their members. It is this culture that is the product of natures secret plan, to the end of which the increase in knowledge as well as the industrial and information revolutions are geared.

2.00 Platonian Duality


For the sake of brevity, the increase in knowledge is traced from Plato, through Einstein and Feynman, to Hawking who is currently alive and has made important allusions to the works of the other three, 3. Although Kant did not agree with Plato that noumena could be defined, Platos duality principle founded the distinction between noumena and phenomena in the differentiation between the following two, 2 worlds: The world of Forms (Noumena?) The world of Objects (Phenomena?) At the heart of Platos philosophy is his theory of forms, or ideas. Ultimately, his view of knowledge, his ethical theory, his psychology, his concept of the state, and his perspective on art must be understood in terms of this theory. His theory of forms and his theory of knowledge are so interrelated that they are better discussed together. Influenced by Socrates, Plato was convinced that knowledge, or the natural order, N-O is attainable. He was also convinced of two essential characteristics of knowledge. First, 1st knowledge must be certain and infallible. Second, 2nd knowledge must have as its object that which is genuinely real as contrasted with that which is an appearance only. Because that which is fully real must, for Plato, be fixed, permanent, and unchanging, he identified the real with the ideal realm of being as opposed to the physical world of becoming. Reality in this case would be a reference to the essentials. Plato summarised his thoughts in the image of the divided line and the myth of the cave. In the image of the divided line, Plato distinguishes between two levels of awareness as follows: Opinion and Knowledge Thus claims or assertions about the physical or visible world, including both commonsense observations and the propositions of science, are opinions only. Some of these opinions are well founded and some are not; but none of them counts as genuine knowledge. At the higher level awareness translates into knowledge, because reason, rather than mere sense experience, is involved.

Reason, properly used, results in intellectual insights that are certain, and the objects of these rational insights are the abiding universals, the eternal forms or substances that constitute the real world. Plato uses reason and rationality synonymously and does not distinguish between them. The myth of the cave describes individuals chained deep within the recesses of a cave. Bound so that vision is restricted, they cannot see one another. The only thing visible is the wall of the cave upon which appear shadows cast by models or statues of animals and objects that are passed before a brightly burning fire. Breaking free, one of the individuals escapes from the cave into the light of day. With the aid of the sun, that person sees for the first time the real world and returns to the cave with the message that the only things they had seen up till then were shadows and appearances and that the real world awaits them if they are willing to struggle free of their bonds. The shadowy environment of the cave symbolizes for Plato the physical world of appearances. Escape into the sun-filled setting outside the cave symbolizes the transition to the real world, the world of full and perfect being, the world of Forms, which is the proper object of knowledge. Forms have greater reality than objects in the physical world both because of their perfection and stability and because they are models, resemblance to which gives ordinary physical objects whatever reality they have. Everything in the world of space and time is what it is by virtue of its resemblance to, or participation in, its universal form. The ability to define the universal term is evidence that one has grasped the form to which that universal refers. Hawking made reference to this principle in his explanation of Einsteins general relativity principle. Thus in general relativity, bodies always follow straight lines in four-dimensional space-time, but they nevertheless appear to move along curved paths in our three-dimensional space. This is rather like watching an airplane flying over hilly ground. Although it follows a straight line in three-dimensional space, its shadow follows a curved path on the two-dimensional ground. The mass of the sun curves space-time in such a way that although the earth follows a straight path in four-dimensional space-time, it appears to move along a circular orbit in threedimensional space.

3.00 Einsteins General Relativity


In the general theory of relativity Einstein made the revolutionary suggestion that gravity is not a force like other forces, but is a consequence of the fact that spacetime is not flat, as had been previously assumed: it is curved, or warped, by the distribution of mass and energy in it. Bodies like the earth are not made to move on curved orbits by a force called gravity; instead, they follow the nearest thing to a straight path in a curved space, which is called a geodesic. A geodesic is the shortest path between two nearby points. For example, the surface of the earth is a twodimensional curved space. A geodesic on the earth is called a great circle, and is the shortest route between any two points. As the geodesic is the shortest path between any two airports, this is the route an airline navigator will tell the pilot to fly along. Space and time are now dynamic quantities: when a body moves, or a force acts, it affects the curvature of space and time; and in turn the structure of space-time affects the way in which bodies move and forces act. Space and time not only affect but also are affected by everything that happens in the universe. Just as one cannot talk about events in the universe without the notions of space and time, so in general relativity it became meaningless to talk about space and time outside the limits of the universe. The old idea of an essentially unchanging universe that could have existed, and could continue to exist, forever was replaced by the notion of a dynamic, expanding universe that seemed to have begun a finite time ago, and that might end at a finite time in the future. The whole history of science has been the gradual realization that events do not happen in an arbitrary manner, but that they reflect a certain underlying order, which may or may not be divinely inspired. It would be only natural to suppose that this order should apply not only to the laws, but also to the conditions at the boundary of space-time that specify the initial state of the universe. In order to predict how the universe should have started off, one needs laws that hold at the beginning of time. But when one combines general relativity with the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics, it is possible for both space and time to be finite without any edges or boundaries. Thus, just as Newtons laws of motion put an end to the idea of absolute position in space, the theory of relativity got rid of absolute time; and Feynmans superposition and sum over histories got rid of the boundaries.

4.00 Feynmans Superposition and Sum over Histories


Thirty-one years ago Dick Feynman told me about his 'sum over histories' version of quantum mechanics. "The electron does anything it likes," he said. "It just goes in any direction, at any speed, forward and backward in time, however it likes, and then you add up the amplitudes and it gives you the wave function." I said to him "You're crazy." But he isn't Freeman Dyson, 1980 Following Hawking, in Feynmans formulation of quantum theory in terms of a sum over histories, a particle does not have just a single history, as it would in a classical theory. Instead, it is supposed to follow every possible path in space-time, and with each of these histories there are associated a couple of numbers, one representing the size of a wave and the other representing its position in the cycle or phase. Then the probability that a particle passes through some particular point is found by adding up the waves associated with every possible history that passes through that point. When one actually tries to perform these sums, however, one runs into severe technical problems. The only way around these is to add up the waves for particle histories that are not in real time, but take place in imaginary time. Imaginary time is a well-defined mathematical concept. Taking any ordinary or real number and multiplying it by itself, gives a positive number. For instance, 2 times 2 is 4, but so is 2 times 2. There are however, special numbers called imaginary numbers that give negative numbers when multiplied by themselves. The one called i, when multiplied by itself, gives 1, 2i multiplied by itself gives 4, and so on. In practice, the real numbers are represented by a line going from left to right, with zero in the middle, negative numbers like 1, 2, etc. on the left, and positive numbers, 1, 2, etc. on the right. Then imaginary numbers are represented by a line going up and down the page, with i, 2i, etc. above the middle, and i, 2i, etc. below. Thus imaginary numbers are in a sense numbers at right angles to ordinary real numbers. To measure time using imaginary numbers rather than the real ones has an interesting effect on space-time. The distinction between time and space disappears completely. In Euclidean space-time there is no difference between the time direction and directions in space. On the other hand, in real space-time, in which

events are labelled by ordinary real values of the time coordinate, it is easy to tell the difference. The time direction at all points lies within the light cone, and space directions lie outside. When Feynmans sum over histories is applied to Einsteins view of gravity, the analogue of the history of a particle becomes a complete curved space-time that represents the history of the whole universe. Because one is using Euclidean spacetimes, in which the time direction is on the same footing as directions in space, it is possible for space-time to be finite in extent and yet to have no singularities that formed a boundary or edge. Space-time would be like the surface of the earth, only with two more dimensions. The surface of the earth is finite in extent but it doesnt have a boundary or edge. This means that if a person sails off into the sunset, they dont fall off the edge or run into a singularity. See the similarities in the chart below:

Source: http://www.fisica.net/relatividade/stephen_hawking_a_brief_history_of_time.pdf The quantum theory of gravity has therefore opened up a new possibility, in which there would be no boundary to space-time and so there would be no need to specify the behaviour at the boundary. There would be no singularities at which the laws of science broke down, and no edge of space-time at which one would have to appeal to God or some new law to set the boundary conditions for space-time. The universe would be completely self-contained and not affected by anything outside itself. It would neither be created nor destroyed. It would just BE.

In real time, the universe has a beginning and an end at singularities that form a boundary to space-time and at which the laws of science break down. But in imaginary time, there are no singularities or boundaries. So maybe what is called imaginary time is really more basic, and what is called real is just an idea that is invented to help describe what the universe is thought to be like. But if the universe is completely self-contained, with no singularities or boundaries that has profound implications for the role of God as Creator. So long as the universe had a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator. But if the universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end and would simply be. What place, then, for a creator? Hawking concludes however, that these principles only define a set of rules and equations. This causes the crucial question to be re-phrased. What is it that breathes fire into the equations and makes a universe for them to describe? Neither can the usual approach to science, of constructing a mathematical model, answer the questions of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Finding the answer to this question would be the ultimate triumph of human reason, because this would make the mind of God known.

5.00 The Mentality Profile


Following Plato, Einstein, Feynman, and Hawking; A God who is self-contained, Created a universe that is self-contained; And expects humans to become self-contained, Creating institutions that are also self-contained The uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics implies that certain pairs of quantities, such as the position and velocity of a particle, cannot both be predicted with complete accuracy. Following Feynman, quantum mechanics deals with this situation via a class of quantum theories in which particles dont have well-defined positions and velocities but are represented by a wave. These quantum theories are deterministic in the sense that they give laws for the evolution of the wave with time.

Thus if one knows the wave at one time, one can calculate it at any other time. This means that the unpredictable, random element comes in only when the wave is interpreted in terms of the positions and velocities of particles. But maybe that is the mistake; maybe there are no particle positions and velocities, but only waves. By the de Broglie hypothesis every object in our universe is a wave. Thus, phenomena would be adequately defined by the following two, 2 properties of waves: Position, and Size And, given the size, the position would be determined. When this is combined with the Platonian duality principle as operationalised in the duality series in operations research, it would be sufficient to describe phenomena by the following two, 2 properties: Growth (Size factor), and Development (Location Factor) Development demands that the minimum requirement or Nurture, for the object of interest to exist, below which it would be impossible to bring it to being, is identified; as well as the ultimate form or Nature that it can take, beyond which it would be futile to attempt further improvements. These define the boundary conditions of the phenomenon, in real time. With growth, it would be sufficient to identify the item that creates the impulse, for the required growth between the two, 2 points; as well as that which provides the sustenance, for the growth process. These are basis for monitoring and evaluation, to determine the size and there after, the location of the wave-event or phenomenon. Serially: 3. 2. 1. 4. Impulse, L1 Nature, A1 Nurture, A2 Sustenance, L2 Phenomenon 6. Object, A 5. Form, L

This series would therefore adequately represent the natural order, N-O against which the personal order, P-O is evaluated, to measure a persons perspective of phenomena. Moreover, this is corroborated by the perception model of mind, PMM following which it would be sufficient to reduce phenomena into the five, 5 essentials.

Formally: f0 = 4(1 1/z), z = (4 1/f1) f1 = Perception Index, N = 5 f0 = Sensation Index, N= 1 In this case, it is the object component of the series that is described. Given a phenomenon therefore, after its purpose or object is identified, characterising this would at once outline the standard procedure for making the phenomenon. Recall that 20%ters perform at task by the standard procedure. This defines them as selfcontained. They have adopted a perspective of phenomena that approximates noumena or the N-O exactly. They have approximated the personality of the Creator, in real time, within the limits of reality. This agrees with the principle in which the task of science is redefined to be the discovery of laws that will enable the prediction of events, up to the limits set by the uncertainty principle. The concatenation model is at the core of the simulation of the PMM. It is the mental analogue of the Feynman sum over histories. It computes the contributions of the three, 3 components of the mind to the thought process, including the emotion, P2 intellect, P3 and will, P4. Thus, given the Single mindedness that characterises a 100% commitment to a purpose, for P1 = 1, these components of the mind would be fully engaged at P2 = 3, P3 = 9, and P4 = 27 respectively. More items would be required for personalities who are less committed, for P1 > 1. The scores on these factors increase from three, 3 nine, 9 and twenty-seven, 27 respectively; as commitment drops. The concatenation model enables the evaluation of the personality factor-F as the contribution of entropy to the environment, according to the observed deviance from the standard procedure, noumena, or N-O. The factor-F is also input to the need profile, which measure the power, Po that is available to the person, P with which to respond, R to stimuli, S. Recall the behaviour model, which conceptualises behaviour as a function of response, R stimuli, S and Personality, P. This power draws from the soul, S, which is actually a mass of energy in storage. Soul is the concatenation of all the activities of a person, from the first cry at birth to the last breath at death. Following Einsteins energy model, 95% of the mass of an atom is contributed by the activities of quacks and gluons, which contribute the remaining 5% and 0% respectively.

Like the factor-F, given the factor-f0, the soul factor-S is determined. Recall that energy is released when the atom is split. Recall also that by a law in algebra, when a number is split in two, 2 the maximum value of the product of both parts is derived when they are equal, for x = n, so that (x * x) = n2. The black box model, BBM formalises the process for the derivation of the standard procedure series. Given a phenomenon, F it is split into two, 2 according to the duality principle to derive the form, L and object, A components. These are further split to at once satisfy the duality and wave principles, to derive L1, L2 and A1, A2 respectively. It is the energy that is generated in this process that is measured on the F-Scale to evaluate the factors f0, S and F. The scale is presented formally as follows: f0 = 1/10Sn, Sn = X D D = Abs |E B| X = G: G A X = A Otherwise G=5E A=5B

f0 = Objectivity Index Sn = Score on the Item-n (n = 1 to 4) D = Observed Deviance X = Expected Deviance E = Expected Rank on Item-n B = Observed Rank on Item-n

Effort, and therefore motive strength, C is generated according to the commitment to the purpose. This is expended in two, 2 directions, to derive the procedure for purpose-fulfilment, and to counter the obstacles in the way, respectively as follows: Learning: CWk = 1 1/3 * S Containment of detractors: CNd = Log C / Log 1/S Then C = CWk + CNd, which predicts the character factor-C at a correlation coefficient of C/C: r = 0.9754. Given the factors S, C, and F productivity is adequately defined, according to the following model: RES = RGT, Nu 4 Ps 20%
RES = Response to Stimuli RGT = Appropriateness of Response Nu = Number of Essentials Identified Ps = Position on the Pareto 80-20 Continuum

This is the productivity model. While the factors RES and RGT are behavioural, Nu and Ps are phenomenological. The complementarity of the behaviour and phenomenology models is demonstrated on the character model presented below:

Stimulus Attitude, A Motivation, F Ability, f0 Personality, F Response n

Rn

Pc

Given the factor-Pc, Rn = 2Pc 1 n = 1/C Pc2 C = (3Pc + 1)/4 F = Rn/n Vc = 2F - 1 Pc = Phenomenological Compression Index Rn = Rationality Index n = Standard Procedure Index C = Character Index F = Index of Personality Vc = Index of Core Values

The Character Model The character model connects consciousness to behaviour, to describe the energy transfer from nature, through humans, to society. The transfer is achieved via the human mind. Thus, by the value creation model, it is the persons system of values that translate into the creation of value. It takes commitment, effort, and the motive strength to create value. And these are derived in measures, according to the values that people hold. The value that is created is only a reflection of the values that are held. The tangible is derived from the intangible; something, from seaming nothingness. When people value talent, Rn & Pc; professionalism, Vc; and work, n therefore, this translates into people value, C; organisational value, ROI; and the value of the business environment, EB. Given the appropriate values, all the energy that is required for purpose accomplishment is made available, as motive strength; according to the commitment and effort that the person makes. Commitment and effort are defined by the factors S, C, and F. Recall that the factor-S is the soul, which is actually a reservoir of energy that is accumulated as the concatenation of all the activities of a person, from the first cry at birth to the last breath at death. This energy powers, F behaviour, according to the persons influence, C and the entropy, F that they contribute to the environment; both of which determine their dependability; as the responses to stimuli become more appropriate, whichs analogue in HR is the performance at task according to specifications, for RES RGT. Diagrammatically:

Values
Talent, Rn, Pc Profession, Vc Work, n

Value
People Value, C Organisational Value, ROI Value of the Business Environment, EB

Translation
Soul, S (Energy Reservoir)

Rn Vc n Pc

Character, C (Motive Strength or Effort) Personality, F (Power or Influence; Entropy or Waste; Faith or Dependability)

S C ROI, EB F

The model of learning explains the connexion between thought and behaviour in greater details. This is achieved with reference to mile Cous reduction of the mental memory space into the following three, 3: The conscious memory, which relates to the intellect The unconscious memory that works with the will, and The sub-conscious memory that the emotion uses Given desire, which derives from values and is resident in the emotion, it remains dormant until a decision is made that converts it into a purpose to be achieved. Then all the energy that is required is made available as motive strength, according to the commitment and effort that the person is willing to make. The mental activity is then transferred to the intellect, where the path or procedure for purpose fulfilment is plotted. All these are done consciously, and culminate in the measure of the factor-F, as the procedure that is derived is evaluated against the standard procedure. This is stored in the sub-conscious memory, where all such procedures are domiciled, for future reference.

The distinction is made between reflexive and voluntary motivated behaviours. When the procedure that is required for purpose fulfilment is already available in sub-conscious memory, the conscious memory is by-passed, to create the analogue of reflexivity in the domain of purely voluntary motivated behaviours. Reflexes use procedures that have been wired as part of the design of humans. These are stored in the unconscious memory. They also include the procedures that drive the visceral systems, including the circulatory, respiratory, digestive, excretory, reproductive, endocrine, nervous, muscular, and skeletal systems. These are too sensitive to have been left for humans to craft. They approximate the N-O exactly, to become standards for the procedures that humans craft, which are then stored in subconscious or emotional memory. mile Cou suggested a relationship between the conscious memory of the intellect, F and the emotions sub-conscious memory, L to the effect that the emotion, L is a square function of the intellect, F for L = F2. Learning happens when procedures are derived, first, 1st time. It is accomplished when the procedure is standardised, for Nu 4. Then people are able to turn what they know, into what they do. The detractors that obstruct the conversion will have been overcome. The vagaries of the environment are overcome by levitation, whichs analogue in the learning process is appreciation, A1. This is when people shift from the preoccupation with appearances and rise above the Platonian object, to perceive the essentials that define the forms of phenomena. Then they are able to put the correct value on phenomena, having imbibed the appropriate values. Evaluation, A2 and appreciation, A1 are actually inverses. They define the link between the emotion, L and the intellect, F. To the extent that the will, A is able to sustain levitation, to that extent the intellect is able to rule the emotion, to optimise emotional intelligence. This is attitudinal, A, as formalised in the relationship between the factors A and C, for [A = 19(C 1)]. When this conversion factor is applied to mile Cous model, the human person is modelled in the following relationship: L = 1/A2 F , A1 = 1/A2 F2 = 1/Fn,
2

L = Love A1 = Appreciation A2 = Evaluation F2 = Characterisation Fn = Procedurisation F = Faith

This is the relativity model of humans, RMH.

In the same way that A1 and A2 derive from A, the factors F2 and Fn derive from a fission, or splitting of the factor-F. Fn features in the duality model as the conversion factor that links forms, L and objects, A for L = AFn. Recall that forms are domiciled in the emotion, L as procedures. And objects, A are desires that have translated into purposes by the decision of the will, A. When the will is a unity, for A = 1, the factor-Fn defines procedure, for L = Fn. The following comment is typical of the advocation for situational ethics: Moral decisions and the circumstances evoking them are unique and unrepeatable, it is therefore impossible to apply universal laws Given the N-O, and the standard procedure, which respectively define and operationalise noumena, this position would appear to have become obsolete. Morality connects goodness with righteousness in the following dictum: When it is Right; Then, it is Good Ethical behaviour that is good can only derive from an equivalent base in thought that is moral and right. This would be evidenced in the derivation of the standard procedure. The only time perspectives or procedures can be said to be right therefore is when they correspond to the standard of noumena. And humans are wired for this. The human personality is a constant, F to the extent that all humans are wired alike, with potentials and the necessary features for potential attainment. But to the extent that these are developed differently, humans would be valued variably. This thought is summarised in the series below: 3. 2. 1. 4. Thought Rationality Reason Mind Personality, F 6. Body 5. Spirit 3. 2. 1. 4. Maturity, MI Position, Ps Essentials, Nu Normality, NI Personality (Value) 6. RES 5. RGT

Spirit is related to noumena. It is the source of morals. It distinguishes humans from animals. It makes people both reasonable and rational, but animals can only reason. While they can learn tricks, as in circus animals, the procedure is derived by the human teacher. Rational thought leads to the derivation of procedures. It is spiritual.

Recall that Rn, Pc, Vc, and n quantify the system of values; which translate into C, ROI, and EB, all of which define value that is created equivalently; according to the scores on S, C, and F. Recall also that the consistency of this proposition is established on the productivity model, which corroborates RES and RGT with Nu and Ps. The first pair of factors are behavioural and derive from the factors S and C. The second pair are phenomenological and derive from F. While F derives from Rn and n, S and C derive from Rn and Pc. Vc is predicted from the factor-F. These factors are summarised on the mentality profile, presented below:
1. MI = Maturation Index 2. Po = Power Index 3. RES/ RGT = Response /Appropriateness Index 4. NI = Normality Index 5. Nu = Index of the Number of Essentials 6. Ps = Position Index 7. PfI = Performance Index 8. C = Character Index 9. S = Soul Index 10. F = Personality Index 11. EB = Index of the Business Environment 12. ROI = Index of the Return on Investment 13. Rw = Reward Index. 14. Rn = Rationality Index 15. Pc = Phenomenological Compression 16. Vc = Core Values (Talent/Professionalism) 17. n = Standard Procedure Index 18. EFF = Effectiveness 19. EFF = Efficiency 20. CRD = Credibility

1. 2. 3. 4.

MI Po RES/RGT NI

10. F 9. Soul, S 8. C PfI 6. Ps 5. Nu

Reward 12. ROI 11. EB 14. 15. 16. 17. Rn Pc Vc n CRD 19. EFV 18. EFF

The Mentality Profile

The factors Rn, Pc, Vc, and n are the input data for evaluating the others. They are measured on their various kits. The rationality kit, Rn-K and the phenomenological compression kit, Pc-K are soon to be available on the internet, at the address, www.recommendations.com. The Vc-K which measures the appropriateness of the choice of professions as core values is to be derived in collaboration with the various institutes that regulate the professions. The n-K measures the performance at task by the standard procedure and is derived uniquely for every organisation. All the other three, 3 factors may be predicted from the factor-Pc. And for all the kits, the F-Scale is calibrated against a reduced standard, for Nu = 4, rather than Nu = 5.
The feasibility of these decisions is established by comparing the data from MProfile Theoretical and Pc Recommend, and MProfile Code and Recommendations respectively.

6.00 Concluding
Recall the distinction between Euclidean space-time and the real space-time. This is analogous to the Platonian distinction between the worlds of form and objects respectively. It is also the same as the distinction between mind and matter. But humans are wired to operate in both worlds, when they use their minds to appreciate objects; and when they creatively reduce forms into objects. In both cases, the thought process involved goes beyond reason, to rationality. This ensures that standards of morality and ethics are sustained, for longevity. The standard procedure resolves the seeming contradiction between these pairs of inverses. Its construction starts out with the wave model, which is based on Euclidean space-time; and ends with duality, to reintroduce the real space-time. Then the two, 2 property wave model that is timeless becomes translated into the four, 4 item duality series that is useful in real time, albeit being characteristically timeless. Sustainability is determined by the energy that is derived, according to the rigours expended in resolving the seeming contradictions posed by Euclidean space-time and real space-time, mind and matter, as well as forms and objects. This energy is measured on the concatenation model, to fix the size, Nu of the person, and therefore their position, Ps on the Pareto 80-20 continuum. Then, those whose conclusions and actions match the standards of noumena will be more likely to survive and reproduce; and their pattern of behaviour and thought will come to dominate. The concatenation model and its simulation are presented below:
Pc Rn n f0 P1 P2 P3 P4 Sum Pc Rn n f0 P1 P2 P3 P4 Sum 1.64 2.28 2.13 0.75 1.66 4.31 12.94 38.83 57.74 1.58 2.16 2.05 0.76 1.64 4.28 12.85 38.56 57.34 1.65 1.34 1.18 1.69 1.28 1.66 1.4 2.65 1.32 1.8 1.95 2.85 2.33 2.6 3.64 5.37 0.74 1.09 1.09 2.61 4.41 3.57 2.39 3.1 2.2 2.6 2.89 2.74 3.66 4.7 6.29 7.29 1.36 1.56 1.36 2.06 2.53 1.26 1.19 1.89 1.1 2.35 2.55 2.81 3.08 3.7 4.89 6.03 0.72 0.99 0.98 0.71 0.55 0.62 0.71 0.75 0.72 0.73 0.71 0.82 0.68 0.63 0.62 0.67 1.69 1.11 1.14 1.7 1.82 1.78 1.71 1.65 1.69 1.69 1.71 1.55 1.74 1.78 1.79 1.75 4.39 3.22 3.28 4.41 4.64 4.57 4.42 4.3 4.38 4.38 4.42 4.11 4.49 4.56 4.57 4.5 13.16 9.67 9.84 13.22 13.93 13.71 13.25 12.91 13.13 13.13 13.25 12.33 13.46 13.68 13.71 13.49 39.49 29.02 29.53 39.66 41.79 41.13 39.75 38.72 39.4 9.39 39.74 36.98 40.37 41.05 41.14 40.46 58.74 43.03 43.79 58.99 62.19 61.19 59.13 57.58 58.6 58.58 59.12 54.98 60.06 61.08 61.21 60.18 1.64 2.28 2.13 0.5 1.83 4.66 13.97 41.91 62.37 1.58 2.16 2.05 0.52 1.83 4.65 13.96 41.89 62.34 1.65 1.34 1.18 1.69 1.28 1.66 1.4 2.65 1.32 1.8 1.95 2.85 2.33 2.6 3.64 5.37 0.74 1.09 1.09 2.61 4.41 3.57 2.39 3.1 2.2 2.6 2.89 2.74 3.66 4.7 6.29 7.29 1.36 1.56 1.36 2.06 2.53 1.26 1.19 1.89 1.1 2.35 2.55 2.81 3.08 3.7 4.89 6.03 0.44 0.98 0.97 0.42 0.1 0.25 0.42 0.51 0.45 0.45 0.42 0.63 0.35 0.26 0.25 0.34 1.84 1.16 1.21 1.84 2.68 2.04 1.85 1.83 1.84 1.84 1.85 1.78 1.9 2.02 2.05 1.91 4.68 3.33 3.41 4.69 6.36 5.08 4.7 4.66 4.67 4.67 4.7 4.56 4.79 5.04 5.09 4.81 14.03 9.98 10.24 14.07 19.08 15.25 14.09 13.97 14.01 14.01 14.09 13.67 14.37 15.11 15.28 14.43 42.09 29.94 30.71 42.21 57.23 45.75 42.28 41.91 42.04 42.04 42.27 41.02 43.12 45.33 45.83 43.3 62.64 44.42 45.56 62.81 85.35 68.12 62.92 62.36 62.57 62.56 62.91 61.03 64.18 67.49 68.25 64.45

m Pm + 1 = 2 ( Pm ) + 1, m =1 P1 = F 1

The concatenation model is the mental analogue of the Feynman superposition and sum over histories principle of the wave model

Table-A: Theoretical

Table-B: Empirical

Thus, in the same way that the bell-shape of the normal curve which describes the N-O is an indication of environmental determinism, the symmetry that characterises this shape shows that Euclidean space-time and real space-time, mind and matter, as well as forms and objects are replicas. Like Stephen Hawking rightly summarised: We may regard our use of imaginary time and Euclidean space-time as merely a mathematical device (or trick) to calculate answers about real space-time Noumena, forms, and minds present avenues in a timeless, boundless, and self contained environment; to find solutions that matter, objects, and phenomena create in real time because of their limiting effects. With respect to HR, given the N-O the black box is defined for all systems, so that the F-Scale is a measure of how appropriately the black box has been reconstructed. Thus, metrics are now not only streamlined, but standardised for all organisations. Measures of productivity and ROI, reward and the business environment, like the share capital and dividends, are the same for manufacturing, services, information, as well as the extractive industries. More than this, a level play ground is created for the workforce. Engineers, accountants, HR, whether they are line or support staff; are evaluated similarly, against the humanity that each person brings to the table. The different professions and jobs are only avenues for projecting the person. In addition to these two, 2 observations, the units of measurement adopted for these few and generalise able metrics are the same. They are all rooted in the factor-f0, a measure of deviance from the N-O. The underlying principle is the same. Define the contradiction; and then, resolve it. These measures actually predict what ought, against which the actual is evaluated; for consistency, and thereafter, optimisation. These require rigour.

Pc 1.0 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.1 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17

Rn 1.0 1.02 1.04 1.06 1.08 1.1 1.12 1.14 1.16 1.18 1.2 1.22 1.24 1.26 1.28 1.3 1.32

/n 1.0 1.01 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.08 1.09 1.1 1.11 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.18 1.19 1.2

Vc 1.0 1.01 1.03 1.04 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.1 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.2

S 1.0 0.95 0.92 0.9 0.89 0.87 0.86 0.85 0.84 0.83 0.82 0.81 0.8 0.79 0.79 0.78 0.77

F 1.0 1.01 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.04 1.05 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.07 1.08 1.08 1.09 1.09 1.1 1.1

C 1.0 1.01 1.02 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.08 1.09 1.1 1.11 1.11 1.12

RES RGT 0.99 0.78 0.73 0.7 0.68 0.66 0.64 0.63 0.62 0.6 0.59 0.59 0.58 0.57 0.56 0.55 0.55

ROI

Rw

EB Nu

PfI

MI

NI 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9999 0.9999 0.9999 0.9998 0.9997 0.9996 0.9995 0.9993 0.9991 0.9989

CRD Nu'' 1. 0.94 0.91 0.89 0.88 0.87 0.86 0.85 0.84 0.83 0.82 0.81 0.81 0.8 0.8 0.79 0.79

Nu''' 24418.75 24.11 16.87 13.64 11.71 10.4 9.42 8.66 8.05 8.05 7.12 6.76 6.44 6.16 5.91 5.69 5.48

Po Ps 1.0 1.0 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.95 0.0 2.61 6.12 9.33 12.28 14.98 17.47 19.78 21.92 23.9 25.75 27.48 29.09 30.61 32.02 33.36 34.62

0.98 266666671.23 2.24 1.12 5. 1.01 0.9732 0.66 267.67 2.17 1.09 4.87 0.98 0.9898 0.62 134.33 2.12 1.06 4.69 0.97 0.989 0.6 89.89 2.07 1.04 4.53 0.97 0.9864 0.58 67.67 2.03 1.01 4.39 0.96 0.9833 0.57 54.33 1.99 0.99 4.25 0.96 0.9801 0.56 45.44 1.95 0.98 4.13 0.96 0.9768 0.55 39.1 1.92 0.96 4.01 0.96 0.9735 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.52 0.51 0.51 0.5 0.5 0.5 34.33 30.63 27.67 25.24 23.22 21.51 20.05 18.78 17.67 16.69 1.89 1.86 1.83 1.81 1.78 1.76 1.74 1.72 1.7 0.94 0.93 0.92 0.9 0.89 0.88 0.87 0.86 0.85 3.9 3.8 3.71 3.63 3.55 3.47 3.4 3.33 3.27 0.96 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.9704 0.9673 0.9644 0.9616 0.959 0.9564 0.954 0.9517 0.9495

4.05
1.59 1.32 1.18 1.09 1.02 0.96 0.92 0.88 0.85 0.82 0.8 0.78 0.76 0.75 0.73 0.72

1.34 1.21 1.21 0.77

1.13 0.54

1.68 0.84

3.21 0.94 0.9474

0.9987 0.78 0.71

5.3

0.95 35.8

Table-1: MPROFILE THEORETICAL

Nu = 5, but Nu = 4.05 would be sufficient

Pc 1.0 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.1 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17

Rn 1.39 1.41 1.43 1.44 1.46 1.47 1.49 1.5 1.52 1.53 1.55 1.57 1.58 1.6 1.61 1.63 1.64 1.66

/n 1.33 1.35 1.36 1.37 1.38 1.4 1.41 1.42 1.43 1.45 1.46 1.47 1.48 1.5 1.51 1.52 1.53 1.55

Vc 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.06 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.08 1.09 1.09 1.09

S 0.58 0.58 0.57 0.57 0.56 0.56 0.55 0.55 0.55 0.54 0.54 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.52 0.51 0.51

F 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.05

C 1.22 1.23 1.24 1.25 1.26 1.26 1.27 1.28 1.29 1.29 1.3 1.31 1.32 1.32 1.33 1.34 1.35 1.35

RES RGT ROI 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.42 0.42 0.43 0.43 0.44 0.44 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.46 0.46 0.47 0.47 0.47 0.48 0.48 0.49 0.49 9.9 9.61 9.33 9.07 8.83 8.6 8.39 8.19 7.99 7.81 7.64 7.48 7.32 7.17 7.03 6.89 6.76 6.64

Rw 1.9 1.89 1.89 1.88 1.87 1.87 1.86 1.86 1.85 1.85 1.84 1.84 1.83 1.83 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.81

EB 0.95 0.95 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91

Nu 4.39 4.36 4.34 4.32 4.3 4.28 4.26 4.24 4.22 4.2 4.18 4.16 4.15 4.13 4.11 4.1 4.08 4.06

PfI 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04 1.04

MI 0.895 0.894 0.893 0.8921 0.8912 0.8904 0.8895 0.8888 0.888 0.8873 0.8866 0.886 0.8853 0.8847 0.8841 0.8836 0.883 0.8825

NI 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

CRD Nu'' 0.68 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.9 0.9 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.86 0.86 0.86

Nu''' 22505.02 22.51 15.92 13. 11.26 10.08 9.2 8.52 7.98 7.98 7.14 6.81 6.53 6.27 6.05 5.85 5.66 5.5

Po 0.99 0.99 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98

Ps 12.28 12.73 13.17 13.6 14.02 14.43 14.83 15.22 15.61 15.98 16.35 16.71 17.06 17.4 17.74 18.07 18.4 18.71

Table-2: Pc RECOMMEND

When the reduction from Nu = 5 to Nu = 4 is introduced and only the Pc-Score is used for recommendations, the requirements of the productivity model are still satisfied: RES = RGT, Nu 4 Ps 20%

Pc 1.64 1.58 1.65 1.34 1.18 1.69 1.28 1.66 1.4 2.65 1.32 1.8 1.95 2.85 2.33 2.6 3.64 5.37

Rn 2.28 2.16 0.74 1.09 1.09 2.61 4.41 3.57 2.39 3.1 2.2 2.6 2.89 2.74 3.66 4.7 6.29 7.29

/n 2.13 2.05 1.36 1.56 1.36 2.06 2.53 1.26 1.19 1.89 1.1 2.35 2.55 2.81 3.08 3.7 4.89 6.03

Vc 1.14 1.11 1.69 1.7 1.58 1.53 2.49 4.67 3.02 2.28 3.0 1.21 1.27 1.82 1.38 1.54 1.57 1.42

S 0.63 0.64 0.6 0.94 0.92 0.59 0.47 0.53 0.59 0.63 0.6 0.6 0.59 0.69 0.56 0.53 0.52 0.56

F 1.07 1.05 1.34 1.35 1.29 1.27 1.74 2.83 2.01 1.64 2.0 1.11 1.13 1.41 1.19 1.27 1.29 1.21

C 1.48 1.44 1.49 1.26 1.14 1.52 1.21 1.5 1.3 2.24 1.24 1.6 1.71 2.39 2.0 2.2 2.98 4.28

RES RGT ROI 0.42 0.42 0.41 0.54 0.61 0.41 0.44 0.4 0.44 0.34 0.46 0.4 0.38 0.33 0.35 0.34 0.3 0.26 0.4 0.41 0.4 0.39 0.42 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.45 0.35 0.47 0.39 0.38 0.35 0.36 0.34 0.32 0.31 5.17 5.6 5.1 8.84 15.81 4.86 10.52 5.04 7.67 2.62 9.33 4.33 3.81 2.44 3.01 2.67 2.01 1.61

Rw 1.74 1.81 1.19 1.28 1.35 1.29 0.91 0.7 0.84 0.97 0.84 1.62 1.55 1.15 1.42 1.27 1.25 1.38

EB 0.87 0.9 0.6 0.64 0.68 0.64 0.46 0.35 0.42 0.49 0.42 0.81 0.77 0.57 0.71 0.64 0.63 0.69

Nu 3.65 3.91 1.72 1.7 1.91 2.01 1.03 0.61 0.85 1.14 0.85 3.18 2.9 1.54 2.45 2. 1.93 2.32

PfI 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.69 0.8 0.92 1.0 0.94 0.95 0.83 0.96 0.9 0.89 0.79 0.88 0.88 0.84 0.79

MI 0.9836 0.9917 0.8771 1.0248 0.9832 0.8974 0.7725 0.7548 0.7799 0.8791 0.7756 0.9693 0.961 0.9431 0.9473 0.9196 0.936 0.993

NI 0.9997 0.9999 0.914 0.9106 0.9442 0.9559 0.6969 0.4553 0.603 0.7444 0.6055 0.9985 0.9962 0.8756 0.9858 0.9543 0.9463 0.9796

CRD 0.7 0.7 0.68 0.93 0.91 0.68 0.65 0.66 0.68 0.7 0.69 0.69 0.68 0.73 0.67 0.66 0.66 0.67

Nu'' XTY 0.56 0.58 0.5 0.61 0.67 0.51 0.49 0.43 0.48 0.44 0.49 0.53 0.51 0.46 0.48 0.46 0.44 0.44 0.41 0.42 0.41 0.46 0.5 0.4 0.47 0.4 0.44 0.44 0.46 0.39 0.38 0.34 0.36 0.34 0.31 0.29

Nu'' Po 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 1.49 0.97 0.97 0.86 0.85 0.88 0.88 0.74 0.57 0.69 0.77 0.69 0.95 0.94 0.83 0.91 0.88 0.88 0.91

Ps 27.05 21.74 65.65 66.0 61.72 59.72 79.38 87.86 83.03 77.24 82.94 36.42 42.05 69.25 50.95 60.02 61.4 53.61

Table-3: The MPROFILE CODE

The empirical data is applied without the reduction, for Nu = 5 The productivity model is satisfied, but For all the candidates, Nu < 4 This is stricter measure
Pc 1.64 1.58 1.65 1.34 1.18 1.69 1.28 1.66 1.4 2.65 1.32 1.8 1.95 2.85 2.33 2.6 3.64 5.37 Rn /n Vc S F C RES RGT ROI Rw EB Nu PfI MI NI 1.0 1.0 0.914 0.9106 0.9442 0.9918 0.8578 0.5961 0.7724 0.8932 0.7749 0.9998 0.9995 0.8756 0.9979 0.9914 0.9893 0.9968 CRD Nu'' Nu''' 0.64 0.74 0.64 0.76 0.68 0.69 0.88 0.64 0.47 0.59 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.64 0.66 0.63 0.6 0.61 0.64 0.64 0.65 0.6 0.52 0.59 0.55 0.6 0.69 0.66 0.54 0.62 0.58 3.06 3.22 2.46 3.24 4.6 2.66 3.25 2.01 2.74 2.74 3.03 2.73 2.52 1.65 2.17 1.95 1.68 1.57 Po Ps

2.28 2.13 1.09 0.44 2.16 2.05 1.07 0.45 0.74 1.09 1.09 2.61 4.41 3.57 2.39 3.1 2.2 2.6 2.89 2.74 3.66 4.7 1.36 1.56 1.36 2.06 2.53 1.26 1.19 1.89 1.1 2.35 2.55 2.81 3.08 3.7 0.39 0.61 0.75 1.33 1.88 3.07 2.17 1.76 2.16 1.13 1.16 0.97 1.23 1.33 0.59 0.61 0.89 0.39 0.11 0.25 0.38 0.44 0.4 0.41 0.38 0.53 0.33 0.26

1.04 1.71 0.99 1.03 1.67 0.96 0.69 0.8 0.87 1.16 1.44 2.03 1.59 1.38 1.58 1.07 1.08 0.98 1.12 1.16 1.72 1.48 1.36 1.75 1.44 1.73 1.53 2.47 1.47 1.83 1.95 2.63 2.23 2.44 0.95 0.82 0.89 1.04 1.36 1.21 0.93 1.28 0.89 1.08 1.16 1.34 1.36 1.63

0.99 3.81 1.81 0.91 0.95 4.0 0.93 0.78 0.53 1.03 1.04 1.07 0.88 1.28 0.81 1.06 1.11 1.22 1.22 1.28 3.78 5.13 6.52 3.67 5.56 3.75 4.78 2.36 5.27 3.4 3.11 2.23 2.62 2.39 1.86 0.93 1.19 1.19 1.34 1.45 1.0 0.8 0.98 1.14 0.99 1.73 1.67 1.12 1.56 1.42 0.6 0.59 0.67 0.73 0.5 0.4 0.49 0.57 0.49 0.86 0.83 0.56 0.78 0.71

4.09 4.29
1.72 1.7 1.91 2.64 1.47 0.84 1.21 1.61 1.21 3.72 3.48 1.54 3.08 2.63

0.94 0.9729 0.94 0.9786 0.89 0.91 0.74 0.94 1.05 0.98 0.96 0.89 0.97 0.93 0.93 0.85 0.93 0.94 0.8934 0.8787 1.0105 0.9083 0.7569 0.7583 0.806 0.884 0.8055 0.9616 0.9537 0.9 0.9374 0.9031

0.98 18.22 0.98 14.26 0.86 0.85 0.88 0.93 0.83 0.68 0.78 0.84 0.78 0.97 0.96 0.83 0.95 0.92 65.65 66.0 61.72 47.15 70.63 83.28 75.84 67.72 75.71 25.64 30.39 69.25 38.43 47.45

6.29 4.89 1.35 0.24 7.29 6.03 1.26 0.32

1.17 3.22 1.94 1.13 4.52 1.86

1.44 1.9 1.4 0.7 2.55 1.69 1.57 1.53 0.76 2.95

0.93 0.9113 0.87 0.9715

0.59 0.54 0.62 0.53

0.92 48.91 0.94 40.99

Table-4: RECOMMENDATIONS

The empirical data is applied with the reduction, for Nu = 4 The productivity model is satisfied, and For two, 2 of the candidates, Nu 4 This is more lenient measure

You might also like