1. At quickie Car wash, the process is advertised to take less than 7 minutes. Consequently, management has set a target average of 390 seconds for the wash process. Suppose the average range for a sample of nine cars is 10 seconds.
Use the below Table 6.1 to establish control limits for sample means and ranges for the car wash process.
2. At Isogen Pharmaceuticals, the filling process for its asthma inhaler is set to dispense 150 milliliters ( ml) of Steroid solution per container. The average range for a sample of 4 containers is 3 ml.
Use the below Table 6.1 to establish Control Limits for sample Means and ranges for the filling process.
(see attached file)
3.Garcia's garage desires to create some colorful charts and graphs to illustrate how reliably its mechanics "get under the hood and fix the problem."
The historic average for the proportion of customers that return for the same repair within the 30 day warranty period is 0.10
Each month, Garcia tracks 100 customers to see whether they return for warranty repairs.
The results are plotted as a proportion to report progress toward the goal.
If the control limits are to be set at two standard deviations on either side of the goal, determine the control limits for this chart.
In March, 8 of the 100 customers in the sample group returned for warranty repairs. Is the repair process in control?© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 24, 2018, 8:24 pm ad1c9bdddf
This solution is comprised of a detailed explanation to use the below Table 6.1 to establish control limits for sample means and ranges for the car wash process.
Problem Identification in Exemplary Business Research
Read the two attached, published research articles.
Then assist with writing a short critique of the quality of the research reported in each of these articles.
Case assignment expectations
A critique is a review and commentary (usually in the range of 3-5 pages, not including cover page or reference page) on a particular article(s) or piece(s) of research. It is not necessarily critical in the negative sense, although you may need to comment negatively on some aspects; both positive and negative aspects should be treated. Just because something appears in print, even in an A-list journal, does not make it free from possible errors or beyond criticism; nothing should be necessarily taken at face value.
In this case, your critique should address at least the following issues, as well as any other points that you find relevant and worthy of comment:
The degree to which each of the papers exhibits quality in terms of the eight criteria discussed;
Purposiveness: A definite aim. The research will have some practical benefit.
Rigor: A careful design. The correct data are collected, and no other.
Testability: The data can be tested, and the tentative notions about their relationships can be definitely proved or disproved.
Replicability: Another researcher could do the study again, and get similar results.
Precision and confidence: The research findings are close to "reality." It is highly likely that the results are "true," and not the results of sampling error.
Objectivity: The conclusions of the study are based on the revealed relationships among data, and not the researcher's opinions or philosophical values.
Generalizability: The research findings are applicable to other organizations.
Parsimony: The relationships are simple and straightforward.
The most important data are collected, the most obvious relationships are tested, and the most significant of those are identified.
. Be clear, specific, and brief.
Your comparative assessment of the overall quality of both papers, including the basis for your conclusions.
Please included citations where used.View Full Posting Details