Page 78 - CITN 2017 Journal

Figure 1: Descriptive statistics for the indicators of each variable
The distributions reveal substantial evidence of the variables as concerns the investigated
organizations (where Corporate effectiveness: effectiveness1 = 4.0972; effectiveness2 =
4.0417; effectiveness3 = 3.9861; Efficiency: efficiency1 = 4.1389; efficiency2 = 4.1111;
efficiency3 = 4.0417; Asset Management: asset1 = 4.1528; asset2 = 4.1250; asset3 =
4.0417; Productivity: productivity1 = 4.1250; productivity2 = 4.0972; productivity3 =
4.0139; Control and Improvement: control1 = 4.1667; control2 = 4.1111; control3 =
4.1111).

Table 2: Distribution for variables
N Minimu Maximu Mean Std. Skewness Kurtosis
m m Deviation
Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Statistic Std.
Error Error
Effective 72 1.00 5.00 4.0417 .90545 -2.252 .283 4.928 .559
Efficiency 72 1.33 5.00 4.0972 .84926 -1.614 .283 2.689 .559
Asset 72 1.33 5.00 4.1065 .81039 -1.915 .283 3.731 .559
Productivity 72 1.00 5.00 4.0787 .86939 -2.177 .283 4.607 .559
Control 72 1.00 5.00 4.1296 .87846 -2.426 .283 6.268 .559
Valid N
72
(listwise)

Source: Field Survey, 2016

The distribution for the variables is revealed in table 2; where the data indicates that the
respondents of the study affirm to the significance of all five variables within their
respective organizations.

71