I have successfully taught Lean Six Sigma methodology in four separate classes, totaling 40 employees, at Nellis Air Force Base.
I would like to compare two types of participant personalities in my classes: those
who are eager to interact, learn, grasp new concepts, are highly motivated, and
participate with a team attitude, and; those who tend to be negative, closed to
new concepts or alternate ideas, are non-participatory, or for whatever reason,
do not even try to apply course objectives to their situations.
Thinking back to the first class two weeks ago, it
took the group about 2 hours and 45 minutes to participate and interact in the
class setting, though there were side conversations on the topic within the first
60 minutes. In the second class, participants took around 45 minutes to participate
and interact. The third class took about 1 hour 15 minutes, while the fourth
class took only 25 minutes.
Of the ten attendees per class, I noted the amount
of people who appeared grumpy. I discovered that they were grumpy for a variety
of reasons, such as: they had to attend the class involuntarily; the class
started too early in the morning, or; they did not feel they had anything to
learn on the subject. I decided to document the number of grumpy appearing
attendees in each class for cross-referencing to see if there were patterns and
identify areas where I could significantly reduce the grumpy factor.
I identified the number of people who were negative,
including varying degrees of hostility, anger, resentment and a slew of other
attitude problems. I was pretty sure that this negativity was not directed
towards me in particular, but rather to their personal situations. At least, I
was hopeful this was the reason.
Type
|
Week 1: Class 1
|
Week 1: Class 2
|
Week 2: Class 3
|
Week 2: Class 4
|
Minutes until inspiration
|
2 hours 45 minutes
|
45 minutes
|
1 hour 15 minutes
|
25 minutes
|
Amount of people who were grumpy
|
3
|
3
|
4
|
2
|
# of people who were negative
|
2
|
1
|
2
|
0
|
# of people who didn’t want change or believe in it
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
2
|
Therefore, I decided to create a variance test to
analyze two sample data sets and see if there is any correlation, or
statistical significance.
After a diagnosis of the different data types and
sets, I took the mean of the week 1 and week 2. I then compared the variances
of the weeks to see what the results could garner.
Interestingly, results in week 2 tend to be
decreasing in mean compared to week 1. This is good because the trend is that
the people attending my class in week 2 are less grumpy, negative and
increasing in positive interaction. If we look at the F Critical Value of being
9.27, this is less than the F Value of 4.6. This means that the null hypothesis
is accepted, and the variances are equal!
Bottom-line, I will work hard to identify quickly the
grumpy, non-believers, uninterested, frustrated group and try to persuade them
to interact and share their thoughts. Hopefully I can turn the tide with
optimism and positive change!
References:
Institute for Digital Research & Education
Statistical Consulting. (2020). FAQ: What
are the Differences Between One-Tailed and Two-Tailed Test? Retrieved from https://stats.idre.ucla.edu/other/mult-pkg/faq/general/faq-what-are-the-differences-between-one-tailed-and-two-tailed-tests/
Frontline Solvers. (2020). F-Test
Two – Sample for Variances. Retrieved from https://www.solver.com/f-test-two-sample-variances
No comments:
Post a Comment