Information Management - Assignment 1

For attention of
Professor Phillip Samouel
Information Management: BBM500

Assignment Part 1: Quantitative Methods
HS Gas Ltd: Average weekly production values generated on a Gas Mains Rehabilitation
Contract by Main Layers, Service Layers and Multi-Skilled teams.
Date: 31 March 2010
Word Count: 1,945
Student: ID 0963236

Assignment Part 1 ± Quantitative Methods
Student ID: 0963236 Page 1
Contents Page
Executive Summary Page 3
Research Criteria and Data Introduction Page 4
Question 1: Summary of the Characteristics of the Data Page 5
Question 2a: i) The assessment of a single sample mean average weekly turnover compared to the
population mean average weekly turnove r for the Gas Utility Contracts Page 8
Question 2a: ii) The Comparison of two independent population sample means namely average weekly
turnover of Main Laying Service teams and Multi -Skilled teams. Page 9
Question 2a: iii) The Comparison of Multiple Independent Sample Means to check Significant
differences in the Population Page 11
Appendices Page 13
Bibliography Page 22

Executive Summary
HS Gas Ltd is an established, professional, utilities and civil engineering contracting company.
Re-branded in 2006 as HS Group Ltd to reflect its development into a multi-disciplinary contractor, it now embodies five specialised
operating Divisions, working together to provide clients with a complete, integrated contract solution. HS Gas Ltd is one of those
divisions and falls under the parent company of HS Group Ltd.
The Gas Utilities Division has just over 200 two man teams working on various contracts across the South of England. These
teams in turn are categorized into three different types namely Main Layers, Service Layers and Multi-Skilled teams. All three have
similar characteristics and skill levels but work on different parts of the installation and rehabilitation of gas mains.
I have taken these three skill set categories as independent populations within the total HS Gas Ltd team labour resources.
I can therefore conclude within a 95% significant degree of confidence by using statistical analysis the following:
h c
c c c
SKILLc c c Std.c

t c
c .3c 33c .3c
c .c c .c
3c 3.3c c .c
tc 3.c 3c .c

c

Research Criteria and Data Introduction
The objective of this research is to enforce the hypothesis that the Main Laying Teams (Skill Set 1) produce a higher average
weekly turnover than the Multi-Skilled Teams (Skill Set 3) and in turn is greater than the Service Laying Teams (Skill Set 2).
The three Skill Set categories are as follows within the Gas Industry:
Skill Set 1: Main Laying Teams

They are responsible for laying gas mains (size range from 63mm to 600mm) within the existi ng and proposed new gas utilities
network.
Skill Set 2: Service Laying Teams

They are responsible for connecting the newly laid gas main up to residential and commercial properties which feed off the gas
network.
Skill Set 3: Multi-Skilled Teams

As the title states they are skilled in both of the first two sets but are more used on smaller projects where it is not suitable to have
too many teams working i.e. small villages.
Raw data was taken from an in-house Database known to HS Gas as CAS9. Of the total 210 teams working on the HS Gas Ltd
contracts an amount of 129 were taken as observations. From the 129 teams 6 have been removed as outliers. The breakdown of
the sample for the remaining 123 is as shown in the Executive Summary.

Question 1. Summary of the Characteristics of the Data
The average weekly value generated by HS Gas Ltd Teams using a workforce sample representative
of the Company as a whole.
By using Descriptive Statistics the following tables have been generated with the use of an initial sample of 129 teams (Skill Set 1,
2 and 3 ± See Appendices)
! c
c c c Stttc Std.c c
c c 3.c 3.3c
c dcItc cc L c !dc 3.3c c
"##c !dc .c c
c$$dcc 3.c c
dc 3.c c
c .33c c
Std.c
t c 3.3c c
$!$c .c c
%$!$c 3.c c
&c .c c
It'!tc&c .c c
Skc .33c .3c
K!t c .3c .3c

c
V
c
c c c c !$(c !c
c )&*tc c c 3.c
c c .3c
3c c .33c
c c .c
c c .3c
L tc c 3c .c
c 3c .c
3c c .c
c c 3.c
c 3c 3.c

c
Outliers c
With a minimum of 1,269.02 and a maximum of 11,913.97 the range of 10,644.95 is high in comparison. Based on experience of
what teams can produce on a weekly basis one can assume that the extreme average values generated are unrealistic and
therefore these outliers should be removed from the analysis and not included.
The skewness of the data is shown to be 1.363 which is slightly out of the acceptable range so that a normal distribution can occur.
The characteristics of a normal distribution have been achieved by removing six outliers. This was done by firstly removing the
highest values which were distorting the characteristics of a normal distribution.
The mean of 3,683.30 is comparative to the median of 3,314.49 which shows that the data is now more accurately representative
of what the weekly average team¶s values for Gas Utility teams should be.
The acceptable range of +/-1 for skewness has been achieved of 0.855. This shows that the data used is slightly positively skewed
but lies within the acceptable parameters.
The acceptable range of +/-2 for kurtosis has also been achieved of 0.370. This distribution curve is therefore slightly platykurtic.
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
! c
c c c Stttc Std.c c
c c 3.c .3c
c dcItc cc L c !dc 33.3cc
"##c !dc .3cc
c$$dcc 3.cc
dc 33.cc
c 3.cc
Std.c
t c .cc
$!$c .cc
%$!$c 3.cc
&c 3.cc
It'!tc&c .cc
Skc .c .c
K!t c .3c .33c

c
V
c
c c c c !$(c !c
c )&*tc c c 3.c
c c 3.3c
3c c .3c
c c .c
c c .c
L tc c 3c .c
c 3c .c
3c c .c
c c 3.c
c 3c 3.c
c
Data Observations
I can be 95% confident that the average weekly turnover will be between 4,021.11 and 3,351.48.After comparing against
retrospective values generated on previous contracts I can accept that this is in line with re gards to Main Laying, Service Laying
and Multi-Skilled teams within the Gas Utilities industry.
The sample mean is 3,683.30. The range was initially 10,644.95 which have now been reduced to 8,043.97.

Normal distribution curve achieved after the relevant outliers were taken out
c
c
population mean average weekly turnover for the Gas Utility Contracts. c
The average weekly turnover for teams within the Gas Utility Contracts can be taken to be 3,125. This figure has been deduced
from previous experience working on Gas Utility Contracts across the South West of England over the past 10 years by my
Commercial Director, Mr Dave Arnold of HS Gas Ltd. This is the figure used by him to complete any monthly f orecasting.
Therefore the sample mean of the teams must be compared to the population mean in order to assess the validity of the claim that
the figure used to complete forecasts and actual weekly turnover is accurate with a degree of confidence.
It is assumed that the population distribution is normal.
The Hypothesis Test:
-c Null Hypothesis
HO: µ = 3,125 (Teams average weekly turnover South West of England)
-c Alternative Hypothesis
HA: µ > 3,125 (The average weekly turnover for teams in South of England is greater than 3,125)
The sample mean of 3,686.29 is known to be higher than this and therefore the one tailed test is applied.

-c Level of Significance
Į = 0.05 Margin of Error is used
-c Determination of the Appropriate Statistical Test
The Z test requires the standard deviation for the population which is not available and therefore the t test will be used.
The t test is more accurate because it considers the sample size. If the sample size increases there is no difference
between the Z and t test. (Kingston University Module: Information Management 11.9)
-c Determination of the Critical Value
SPSS will be used to calculate this.
-c Calculating the Test Statistic
SPSS will be used to calculate this
-c Conclusion (SPSS Output)
*
c
c c c Std.c
t c Std.c cc
c 3c 3.c .c .3c

c
*
c
c tc!c+c3cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc c
c c dcItc ct*c

c
c tc dc S&.c,-td)c c
c L c "##c
c 3.3c c .c .c .3c .3c
c
After completing the t test using the SPSS Statistical package, the p - value is shown to be 0.001
The p - value represents the exact probability that data as extreme as the data we have obtained would occur if the null hypothesis
is true. (Kingston University: Information Management 11.13)
The p ± value is divided by two due to the fact that the t distribution is symmetrical. Therefore the one-tailed p ± value is 0.0005.
The one-tailed p ± value of 0.0005 is less than the significance level of 0.05 and therefore we reject the H O
It can therefore be concluded with a 5% significance level that the sample mean is significantly greater than the population mean.
turnover of Main Laying Service teams and Multi-Skilled teams.
Assumptions to be made of the following: The samples are Independent as they are based on different skill sets to complete work
on the gas contracts. The populations follow a normal distribution.
-c Null Hypothesis
HO: µ Average Main Laying teams = µ Average Multi ± Skilled teams

HA: µ Average Main Laying teams µ Average Multi ± Skilled teams
The two-tailed test is used to check whether there is any significant difference between them.
A t ± test of independent populations will be used. The Levene¶s test will provide information about the variances of the
two populations and the related hypothesis. The Null Hypothesis to be tested at Į = 0.05 as follows:
HO: ı2 Average Main Laying teams = ı2 Average Multi-Skilled teams
HA: The variances of the two populations are not equal
(Kingston University: Information Management 11.18)
SPSS will be used to calculate this. We have retained HO of equality of variances and therefore shall see the test statistic
of 2.383 (Kingston University: Information Management 11.19)
c
°
c
c SKILLc c c Std.c

t c Std.c cc
c c 33c .3c .3c 33.c
3c c 3.3c .c .3c

c

c
c c L.ctc
c'!tyc c
c t-ttc c'!tyc cc
c c c dcItc c
S&.c,- c Std.c c t*c

c
c c /c S&.c tc dc td)c
c
c L c "##c
c '!c

c .c .3c .33c 3c .c .3c 3.3c .3c .33c
!$dc
'!c c c
c tc .3c .3c .c .3c 3.c .c .3c
!$dc

The SPSS output data shows that sample mean for Main Laying teams (Skill set 1) is 905.04 higher than that of the sample mean
for Multi-Skilled teams (Skill set 3).
The 2-tail sig of 0.019 is smaller than the Į (0.05) and therefore we reject H O and conclude that at a 5% level of significance there
is evidence of significant difference in the mean of the average weekly turnover of Main Laying and Multi-Skilled teams.
Question 2a: iii) The Comparison of Multiple Ind ependent Sample Means to check Significant
differences in the Population
Assumptions to be made of the following: 1) Data was obtained independently and randomly from the populations. 2) The
population follows a normal distribution. 3) The populations from which the data has been obtained have a common variance
-c Null Hypothesis
HO: µ Average Main Laying teams = µ Average Service Laying teams = µ Average Multi-Skilled teams
HA: Not all µs are the same or at least two µs are not equal
There are more than two means and therefore ANOVA is employed. Levene¶s test for the assumption of Equality of
Variance will be employed. The Null Hypothesis to be tested at Į = 0.05 as follows:
HO: ı2 Average Main Laying teams = ı2 Average Service Laying teams = ı2 Average Multi-Skilled teams
Alternative hypothesis will be:
HA: Not all variances are the same or at least two variances are not equal
h c
c c c
SKILLc c c Std.c
t c
c .3c 33c .3c
c .c c .c
3c 3.3c c .c
tc 3.c 3c .c

c
c
c
*c
c c c c c c
c S!$c cS'!c dc cS'!c /c S&.c
tc !#c .c c 3.3c .3c .c
0t*c !#c 33.3c c .c c c

tc 3.c c c c c
c

c
c c c c c c
!kyc)S
c
c dcItc
,I)cSKILLc ,1)cSKILLc c

c,I-1)c Std.c c S&.c L c !dc "##c !dc
c c 3.3* c .c .c .33c 3.c
3c .3* c 3.3c .3c .3c .c

*
c c -3.3 c .c .c -3.c -.33c
3c -3.3*c .c .c -.3c -.c
3c c -.3*c 3.3c .3c -.c -.3c
c 3.3* c .c .c .c .3c
*.c*c$cdcc&tctct*c.c.c c c
The mean difference between the 3 skill sets was evaluated to a 5% significance level by using Tukeys Method of Multiple
Comparison test. All comparisons show a p-value below the significance level of 0.05 and therefore the null hypothesis is rejected.
Alternatively using the Sig F value of 0.000 which is less than Į = 0.05 we conclude that the null hypothesis is rejected.
It is therefore concluded that a significant difference exists between the three Skill sets for Gas Utility teams.
Therefore one can see that the average weekly turnover of Main Laying teams (Skill set 1) is 2,735.28 greater than Service Laying
teams (Skill set 2) and 905.04 greater than Multi ± Skilled teams (Skill set 1).
Recommendations
Main Laying work within the respective contracts should therefore be kept as high as possible compared to the remaining skill sets.
Service Layers should be kept to a minimum and used to backup the Main Layers but spread quite thinly. They should be more
incentivised to try and increase their weekly production values. With regards to Multi ± Skilled teams, these should be used on an
ad hoc basis and used only when needed.

Appendices
SPSS Raw Data:
MAINLAYER / SERVICE TOTAL VALUE AVERAGE PER

ID No OF WEEKS
LAYER / MULTISKILLED GENERATED WEEK
1 3 86,393.08 11 7,853.92
2 3 387,026.36 37 10,460.17
3 1 224,144.23 43 5,212.66
4 2 7,760.87 4 1,940.22
5 2 79,855.60 54 1,478.81
6 1 46,572.53 8 5,821.57
7 1 97,997.10 33 2,969.61
8 1 21,695.50 14 1,549.68
9 3 82,227.56 39 2,108.40
10 3 105,851.00 18 5,880.61
11 3 61,967.04 47 1,318.45
12 2 25,622.08 11 2,329.28
13 1 160,069.82 37 4,326.21
14 3 46,807.08 20 2,340.35
15 1 139,102.63 34 4,091.25
16 3 194,633.08 36 5,406.47
17 3 213,298.66 62 3,440.30
18 1 12,538.12 4 3,134.53
19 3 82,895.91 24 3,454.00
20 3 157,051.78 59 2,661.89
21 3 210,880.14 51 4,134.90
22 1 187,978.50 21 8,951.36
23 3 40,248.28 12 3,354.02
24 1 93,841.92 19 4,939.05
25 1 423,699.27 37 11,451.33
26 3 121,254.17 50 2,425.08
27 3 72,550.48 13 5,580.81
28 2 13,761.76 5 2,752.35
29 1 164,406.56 48 3,425.14
30 2 3,882.26 3 1,294.09
31 3 64,190.38 48 1,337.30
32 3 70,003.15 13 5,384.86
33 3 171,030.98 60 2,850.52
34 3 25,995.97 8 3,249.50
35 3 77,649.48 15 5,176.63
36 3 113,959.50 48 2,374.16
37 1 187,486.64 35 5,356.76
38 3 76,489.05 53 1,443.19
39 3 156,009.50 59 2,644.23
40 3 61,552.79 16 3,847.05
41 3 299,232.21 46 6,505.05
42 3 132,189.76 52 2,542.11
43 2 27,918.48 22 1,269.02
44 3 88,120.94 11 8,010.99
45 3 394,766.89 37 10,669.38
46 1 228,627.11 43 5,316.91
47 2 7,916.09 4 1,979.02
48 2 81,452.71 54 1,508.38
49 1 47,503.98 8 5,938.00

50 1 99,957.04 33 3,029.00
51 1 22,129.41 14 1,580.67
52 3 83,872.11 39 2,150.57
53 3 107,968.02 18 5,998.22
54 3 63,206.38 47 1,344.82
55 2 26,134.52 11 2,375.87
56 1 163,271.21 37 4,412.74
57 3 47,743.22 20 2,387.16
58 1 141,884.68 34 4,173.08
59 3 198,525.74 36 5,514.60
60 3 217,564.63 62 3,509.11
61 1 12,788.88 4 3,197.22
62 3 84,553.83 24 3,523.08
63 3 160,192.81 59 2,715.13
64 3 215,097.74 51 4,217.60
65 1 191,738.07 21 9,130.38
66 3 41,053.25 12 3,421.10
67 1 95,718.76 19 5,037.83
68 1 432,173.26 37 11,680.36
69 3 123,679.25 50 2,473.59
70 3 74,001.49 13 5,692.42
71 2 14,037.00 5 2,807.40
72 1 167,694.69 48 3,493.64
73 2 3,959.91 3 1,319.97
74 3 65,474.18 48 1,364.05
75 3 71,403.21 13 5,492.55
76 3 174,451.60 60 2,907.53
77 3 26,515.89 8 3,314.49
78 3 79,202.47 15 5,280.16
79 3 116,238.69 48 2,421.64
80 1 191,236.37 35 5,463.90
81 3 78,018.83 53 1,472.05
82 3 159,129.69 59 2,697.11
83 3 62,783.85 16 3,923.99
84 3 305,216.85 46 6,635.15
85 3 134,833.56 52 2,592.95
86 2 28,476.85 22 1,294.40
87 3 89,883.36 11 8,171.21
88 3 402,662.22 37 10,882.76
89 1 233,199.65 43 5,423.25
90 2 8,074.41 4 2,018.60
91 2 83,081.77 54 1,538.55
92 1 48,454.06 8 6,056.76
93 1 101,956.18 33 3,089.58
94 1 22,572.00 14 1,612.29
95 3 85,549.56 39 2,193.58
96 3 110,127.38 18 6,118.19
97 3 64,470.51 47 1,371.71
98 2 26,657.21 11 2,423.38
99 1 166,536.64 37 4,500.99
100 3 48,698.09 20 2,434.90
101 1 144,722.38 34 4,256.54
102 3 202,496.26 36 5,624.90
103 3 221,915.93 62 3,579.29
104 1 13,044.66 4 3,261.17
105 3 86,244.90 24 3,593.54

106 3 163,396.67 59 2,769.44
107 3 219,399.70 51 4,301.95
108 1 195,572.83 21 9,312.99
109 3 41,874.31 12 3,489.53
110 1 97,633.13 19 5,138.59
111 1 440,816.72 37 11,913.97
112 3 126,152.84 50 2,523.06
113 3 75,481.52 13 5,806.27
114 2 14,317.74 5 2,863.55
115 1 171,048.58 48 3,563.51
116 2 4,039.10 3 1,346.37
117 3 66,783.67 48 1,391.33
118 3 72,831.27 13 5,602.41
119 3 177,940.63 60 2,965.68
120 3 27,046.21 8 3,380.78
121 3 80,786.52 15 5,385.77
122 3 118,563.46 48 2,470.07
123 1 195,061.10 35 5,573.17
124 3 79,579.21 53 1,501.49
125 3 162,312.28 59 2,751.06
126 3 64,039.52 16 4,002.47
127 3 311,321.19 46 6,767.85
128 3 137,530.23 52 2,644.81
129 2 29,046.39 22 1,320.29
1: Main Layer Team (Total 36)
2: Service Layer Team (Total 18)
3: Multi-Skilled Team (Total 75)
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
Question 1: Summary of the Characteristics of the Data
! c
c c c Stttc Std.c c
c c 3.c .333c
c dcItc c L c !dc 33.c c
.c c
c
"##c !dc
c$$dcc 3.c c
dc 333.c c
c 3.c c
Std.c
t c .c c
$!$c .c c
%$!$c .c c
&c .c c
It'!tc&c .3c c
Skc .c .c
K!t c .c .3c
c
c
V
c
c c c c !$(c !c
c )&*tc c c .c
c c 3.c
3c c 3.3c
c c .3c
c c .c
L tc c 3c .c
c 3c .c
3c c .c
c c 3.c
c 3c 3.c
c
c
c

c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c c
c dc &c tc
c c 2tc c 2tc c 2tc
c 3c .3c c .c c .c

c
! c
c c c Stttc Std.c c
c c 3.c .3c
c dcItc c L c !dc 33.3c c
.3c c
c
"##c !dc
c$$dcc 3.c c
dc 33.c c
c 3.c c
Std.c
t c .c c
$!$c .c c
%$!$c 3.c c
&c 3.c c
It'!tc&c .c c
Skc .c .c
K!t c .3c .33c

c
V
c
c c c c !$(c !c
c )&*tc c c 3.c
c c 3.3c
3c c .3c
c c .c
c c .c
L tc c 3c .c
c 3c .c
3c c .c
c c 3.c
c 3c 3.c

c
c
population mean average weekly turnover for the Gas Utility Contracts c
*
c
c c c Std.c
t c Std.c cc
c 3c 3.c .c .3c
*
c
c tc!c+c3cccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc c
c c dcItc ct*c

c
c tc dc S&.c,-td)c c
c L c "##c
c 3.3c c .c .c .3c .3c
c
c
c
c
c
c
turnover of Main Laying Service teams and Multi-Skilled teams. c
°
c
c SKILLc c c Std.c

t c Std.c cc
c c 33c .3c .3c 33.c
3c c 3.3c .c .3c

c
c c L.ctc
c'!tyc c
c t-ttc c'!tyc cc
c c c dcItc c
S&.c,- c Std.c c t*c

c
c c /c S&.c tc dc td)c
c
c L c "##c
c '!c

c .c .3c .33c 3c .c .3c 3.3c .3c .33c
!$dc
'!c c c
c tc .3c .3c .c .3c 3.c .c .3c
!$dc
c
Question 2a: iii) The Comparison of Multiple Independent Sample Means to check Significant
differences in the Population c
h c
c c c
SKILLc c c Std.c

t c
c .3c 33c .3c
c .c c .c
3c 3.3c c .c
tc 3.c 3c .c
*c
c c c c c c
c S!$c cS'!c dc cS'!c /c S&.c
tc !#c .c c 3.3c .3c .c
0t*c !#c 33.3c c .c c c

tc 3.c c c c c
c
c

c
c c c c c c
!kyc)S
c
c dcItc
,I)cSKILLc ,1)cSKILLc c

c,I-1)c Std.c c S&.c L c !dc "##c !dc
c c 3.3* c .c .c .33c 3.c
3c .3* c 3.3c .3c .3c .c
c c -3.3*c .c .c -3.c -.33c
3c -3.3*c .c .c -.3c -.c
3c c -.3*c 3.3c .3c -.c -.3c
c 3.3* c .c .c .c .3c
*.c*c$cdcc&tctct*c.c.c c c

c
c
c
c
c
c

Bibliography
All data has been extrapolated from CAS9 (in-house database) at HS Gas Ltd. (forms part of HS Group Ltd). The data represents
works completed by the various gangs over a period of roughly 3 years.
1.c Mr Dave Arnold ± Director, HS Gas Ltd, March 2010
2.c Kingston University, Information Management, 2008
3.c Statistics for Dummies, by Deborah Rumsey, Ph.D., Wiley Publishing Inc., 2003
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c


Information Management - Assignment 1

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Information Management - Assignment 1

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

For attention of

Professor Phillip Samouel

Information Management: BBM500

Date: 31 March 2010

Word Count: 1,945

Information Management: BBM500

Executive Summary Page 3

Research Criteria and Data Introduction Page 4

Question 1: Summary of the Characteristics of the Data Page 5

Information Management: BBM500

SKILLc c c Std.c

c .3c 33c .3c

c .c c .c

3c 3.3c c .c

 tc 3.c 3c .c

Information Management: BBM500

Skill Set 1: Main Laying Teams

Skill Set 2: Service Laying Teams

Skill Set 3: Multi-Skilled Teams

Information Management: BBM500

c c 3.c 3.3c

c  dcIt c cc L c !dc 3.3c c

"##c !dc .c c

c $$dcc 3.c c

d c 3.c c

 c .33c c

% $!$c 3.c c

It'!t c&c .c c

Skc .33c .3c

K!t  c .3c .3c

c c c c !$(c !c

c ) &*tc c c 3.c

L tc c 3c .c

Information Management: BBM500

c c 3.c .3c

c  dcIt c cc L c !dc 33.3cc

"##c !dc .3cc

c $$dcc 3.cc

d c 33.cc

 c 3.cc

% $!$c 3.cc

It'!t c&c .cc

Skc .c .c

K!t  c .3c .33c

c ) &*tc c c 3.c

L tc c 3c .c

Information Management: BBM500

Information Management: BBM500

c 3c 3.c .c .3c

c 3.3c c .c .c .3c .3c

Information Management: BBM500

c SKILLc c c Std.c

c c 33c .3c .3c 33.c

3c c 3.3c .c .3c

S &.c,- c Std.c c t*c

c '!c

Information Management: BBM500

c .3c 33c .3c

c .c c .c

3c 3.3c c .c

 tc 3.c 3c .c

c S!$c cS'!c dc cS'!c /c S &.c

tc !#c .c c 3.3c .3c .c

SKILLc c c Std.c

c .3c 33c .3c

c .c c .c

3c 3.3c c .c

tc 3.c 3c .c

c c 3.c 3.3c

c dcItc cc L c !dc 3.3c c

"##c !dc .c c

c$$dcc 3.c c

dc 3.c c

c .33c c

%$!$c 3.c c

It'!tc&c .c c

Skc .33c .3c

K!t c .3c .3c

c c c c !$(c !c

c )&*tc c c 3.c

L tc c 3c .c

c c 3.c .3c

c dcItc cc L c !dc 33.3cc

"##c !dc .3cc

c$$dcc 3.cc

dc 33.cc

c 3.cc

%$!$c 3.cc

It'!tc&c .cc

Skc .c .c

K!t c .3c .33c

c )&*tc c c 3.c

L tc c 3c .c

c 3c 3.c .c .3c

c 3.3c c .c .c .3c .3c

c SKILLc c c Std.c

c c 33c .3c .3c 33.c

3c c 3.3c .c .3c

S&.c,- c Std.c c t*c

c '!c

c .3c 33c .3c

c .c c .c

3c 3.3c c .c

tc 3.c 3c .c

c S!$c cS'!c dc cS'!c /c S&.c

tc !#c .c c 3.3c .3c .c

0t*c !#c 33.3c c .c c c

c dcItc

,I)cSKILLc ,1)cSKILLc c

c c 3.3* c .c .c .33c 3.c

3c .3* c 3.3c .3c .3c .c

3c -3.3*c .c .c -.3c -.c

3c c -.3*c 3.3c .3c -.c -.3c

c 3.3* c .c .c .c .3c

.cc$cdcc&tctct*c.c.c c c

c c 3.c .333c

c dcItc c L c !dc 33.c c

c$$dcc 3.c c

dc 333.c c

c 3.c c

%$!$c .c c

It'!tc&c .3c c

Skc .c .c

K!t c .c .3c

c )&*tc c c .c

L tc c 3c .c

c 3c .3c c .c c .c

c c 3.c .3c

c dcItc c L c !dc 33.3c c

c$$dcc 3.c c

dc 33.c c

c 3.c c

%$!$c 3.c c

It'!tc&c .c c

Skc .c .c

K!t c .3c .33c

c c c c !$(c !c

c )&*tc c c 3.c

L tc c 3c .c

c 3c 3.c .c .3c

c 3.3c c .c .c .3c .3c

c SKILLc c c Std.c

c c 33c .3c .3c 33.c