Matching Items (5)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

151957-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Random Forests is a statistical learning method which has been proposed for propensity score estimation models that involve complex interactions, nonlinear relationships, or both of the covariates. In this dissertation I conducted a simulation study to examine the effects of three Random Forests model specifications in propensity score analysis. The

Random Forests is a statistical learning method which has been proposed for propensity score estimation models that involve complex interactions, nonlinear relationships, or both of the covariates. In this dissertation I conducted a simulation study to examine the effects of three Random Forests model specifications in propensity score analysis. The results suggested that, depending on the nature of data, optimal specification of (1) decision rules to select the covariate and its split value in a Classification Tree, (2) the number of covariates randomly sampled for selection, and (3) methods of estimating Random Forests propensity scores could potentially produce an unbiased average treatment effect estimate after propensity scores weighting by the odds adjustment. Compared to the logistic regression estimation model using the true propensity score model, Random Forests had an additional advantage in producing unbiased estimated standard error and correct statistical inference of the average treatment effect. The relationship between the balance on the covariates' means and the bias of average treatment effect estimate was examined both within and between conditions of the simulation. Within conditions, across repeated samples there was no noticeable correlation between the covariates' mean differences and the magnitude of bias of average treatment effect estimate for the covariates that were imbalanced before adjustment. Between conditions, small mean differences of covariates after propensity score adjustment were not sensitive enough to identify the optimal Random Forests model specification for propensity score analysis.
ContributorsCham, Hei Ning (Author) / Tein, Jenn-Yun (Thesis advisor) / Enders, Stephen G (Thesis advisor) / Enders, Craig K. (Committee member) / Mackinnon, David P (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
152888-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Owner organizations in the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry are presented with a wide variety of project delivery approaches. Implementation of these approaches, while enticing due to their potential to save money, reduce schedule delays, or improve quality, is extremely difficult to accomplish and requires a concerted change management

Owner organizations in the architecture, engineering, and construction (AEC) industry are presented with a wide variety of project delivery approaches. Implementation of these approaches, while enticing due to their potential to save money, reduce schedule delays, or improve quality, is extremely difficult to accomplish and requires a concerted change management effort. Research in the field of organizational behavior cautions that perhaps more than half of all organizational change efforts fail to accomplish their intended objectives. This study utilizes an action research approach to analyze change message delivery within owner organizations, model owner project team readiness and adoption of change, and identify the most frequently encountered types of resistance from lead project members. The analysis methodology included Spearman's rank order correlation, variable selection testing via three methods of hierarchical linear regression, relative weight analysis, and one-way ANOVA. Key findings from this study include recommendations for communicating the change message within owner organizations, empirical validation of critical predictors for change readiness and change adoption among project teams, and identification of the most frequently encountered resistive behaviors within change implementation in the AEC industry. A key contribution of this research is the recommendation of change management strategies for use by change practitioners.
ContributorsLines, Brian (Author) / Sullivan, Kenneth (Thesis advisor) / Wiezel, Avi (Committee member) / Badger, William (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
153080-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Qualifications based selection (QBS) of construction services uses a variety of criteria to evaluate proponents and select a contractor for the project. The criteria typically fall into three categories: past performance and technical capability, key personnel, and price, with price often being considered the most important factor in selection. Evaluation

Qualifications based selection (QBS) of construction services uses a variety of criteria to evaluate proponents and select a contractor for the project. The criteria typically fall into three categories: past performance and technical capability, key personnel, and price, with price often being considered the most important factor in selection. Evaluation and the merits of the key personnel category is not well described or discussed in research. Prior research has investigated the evaluation criteria elements and their ability to differentiate proponents. This case study uses QBS evaluation data from fifty-eight construction projects to show that use of a structured interview process provides the highest level of differentiation of qualifications of proponents, as compared to the proposed price and the technical proposal. The results of the analysis also indicate: 1) the key personnel element (the interview) is statistically more important than price,

2) Contractors who propose on projects using QBS should use their best people in proposal response, and 3) Contractors should educate/prepare their teams for interviews, people count.
ContributorsSawyer, Jeff T (Author) / Sullivan, Kennth S (Thesis advisor) / Wiezel, Avi (Committee member) / Badger, William (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2014
150133-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
ABSTRACT Facility managers have an important job in today's competitive business world by caring for the backbone of the corporation's capital. Maintaining assets and the support efforts cause facility managers to fight an uphill battle to prove the worth of their organizations. This thesis will discuss the important and flexible

ABSTRACT Facility managers have an important job in today's competitive business world by caring for the backbone of the corporation's capital. Maintaining assets and the support efforts cause facility managers to fight an uphill battle to prove the worth of their organizations. This thesis will discuss the important and flexible use of measurement and leadership reports and the benefits of justifying the work required to maintain or upgrade a facility. The task is streamlined by invoking accountability to subject experts. The facility manager must trust in the ability of his or her work force to get the job done. However, with accountability comes increased risk. Even though accountability may not alleviate total control or cease reactionary actions, facility managers can develop key leadership based reports to reassign accountability and measure subject matter experts while simultaneously reducing reactionary actions leading to increased cost. Identifying and reassigning risk that are not controlled to subject matter experts is imperative for effective facility management leadership and allows facility managers to create an accurate and solid facility management plan, supports the organization's succession plan, and allows the organization to focus on key competencies.
ContributorsTellefsen, Thor (Author) / Sullivan, Kenneth (Thesis advisor) / Kashiwagi, Dean (Committee member) / Badger, William (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
150449-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Current information on successful leadership and management practices is contradictory and inconsistent, which makes difficult to understand what successful business practices are and what are not. The purpose of this study is to identify a simple process that quickly and logically identifies consistent and inconsistent leadership and management criteria. The

Current information on successful leadership and management practices is contradictory and inconsistent, which makes difficult to understand what successful business practices are and what are not. The purpose of this study is to identify a simple process that quickly and logically identifies consistent and inconsistent leadership and management criteria. The hypothesis proposed is that Information Measurement Theory (IMT) along with the Kashiwagi Solution Model (KSM) is a methodology than can differentiate between accurate and inaccurate principles the initial part of the study about authors in these areas show how information is conflictive, and also served to establish an initial baseline of recommended practices aligned with IMT. The one author that excels in comparison to the rest suits the "Initial Baseline Matrix from Deming" which composes the first model. The second model is denominated the "Full Extended KSM-Matrix" composed of all the LS characteristics found among all authors and IMT. Both models were tested-out for accuracy. The second part of the study was directed to evaluate the perception of individuals on these principles. Two different groups were evaluated, one group of people that had prior training and knowledge of IMT; another group of people without any knowledge of IMT. The results of the survey showed more confusion in the group of people without knowledge to IMT and improved consistency and less variation in the group of people with knowledge in IMT. The third part of the study, the analysis of case studies of success and failure, identified principles as contributors, and categorized them into LS/type "A" characteristics and RS/type "C" characteristics, by applying the KSM. The results validated the initial proposal and led to the conclusion that practices that fall into the LS side of the KSM will lead to success, while practices that fall into the RS of the KSM will lead to failure. The comparison and testing of both models indicated a dominant support of the IMT concepts as contributors to success; while the KSM model has a higher accuracy of prediction.
ContributorsReynolds, Harry (Author) / Kashiwagi, Dean (Thesis advisor) / Sullivan, Kenneth (Committee member) / Badger, William (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011