Presents the basis for a precise HR that is able to put labour on the shelf, like all other commodities. Recommendations, when done objectively, create a pool from which to select the appropriate personnel, so that square and round pegs are put in their proper holes.

1. +234-703-430-2486
Recommendations
By
Peter Anyebe
View
It is possible to categorise people into the following three, 3 groups, according to
my profile
their scores on the factor-Nu:
Adapted, Nu < 2.00
Adjusted, 2.00 ≤ Nu ≤ 4.00
Integrated, Nu ≥ 4.00
The factor-Nu measures the number of essentials that the person is able to identify,
out of the expected five, 5. It is derived from the factor-F. This conception is
corroborated by the following two, 2 measures:
WordPress
Maturation, MI and
Normality, NI
Google Me
In principle the factors MI and NI are correlated at r = 0.9962, when the subjects are
consistent. The correlation drops to r = 0.8579 when the inconsistent subjects are
included in the analysis. In general, a correlation of r = 0.7014 is observed between
both factors. This is expected to rise with the number of subjects in the analysis. Of
the twenty, 20 subjects in the analysis described here, six, 6 were consistent.
Normality is derived from the factor-Nu. And maturation, MI is derived principally
from the factors S and C. Recall that it is sufficient to put a value on people
objectively, using the factors F, S, and C. These factors, in turn, are derived from the
factors Pc, Rn, Vc, and √n which are measured on their various kits.
Following this corroboration, performance is appraised on the factor-PfI, which is
one of two, 2 factors that define maturation formally as follows:
MI = √(PfI x EB), Pf = 1 / (1 – 1/Fp) Rw = √(Nu/Nu’),
Fp = (FA x FC) Nu’ = f1, Derived on the PMM
FC = √n / √n’, FC > 1 f0 = 2Po – 1
PfI = 1 – 1/Pf, FC = 1/ FC + 1, FC < 1 Po = RES / RGT
EB = Rw/2, FA = 1/(RES x RGT), 1 ≤ FA ≤ 2
FA = 1/ FA + 2, FA < 1
The factor- EB is a measure of the quality of the business environment.

2. The factor-PfI is predicted from the measure of only the factor-Pc at r = 0.9999, for
the subjects that are consistent. It drops to r = 0.8024 when the inconsistent subjects
are included in the analysis. For recommendations therefore, the score on this factor
necessarily needs to be at least 0.80 for the subject to be recommendable. Recall the
Pareto 80-20 Rule, following which 80% of the work in most organisations is done
by 20% of the personnel. The 20%ters need to score up to 0.98 on this factor.
Reference the data on the tables 1 and 2 below.
The factor-ROI is another factor that needs to feature prominently on the
recommendation note. When the negative ROI scores are ignored, the other scores
on the above referenced data return a correlation of r = 0.7846 between the scores
derived from only the factor-Pc and the scores derived from the three, 3 factors Pc,
Rn, and √n. Serially, a recommendation would be adequate when it includes the
following measures:
1. Maturation Recommendations
2. Category 6. HPRQ
3. Entropy 5. Reward
4. ROI
Thus for a meaningful recommendation, the object would be to define a quality
human-power resource, HPRQ against the back drop of the competencies that need
to be rewarded, for sustained organisational growth, ROI. These competencies are
expressed in the amount of entropy, F that the subject is capable of contributing, as
well as the category, Nu and level of maturation, MI.
Recall that the factor-C is the input to the evaluation of the ROI. It is the objective
determinant of employability. It ought to exceed or at least equal the organisational
C-score for the subject to be employable. A lower C-score would only negate
organisational growth.
Recommendations put labour on the shelf, like all other commodities. Done in the
manner presented here, it makes HR precise.

3. Pc Rn /n Vc S F C RES RGT ROI Rw EB Nu PfI MI NI Po Ps
1.64 2.42 2.15 1.25 0.43 1.08 1.71 1.0 0.99 6.16 1.51 0.76 3.38 0.95 0.86957 0.99928 0.91 27.26
1.58 2.32 2.07 1.24 0.44 1.07 1.67 0.97 0.96 6.09 1.45 0.72 3.23 0.9 0.85011 0.99877 0.86 24.92
1.8 2.68 2.36 1.27 0.41 1.08 1.83 1.06 1.08 1.4 0.52 0.26 1.06 0.3 0.50903 0.708 0.29 9.39
1.95 2.93 2.55 1.29 0.39 1.09 1.95 1.11 1.15 1.06 0.53 0.26 0.99 0.29 0.51307 0.67499 0.28 9.44
2.33 3.56 3.05 1.33 0.35 1.1 2.23 1.21 1.32 0.68 0.54 0.27 0.85 0.26 0.51764 0.6047 0.25 9.33
5.37 8.7 7.07 1.46 0.23 1.14 4.52 1.63 2.29 0.22 0.48 0.24 0.46 0.16 0.49105 0.35528 0.15 7.08
1.69 2.5 2.22 1.26 0.42 1.08 1.75 1.01 1.02 1.85 0.51 0.25 1.11 0.32 0.50461 0.73439 0.3 9.29
2.6 4.01 3.41 1.35 0.33 1.11 2.44 1.27 1.43 0.55 0.54 0.27 0.78 0.25 0.51807 0.56418 0.23 9.14
3.64 5.76 4.78 1.41 0.28 1.13 3.22 1.45 1.79 0.34 0.52 0.26 0.61 0.2 0.51071 0.45489 0.19 8.28
1.18 1.68 1.56 1.15 0.51 1.05 1.36 0.76 0.7 4.94 0.93 0.47 2.09 0.52 0.68368 0.96334 0.5 9.82
1.65 2.43 2.16 1.25 0.43 1.08 1.72 1.0 1.0 6.17 1.52 0.76 3.41 0.96 0.87272 0.99934 0.92 27.65
1.34 1.93 1.76 1.19 0.47 1.06 1.48 0.86 0.81 5.61 1.16 0.58 2.59 0.67 0.76049 0.99028 0.66 15.7
2.85 4.43 3.74 1.37 0.32 1.11 2.63 1.32 1.52 0.47 0.54 0.27 0.73 0.23 0.51725 0.53209 0.22 8.94
18.31 30.8 24.31 1.53 0.12 1.16 14.23 2.02 4.85 0.08 0.31 0.16 0.21 0.08 0.39584 0.67499 0.07 3.71
2.14 3.24 2.8 1.31 0.37 1.1 2.09 1.16 1.24 0.82 0.53 0.27 0.91 0.28 0.51612 0.63765 0.26 9.41
2.65 4.09 3.47 1.36 0.33 1.11 2.47 1.29 1.45 0.53 0.54 0.27 0.77 0.24 0.51798 0.55738 0.23 9.1
1.4 2.03 1.84 1.2 0.46 1.06 1.53 0.89 0.85 5.78 1.23 0.62 2.76 0.73 0.78516 0.99415 0.71 17.98
1.28 1.83 1.69 1.17 0.49 1.05 1.44 0.82 0.77 5.41 1.08 0.54 2.41 0.62 0.73379 0.98393 0.6 13.45
1.32 1.9 1.74 1.18 0.48 1.06 1.47 0.85 0.8 5.55 1.13 0.57 2.53 0.66 0.75183 0.9885 0.64 14.94
1.66 2.45 2.18 1.25 0.42 1.08 1.73 1.0 1.0 2.04 0.51 0.25 1.13 0.32 0.50309 0.74191 0.31 9.25
Data derived from only the factor-Pc
Pc Rn /n Vc S F C RES RGT ROI Rw EB Nu PfI MI NI Po Ps
1.64 2.28 2.13 1.14 0.44 1.07 1.71 0.99 0.99 6.05 1.63 0.82 3.65 0.92 0.86442 0.99973 0.97 27.05
1.58 2.16 2.05 1.11 0.45 1.05 1.67 0.96 0.95 5.35 1.75 0.87 3.91 0.86 0.86667 0.99991 0.97 21.74
1.8 2.6 2.35 1.21 0.41 1.11 1.83 1.06 1.08 5.62 1.56 0.78 3.18 0.3 0.48466 0.99852 0.95 36.42
1.95 2.89 2.55 1.27 0.38 1.13 1.95 1.11 1.16 4.74 1.58 0.79 2.9 0.29 0.47741 0.99623 0.94 42.05
2.33 3.66 3.08 1.38 0.33 1.19 2.23 1.22 1.36 3.3 1.67 0.84 2.45 0.26 0.46809 0.98579 0.91 50.95
5.37 7.29 6.03 1.42 0.32 1.21 4.52 1.69 1.86 1.84 1.5 0.75 2.32 0.19 0.37849 0.97958 0.91 53.61
1.69 2.61 2.06 1.53 0.39 1.27 1.51 0.92 0.86 -5.28 0.9 0.45 2.01 0.4 0.42272 0.95587 0.88 59.72
2.6 4.7 3.7 1.54 0.26 1.27 2.44 1.28 1.63 2.66 1.81 0.9 2. 0.24 0.46254 0.9543 0.88 60.02
3.64 6.29 4.89 1.57 0.24 1.29 3.22 1.44 1.94 1.97 1.91 0.95 1.93 0.2 0.43962 0.94629 0.88 61.4
1.18 1.09 1.36 1.58 0.89 1.29 1.36 0.52 0.89 4.22 2.38 1.19 1.91 0.42 0.70573 0.94423 0.88 61.72
1.65 0.74 1.36 1.69 0.59 1.34 1.72 0.93 0.95 -6.18 0.84 0.42 1.72 0.8 0.57928 0.91395 0.86 65.65
1.34 1.09 1.56 1.7 0.59 1.35 1.6 0.86 0.89 -5.64 0.88 0.44 1.7 0.66 0.53747 0.91063 0.85 66.0
2.85 2.74 2.81 1.82 0.53 1.41 2.62 1.34 1.22 -19.33 0.69 0.34 1.54 0.26 0.30049 0.8756 0.83 69.25
18.31 35.62 25.05 1.84 0.14 1.42 14.23 2.07 4.29 1.14 2.13 1.06 1.5 0.09 0.3121 0.86732 0.83 69.91
2.14 4.79 3.13 2.06 0.19 1.53 1.65 1.07 1.28 -12.76 1.04 0.52 1.29 0.15 0.27514 0.80299 0.8 74.17
2.65 3.1 1.89 2.28 0.44 1.64 1.23 0.72 0.52 -1.92 0.51 0.25 1.14 0.18 0.21218 0.74441 0.77 77.24
1.28 4.41 2.53 2.49 0.11 1.74 0.89 0.84 -0.55 6.72 3.04 1.52 1.03 0.32 0.6966 0.6969 0.74 79.38
1.4 2.39 1.19 3.02 0.38 2.01 1.27 0.79 0.58 -1.63 0.38 0.19 0.85 0.18 0.18555 0.60304 0.69 83.03
1.32 2.2 1.1 3.0 0.4 2.0 1.22 0.74 0.49 -1.6 0.38 0.19 0.85 0.14 0.16562 0.60549 0.69 82.94
1.66 3.57 1.26 4.67 0.25 2.83 1.44 0.97 0.9 -1.49 0.27 0.14 0.61 0.29 0.19929 0.45528 0.57 87.86
NI = 2(ϕx – 0.5), Data derived from the factors Pc, Rn, Vc, and √n
x = Nu,
ϕx = 1 – Qt(C1t + C2t + C3t + C4t + C5t) P = 0.2316419
C1 = 0.31938153
t = 1 / (1 + Px) C2 = 0.356563782
ϕt = 1 / √(2π) x e(-(x2/2)) C3 = 1.78147837
C4 = -1.821255978 e = 2.7183
Hastings’ Approximation of the Normal Distribution Function C5 = 1.330274429 π = 3.141