But with low voice:
- Compared to a whale you are top model.
That's what I call “philosophical jokes”.
Depending on the complexity or, more often, on the trivial actions, they can be created
by each new category or they can be translated into the evaluation of the particular
situations. We will “code” them A10, A11, etc., but it would be better not to “hunt”
them, to accept them with certain opposition, because: “what is much is not healthy”. If
any correction is necessary...it is necessary.
The concrete objectives to be evaluated, described earlier, for which you have given
marks, can be organized: a, b, c, d, then different subcategories: a1, b1 etc. Such
subdivision, in my opinion , would become too busy and therefore against productivity.
On the other hand, its phased ordering, according to the analysis phase, is beneficial.
- We will use S for success.
I was saying that someone could have the figure 6 for assessing competence, by
reference to Creation. The equation would be like this:
S=
A1(that is 6) times (a+b+c+etc), that is, the marks for the particular aspects of starting a
business.
The amount resulting from (a+b+c+d) will usually be divided by 2...or not, depending
on the degree of risk. That if you know or others have told you that you have to have a
bad opinion about your abilities in the field to be analyzed. Then, instead of 2, it can be
3, but it's hard to believe that someone can be that wrong. When you are that wrong, you
do not even know what street you live on. Usually 2 will be used.
Let's say that a+b+c+etc. results in figure 100. Your score for competence, for the
chances of being the right person in the right place will be:
- 6 times (100 divided by 2 =50)=300. This score we add it to itself plus 1, then we
divide everything into the following figure: