PRJ70406 Chapter 4 Analysis and Results: Marks Guide

Quick answer: For PRJ70406 Chapter 4 analysis and results, report nine things in order: introduction, demographic profile, data preparation, reliability, descriptive statistics, normality, inferential tests, hypothesis outcomes and a summary. Each table needs a threshold, a source and one interpreting sentence. Your SPSS output must match what Chapter 3 promised.

Your group has closed the survey, someone has exported a spreadsheet with a few hundred rows, and the Chapter 4 draft is due in week 6. The Taylor’s University PRJ70406 Business Management Project brief lists the sub-sections clearly, but it says nothing about how to turn SPSS output into pages a marker will reward. That gap is where most groups lose marks, and this guide fills it.

If you want to compare your wording with the exact requirements first, the PRJ70406 Business Management Project question page sets them out.

What PRJ70406 Chapter 4 analysis and results must contain

The brief carries 80 marks for the group research report, which runs to 10,000–15,000 words. Chapter 4 for a quantitative project follows a fixed order, and markers tick it off section by section. Here is what each part has to deliver.

A qualitative project replaces the numeric sub-sections with themes, coding steps and a final data structure, but the discipline is the same: one decision, one source, one interpretation.

Step-by-step approach to Chapter 4

1. Reopen your Chapter 3 and list every promise it makes: sample size, sampling method, tests, software.
2. Clean the file first. Count the responses received, the ones removed and why.
3. Code every item and label it in SPSS before running anything.
4. Compute construct scores only after the reliability check.
5. Run the tests in the order of the sub-sections, saving each output table as you go.
6. Rebuild each SPSS table in APA 7th format, following the output walk-throughs in Pallant (2020). Never paste screenshots.
7. Write the interpretation under each table straight away, while the numbers are fresh.
8. Check that every hypothesis from Chapter 2 gets a clear answer in 4.8.

Most students waste the first hours formatting tables. Write the sentence under each table first. It forces you to know what the number means.

How many respondents does the brief require?

The brief sets the minimum sample as the G*Power result or 100 respondents, whichever is higher. For multiple regression with four predictors, a medium effect (f² = 0.15), α = .05 and power of .95, G*Power gives roughly 129, so 129 becomes your floor (Faul et al., 2009). State the inputs, not just the answer.

Quantitative or qualitative: how Chapter 4 changes

Quantitative is the safer route for a group with a business problem that can be measured, and it fits the research-onion logic you justify in Chapter 3 (Saunders et al., 2023). It is also where the tables multiply, so plan your numbering early. If your report doubles as a longer capstone, the same logic is used in a final year project helper engagement.

Mark-maximising checklist for PRJ70406 Chapter 4

• Every table is numbered, titled and discussed in the text.
• Each threshold has a source: alpha of .70 or above (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994); skewness and kurtosis limits (Kline, 2016).
• Sample size in Chapter 4 equals the sample size in Chapter 3 or the difference is explained.
• Assumptions for regression are checked and stated: multicollinearity, independence of residuals, normality (Hair et al., 2019).
• Each hypothesis is labelled H1, H2 and so on, matching Chapter 2.
• Decimal places are consistent across all tables.
• Figures such as Q-Q plots are in the appendix if they would break the flow.

Common mistakes that cost marks

Reporting alpha below .70 and carrying on as if nothing happened is the classic one. If a construct falls short, say so, check the corrected item-total correlations, and explain what you did. Dropping an item with a reason is fine. Silently dropping it is not.

The second is treating a significant Shapiro–Wilk result as an automatic failure. With a few hundred cases, Likert composites often fail it. Pair it with skewness, kurtosis and plots, as Kim (2013) suggests, and justify the test you finally use.

Third, a hypothesis that is not supported gets buried. Markers read 4.8 closely. A clean “not supported” with the beta and p-value is worth more than a vague sentence. Finally, check the reference list: a mix of APA and Harvard styles reads as careless, and a citation and referencing verification service can catch it before you submit.

What students actually worry about

Search forums for MBA research project help and the same questions repeat. Which normality test do I report? What do I do if alpha is .65? Is a hypothesis that fails a failed project? Can five people share the SPSS work fairly? And how long should Chapter 4 be?

The short answers: report skewness and kurtosis with plots; investigate the weak construct and document the decision; no, a failed hypothesis is a finding, not a failure; split by section but have one person run the final file; and let the tables set the length, not a word target.

Group work adds its own friction. Everyone must also appear in the recorded video discussion of findings, so each member needs to understand the Chapter 4 numbers, not only their own section.

If your draft is ready and you only need a critical read of the logic and formatting, an assignment review service can check it against the brief.

See the layout in a worked example

We wrote a model Chapter 4 extract with illustrative data so you can see each table and sentence in place. It is for reference only: PRJ70406 Chapter 4 SPSS sample. For the reasoning behind a research design, a related Malaysian example is the ECC563 research methodology assignment sample.

The Chapter 5 discussion should then interpret findings against your own Chapter 2 studies. If the project sits in a wider management topic, a management assignment helper page lists related support.

About the expert

Questions on business strategy and market research are handled by Aina R., who holds a PhD in Marketing & Business Strategy from the University of Malaya. Her listed specialisms are Marketing Case Studies, SWOT & PESTEL Analysis, and Consumer Psychology & Market Research, and her profile says she is trusted for coursework and MBA projects from UM, Taylor’s, and UCSI.

Before you submit your Chapter 4 draft

Check one thing tonight: does every number in Chapter 4 match the method in Chapter 3? If it does not, fix that before polishing. For structured guidance, our MBA assignment help page explains what support covers. We provide model answers and academic guidance, and you remain responsible for following Taylor’s University rules. You can read about us and student feedback on the reviews page before deciding.

FAQs

How long should Chapter 4 be in a 10,000–15,000 word project?

The brief gives no chapter word count, so let the content decide. Most quantitative projects need enough space for around six to eight tables with a short interpretation under each. Check the weighting of your marking rubric and your supervisor’s guidance rather than aiming for a fixed length.

Which normality test should I use in SPSS?

Report skewness, kurtosis and Q-Q plots, and add Shapiro–Wilk if you wish. With samples above about 100, Shapiro–Wilk often flags small departures. Judge normality from all indicators together, state your thresholds with sources, and explain why you kept or changed the test.

What if my Cronbach’s alpha is below .70?

Do not hide it. Check the corrected item-total correlations and the alpha-if-item-deleted column, then decide whether to drop an item or keep the construct with a stated limitation. Document the decision in 4.4 and mention it again in your limitations.

Do I need to use G*Power or can I just collect 100 responses?

The brief takes whichever is higher. Run G*Power with your actual number of predictors, effect size, alpha and power. If the result exceeds 100, that figure is your minimum; if it is lower, 100 applies.

Can a hypothesis be not supported and still earn full marks?

Yes. Markers assess how clearly you report and explain results, not whether they match your expectations. State the statistics, offer a reasoned explanation in Chapter 5, and link it to a practical implication.

Should Chapter 4 include interpretation or only results?

Include both a short interpretation under each table and a summary in 4.9. Deeper comparison with past studies, reasons for differences and strategies belong in Chapter 5. Keep the two chapters distinct so the discussion does not repeat the tables.

References

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Kim, H.-Y. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: Assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics, 38(1), 52–54. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52

Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.

Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2023). Research methods for business students (9th ed.). Pearson Education.