TABLE 4: HOLD DIRECTORS PERSONALLY ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTS
AND BAR FELONS FROM SERVING AS DIRECTORS PLUS OTHER RESTRICTIONS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
KEY
FINDINGS: |
1 |
Overall 96.9% of respondents want directors held personally liable for
their acts, felons barred from board service, and other restrictions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
Boldfaced values in the rows of column
YESes and Nos differ significantly from the overall average as they are at
least 3 standard deviations away from that value. |
|
|
|
|
3 |
The percentage YES and NO responses of all
but one of the non-owner interest groups are statistically significantly
different from the corresponding ones of Owners and Overall in that they are |
|
|
much less favorably inclined to
have directors held personally responsible for their acts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
Some percentage YES and NO responses in
the Gender, Region and Additional Remarks Made sections differ significantly
from the Overall figures. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
The YES and NO percentage responses of
CCFJ members differed significantly from both those Overall and of
Non-members. Non-members responses,
however, were not statistically |
|
|
|
significantly different from the Overall values. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
There's a potentially causal relationship between respondents'
Interest and their response to this question. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* * * * * * * * * * * * |
* * * * * * * * INTEREST * * * *
* * * * |
* * * * * * * * * |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* * * * * * * *
REGION [8] * * * * * * * |
* *
ADDITIONAL REMARKS MADE * * |
|
|
|
|
|
BOARD |
|
|
|
|
|
* * *
GENDER [5] * * * |
CCFJ
MEMBER [7] |
|
|
WEST |
EAST |
|
|
PRIORITY |
COMMENT |
|
|
|
|
OVERALL |
OWNER |
MEMBER [1] |
LAWYER |
C.A.M. [2] |
OTHER [3] |
N.A. [4] |
|
MALE |
FEMALE |
D.K. [6] |
|
YES |
NO |
|
NORTH |
CENTRAL |
COAST |
COAST |
SOUTH |
|
ONLY |
ONLY |
BOTH |
NEITHER |
OVERALL TOTALS |
|
1033 |
|
740 |
130 |
7 |
13 |
8 |
135 |
|
583 |
389 |
60 |
|
196 |
837 |
|
35 |
202 |
156 |
137 |
503 |
|
176 |
131 |
418 |
308 |
% WITHIN CATEGORY |
|
100.0% |
|
71.6% |
12.6% |
0.7% |
1.3% |
0.8% |
13.1% |
|
56.4% |
37.7% |
5.8% |
|
19.0% |
81.0% |
|
3.4% |
19.6% |
15.1% |
13.3% |
48.7% |
|
17.0% |
12.7% |
40.5% |
29.8% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ADJUSTED # [9] |
|
1024 |
|
733 |
130 |
7 |
12 |
8 |
134 |
|
583 |
385 |
56 |
|
191 |
833 |
|
34 |
202 |
155 |
135 |
498 |
|
174 |
131 |
414 |
305 |
# OF YESes |
|
992 |
|
718 |
121 |
5 |
11 |
7 |
130 |
|
566 |
373 |
53 |
|
189 |
803 |
|
34 |
197 |
151 |
131 |
479 |
|
170 |
125 |
402 |
295 |
# OF NOs |
|
32 |
|
15 |
9 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
|
17 |
12 |
3 |
|
2 |
30 |
|
0 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
19 |
|
4 |
6 |
12 |
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COLUMN % YES [10] |
|
96.9% |
|
98.0% |
93.1% |
71.4% |
91.7% |
87.5% |
97.0% |
|
97.1% |
96.9% |
94.6% |
|
99.0% |
96.4% |
|
100.0% |
97.5% |
97.4% |
97.0% |
96.2% |
|
97.7% |
95.4% |
97.1% |
96.7% |
t-Test on %
YESes [11] |
|
|
2.0 |
-7.0 |
-47.0 |
-9.6 |
-17.3 |
0.3 |
|
0.4 |
0.0 |
-4.1 |
|
3.8 |
-0.9 |
|
5.8 |
1.2 |
1.0 |
0.3 |
-1.3 |
|
1.5 |
-2.7 |
0.4 |
-0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COLUMN % NO [10] |
|
3.1% |
|
2.0% |
6.9% |
28.6% |
8.3% |
12.5% |
3.0% |
|
2.9% |
3.1% |
5.4% |
|
1.0% |
3.6% |
|
0.0% |
2.5% |
2.6% |
3.0% |
3.8% |
|
2.3% |
4.6% |
2.9% |
3.3% |
t-Test on % NOes [11] |
|
|
|
-2.0 |
7.0 |
47.0 |
9.6 |
17.3 |
-0.3 |
|
-0.4 |
0.0 |
4.1 |
|
-3.8 |
0.9 |
|
-5.8 |
-1.2 |
-1.0 |
-0.3 |
1.3 |
|
-1.5 |
2.7 |
-0.4 |
0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 STD.
DEVIATION [12] |
0.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% YESes Row [10] |
|
100.0% |
|
72.4% |
12.2% |
0.5% |
1.1% |
0.7% |
13.1% |
|
57.1% |
37.6% |
5.3% |
|
19.1% |
80.9% |
|
3.4% |
19.9% |
15.2% |
13.2% |
48.3% |
|
17.1% |
12.6% |
40.5% |
29.7% |
% NOs Row [10] |
|
100.0% |
|
46.9% |
28.1% |
6.3% |
3.1% |
3.1% |
12.5% |
|
53.1% |
37.5% |
9.4% |
|
6.3% |
93.8% |
|
0.0% |
15.6% |
12.5% |
12.5% |
59.4% |
|
12.5% |
18.8% |
37.5% |
31.3% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calculated
Chi-Squared Value [13]: |
0.0064 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.6584 |
|
|
|
"0.0673" |
|
|
0.4270 |
|
|
|
|
|
0.7050 |
|
|
|
Implication of
Chi-Squared Test |
|
RELATIONSHIP FOUND |
|
|
|
|
|
INDEPENDENT |
|
|
INDEPENDENT |
|
INDEPENDENT |
|
|
|
|
INDEPENDENT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 ROWS x 3 COLUMNS |
|
|
|
|
|
2 ROWS x 2 COLUMNS |
|
CELL < 5 |
|
|
2 ROWS x 3 COLUMNS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
© 2008 Cyber Citizens for Justice, Inc. Deland, FL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|