Darryl Laws

 

  1.  The sample frame – My elite purposeful sample M&A experts will be extracted from an aggregate list of M&A and Private Equity industry professionals whom are registered with FINRA (IBs and PE fund managers) and or lawyers registered with the U.S. Securities Exchange. All of which have under gone FBI background checks and financial scrutiny. CEOs of acquisitive private companies will either be introduced to me by PE fund managers or come from my pre-existing relationships. I will consider on an ongoing basis how the sample frame can be updated and whether or not it contains information that can improve the survey.

  2. Units of analysis -  The selection criteria for inclusion in the elite purposeful sample of fifteen (15) participants who will come from: private equity and M&A professionals that are  leaders in their respective fields of private equity fund management, acquisitive corporate CEOs, M&A investment bankers and M&A lawyers); whom can articulate their experiences as it relates to irrational behavioral, the phenomena being investigated.

  3. Elements - Each of the elite purposeful sampling participants shall possess a minimum of twenty (20) years of mergers and acquisitions experience in his respective field of: M&A law, M&A corporate finance, M&A transactional structuring and M&A negotiation tactics and strategies.

  4. Coverage and sampling error. Coverage and sampling errors will be factored in to my SPSS reliability calculations. The data extracted will be checked for Type I and II errors. Cohen, 1992 states that the statistical power of a significance test is the long-term probability, given the population effective sample, a, and TV of rejecting /&. When the effective sample is not equal to zero, H, is false, so failure to reject it also incurs an error. This is a Type II error, and for any given effective sample, a, and N, its probability of occurring is ft. Power is thus 1 - 0, the probability of rejecting a false H,. In this treatment, the only specification for power is .80 (so/3= .20), a convention proposed for general use. A materially smaller value than .80 would incur too great a risk of a Type II error. A materially larger value would result in a demand for N that is likely to exceed the investigator's resources. Taken with the conventional a = .05, power of .80resultsina 0M ratio of 4:1 (.20 to .05) of the two kinds of risks (Cohen, 1992). 

Comments

Post a Comment