Tesis por compendio / [ES] La presente Tesis Doctoral, desarrollada a modo de compendio de cuatro publicaciones, tiene como objeto el valor de las marcas del sector de las nuevas tecnologías y la sostenibilidad de las empresas propietarias de dichas marcas. En las dos primeras publicaciones se desarrollan modelos matemáticos de estimación del valor de marca, utilizando únicamente la información económico-financiera de las empresas. En la tercera publicación se analiza el grado de similitud de los rankings de sostenibilidad de acceso abierto más importantes que han aparecido en la última década, para determinar si incorporan de facto las marcas mejor valoradas del sector tecnológico. Y, por último, en la cuarta publicación se desarrollan modelos matemáticos que explican diferentes tipos de resultados de las empresas en función de la transparencia en materia de sostenibilidad de las compañías propietarias de las marcas. En las cuatro publicaciones presentadas, la muestra es común y está formada por un total de trece marcas del sector tecnológico: Accenture, Apple, Cisco, Facebook, Google, HP, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Oracle, Samsung, SAP y Sony. Estas marcas son las mejor valoradas del sector de la tecnología en el periodo 2000-2018 según los rankings internacionales de valoración de marcas (Interbrand, Brand Finance y Millward Brown), y han permanecido en el Top-100 de al menos dos de dichos rankings en dicho periodo. Las conclusiones generales de nuestra investigación permiten confirmar que la información económico-financiera es importante para explicar el valor de las marcas de las empresas tecnológicas. Concretamente, únicamente con el resultado neto de las empresas se explica cerca del 60% del valor de marca proporcionado por los rankings internacionales. Si al resultado neto, se añade la cotización bursátil de las empresas propietarias de las marcas, se llega a explicar el 80% del valor de las marcas. Y si, por último, se añaden un conjunto de variables económico-financieras, el valor de marca se aproxima al 90%. De estos resultados, se puede deducir que la proporción restante del valor de marca, entre el 10% y el 40%, (en función de las variables que se incluyan en los modelos), es explicada por la fortaleza de la marca. Esta Tesis también evidencia, tanto las diferencias significativas entre las valoraciones de marca proporcionadas por las consultoras de valoración de marcas, como las diferencias entre las valoraciones de sostenibilidad proporcionadas por los rankings de RSC de acceso abierto, y al mismo tiempo, las diferencias entre ambos tipos de valoraciones; ya que, las empresas con las marcas más reconocidas mundialmente, no son las que mayor conciencia socio-ambiental tienen. Por último, se observa que las grandes empresas son más transparentes en términos de sostenibilidad, pero esta transparencia apenas se relaciona con otros resultados económicos como el incremento de los activos, de los ingresos, el apalancamiento, el ROE o el ROA. Además, se muestra que los tres pilares de la RSC son utilizados por las consultoras para determinar el valor de marca, mientras que los rankings de RSC solo utilizan la transparencia en los aspectos sociales y ambientales. / [CA] La present Tesi Doctoral, desenvolupada com un compendi de quatre publicacions, té com a objecte el valor de les marques del sector de les noves tecnologies i la sostenibilitat de les empreses propietàries d'aquestes marques. En les dos primeres publicacions es desenvolupen models matemàtics d'estimació del valor de marca, utilitzant únicament la informació económico-financera de les empreses. En la tercera publicació s'analitza el grau de similitud dels rànquings de sostenibilitat d'accés obert més importants que han aparegut en l'última dècada, per a determinar si incorporen de facto les marques millors valorades del sector tecnològic. I, finalment, en la quarta publicació es desevolupen models matemàtics que expliquen diferents tipus de resultats de les empreses en funció de la transparència en matèria de sostenibilitat de les companyies propietàries de les marques. En les quatre publicacions presentades, la mostra és comú i està formada per un total de tretze marques del sector tecnològic: Accenture, Apple, Cisco, Facebook, Google, HP, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Oracle, Samsung, SAP i Sony. Aquestes marques són les millor valorades del sector de la tecnologia en el període 2000-2018 segons els rànquings internacionals de valoració de marques (Interbrand, Brand Finance i Millward Brown), i han estat al Top-100 en almenys dos d'aquestos rànquins en eixe període. Les conclusions generals de la nostra investigació permeten confirmar que la informació económico-financera és important per explicar el valor de les marques de les empreses tecnològiques. Concretament, sols amb el resultat net de les empreses s'explica prop del 60% del valor de marca proporcionat pels rànquings internacionals. Si al resultat net, s'afig la cotització borsària de les empreses propietàries de les marques, s'arriba a explicar el 80% del valor de les marques. I si, finalment, s'afigen un conjunt de variables económico-financeres, el valor de marca s'aproxima al 90%. D'aquestos resultats, es pot deduir que la proporció restant del valor de marca, entre el 10% i el 40%, (en funció de les variables que s'incloguen en als models), és explicada per la fortalesa de la marca. Aquesta Tesi també evidencia, tant les diferències significatives entre les valoracions de marca proporcionades per les consultores de valoració de marques, com les diferències entre les valoracions de sostenibilitat proporcionades pels rànquings de RSC d'accés obert, i al mateix temps, les diferències entre ambdós tipus de valoracions; ja que, les empreses amb les marques més reconegudes mundialment, no són les que major consciència socioambiental tenen. Finalment, s'observa que les grans empreses són més transparents en termes de sostenibilitat, però aquesta transparència només es relaciona amb altres resultats econòmics com l'increment dels actius, dels ingressos, l'apalacament, el ROE o el ROA. A més, es mostra que els tres pilars de la RSC són utilitzats per les consultores per determinar el valor de marca, mentre que els rànquings de RSC només utilitzen la transparència en els aspectes socials i ambientals. / [EN] This PhD Thesis, developed as a compendium of four publications, aims at the value of brands in the new technology sector and the sustainability of the companies that own these brands. In the first two publications, mathematical models for estimating brand value are developed, using only the economic-financial information of the companies. The third publication analyzes the degree of similarity of the most important open access sustainability rankings that have emerged in the last decade, to determine if they incorporate de facto the best valued brands in the technology sector. And finally, in the fourth publication, mathematical models are developed to explain different types of business results based on transparency in terms of sustainability of the companies that own the brands. In the four publications presented, the sample is common and consists of a total of thirteen brands in the technology sector: Accenture, Apple, Cisco, Facebook, Google, HP, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Oracle, Samsung, SAP and Sony. These brands are the best valued in the technology sector in the 2000-2018 period according to the international brand valuation rankings (Interbrand, Brand Finance and Millward Brown), and have remained in the Top-100 of at least two of these rankings in that period. The general conclusions of our research allow us to confirm that economic-financial information is important to explain the value of the brands of technology companies. Specifically, 60% of the brand value is explained by the net results of the companies, this percentage rises up to 80% when the stock price of the company is added to the net results as explanatory variable of the brand values. Finally, the brand value is explained nearby to 90% when a set of economic-financial variables are added. From these results, it can be deduced that the remaining proportion of the brand value, between 10% and 40%, (depending on the variables included in the models), is explained by the strength of the brand. This thesis also evidences, both the significant differences between the brand valuations provided by the brand valuation consultancy agencies, but also the differences between the sustainability valuations provided by the open access CSR rankings; in addition, the thesis shows the existing differences between these two types of valuations. Thus, companies with the most recognized brands worldwide are not the ones with the highest socio-environmental awareness. Finally, it is observed that large companies are more transparent in terms of sustainability, but this transparency is hardly related to other economic results such as the increase in assets, income, leverage, ROE or ROA. In addition, it is shown that the three pillars of the RSC are employed by the consultancy agencies to determine the brand value, while the CSR rankings only provide transparency in social and environmental aspects. / Alcaide González, MÁ. (2020). Modelos de valoración de marcas del sector tecnológico y la responsabilidad social corporativa [Tesis doctoral]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/139141 / Compendio

Thesis (MSc)--Stellenbosch University, 2014. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Citation analysis is an important tool in the academic community. It can aid universities, funding bodies, and individual researchers to evaluate scientific work and direct resources appropriately. With the rapid growth of the scientific enterprise and the increase of online libraries that include citation analysis tools, the need for a systematic evaluation of these tools becomes more important. The research presented in this study deals with scientific research output, i.e., articles and citations, and how they can be used in bibliometrics to measure academic success. More specifically, this research analyses algorithms that rank academic entities such as articles, authors and journals to address the question of how well these algorithms can identify important and high-impact entities. A consistent mathematical formulation is developed on the basis of a categorisation of bibliometric measures such as the h-index, the Impact Factor for journals, and ranking algorithms based on Google’s PageRank. Furthermore, the theoretical properties of each algorithm are laid out. The ranking algorithms and bibliometric methods are computed on the Microsoft Academic Search citation database which contains 40 million papers and over 260 million citations that span across multiple academic disciplines. We evaluate the ranking algorithms by using a large test data set of papers and authors that won renowned prizes at numerous Computer Science conferences. The results show that using citation counts is, in general, the best ranking metric. However, for certain tasks, such as ranking important papers or identifying high-impact authors, algorithms based on PageRank perform better. As a secondary outcome of this research, publication trends across academic disciplines are analysed to show changes in publication behaviour over time and differences in publication patterns between disciplines. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Sitasiesanalise is ’n belangrike instrument in die akademiese omgewing. Dit kan universiteite, befondsingsliggams en individuele navorsers help om wetenskaplike werk te evalueer en hulpbronne toepaslik toe te ken. Met die vinnige groei van wetenskaplike uitsette en die toename in aanlynbiblioteke wat sitasieanalise insluit, word die behoefte aan ’n sistematiese evaluering van hierdie gereedskap al hoe belangriker. Die navorsing in hierdie studie handel oor die uitsette van wetenskaplike navorsing, dit wil sê, artikels en sitasies, en hoe hulle gebruik kan word in bibliometriese studies om akademiese sukses te meet. Om meer spesifiek te wees, hierdie navorsing analiseer algoritmes wat akademiese entiteite soos artikels, outeers en journale gradeer. Dit wys hoe doeltreffend hierdie algoritmes belangrike en hoë-impak entiteite kan identifiseer. ’n Breedvoerige wiskundige formulering word ontwikkel uit ’n versameling van bibliometriese metodes soos byvoorbeeld die h-indeks, die Impak Faktor vir journaale en die rang-algoritmes gebaseer op Google se PageRank. Verder word die teoretiese eienskappe van elke algoritme uitgelê. Die rang-algoritmes en bibliometriese metodes gebruik die sitasiedatabasis van Microsoft Academic Search vir berekeninge. Dit bevat 40 miljoen artikels en meer as 260 miljoen sitasies, wat oor verskeie akademiese dissiplines strek. Ons gebruik ’n groot stel toetsdata van dokumente en outeers wat bekende pryse op talle rekenaarwetenskaplike konferensies gewen het om die rang-algoritmes te evalueer. Die resultate toon dat die gebruik van sitasietellings, in die algemeen, die beste rangmetode is. Vir sekere take, soos die gradeering van belangrike artikels, of die identifisering van hoë-impak outeers, presteer algoritmes wat op PageRank gebaseer is egter beter. ’n Sekondêre resultaat van hierdie navorsing is die ontleding van publikasie tendense in verskeie akademiese dissiplines om sodoende veranderinge in publikasie gedrag oor tyd aan te toon en ook die verskille in publikasie patrone uit verskillende dissiplines uit te wys.

Gamification in informationsystem and it´s influence on the users is processed in this study. Gamification means bringing elements from the gaming community and applicate them in another context. Purpose of the study is to look closer to how the users affects by gamification in informationsystem and also identify important aspects from a user-perspective point of view. To perform this study, semi-structured in-depth interviews were made, including nine users of a gamified informationsystem. The conclusion is the following: Gamification influence the commitment, working conditions, performance and progress of the users in a significant way. 17 elements important to consider from a user-perspective point of view when using gamification in informationsystem has been detected. / Denna studie behandlar gamifiering av informationssystem och gamifieringens påverkan på användarna. Gamifiering innebär att ta element ifrån spelvärlden och applicera dem i ett annat sammanhang, här ett informationssystem. Syftet med studien är att identifiera faktorer som ur ett användarperspektiv är viktiga att ta hänsyn till vid gamifiering av informationssystem. För att genomföra denna undersökning har semistrukturerade djupintervjuer genomförts med nio användare av ett gamifierat informationssystem. Resultatet visar att gamifieringen påverkar användarnas engagemang, arbetssituation, prestation samt utveckling. Baserat på resultatet ges förslag på 17 faktorer, som ur ett användarperspektiv är viktiga att ta hänsyn till vid användandet av gamifiering i informationssystem.

L'impact des systèmes de mesure de performance sur l'enseignement supérieur et sur la gestion des carrières des universitaires est vraiment puissant. Cette thèse vise à fournir quelques éléments qui expliquent la transformation du ce secteur et les changements des aspirations des universitaires. Une attention particulière est portée sur les significations de la mesure de la performance au delà des classements et sur la manière selon laquelle les universitaires perçoivent leur environnement actuel. L'analyse du contenu des classements et des systèmes d'accréditation, l'observation des établissements d'enseignement supérieur et des entretiens avec des professeurs, des maîtres de conférences, des PRAG, des vacataires et des doctorants ont permis de constituer une base de données fiable pour la recherche actuelle.L'institutionnalisation des systèmes de mesure de performance joue un rôle important dans la transformation du monde universitaire. La prolifération des classements a privilégié en avant certaines activités exercées par les établissements d'enseignement supérieur, imposant la transformation des pratiques académiques, ainsi que le développement des inégalités d'image entre les différents cheminements des carrières universitaires. La pression normative a incité les institutions à s'aligner sur les exigences internationales, fait qui a conduit à des grandes transformations au niveau individuel, où les membres du corps professoral ont changées leur perception sur la carrière universitaire.Le sujet de cette thèse a émergé en observant les classements internationaux et les systèmes d'accréditation, ainsi que les actions des établissements d'enseignement supérieur et le comportement des universitaires. Mes résultats mettent en lumière la grande importance accordée par la communauté universitaire aux activités de recherche en soulignant quelques conséquences dues à la normalisation des activités académiques. En fait, l'utilisation inadéquate des indicateurs de performance conduit à plusieurs anomalies, comme par exemple l'affaiblissement de la carrière pédagogique. / Performance measurement systems impact the higher education field and influence the career management of academics. This dissertation aims to provide some elements in explaining how the academic world has changed and what academics aspire to do in the future. Particular attention is paid to the meaning of university ranking measurements and to the individual perception of the current academic environment. Content analysis of rankings and accreditation systems, observation of higher education institutions (HEIs) and semi-structured interviews with Tenured Professors, Assistant Professors, Lecturer, and PhD candidates were used as a reliable database for the current research.The institutionalization of performance measurement systems plays an important role in the transformation of the academic field. Used intensively in the marketization of HEIs, they lead to the development of a snowball effect. The proliferation of rankings has pushed forward certain activities performed by HEIs, forcing the transformation of academic practices and the development of image inequalities among different academic career paths. As normative pressure guided institutions to align to international demands, major transformations occurred at the individual level, where faculty members underwent significant change in their understanding of what an academic career meant.The question on how performance measurements impact the academic career management emerged as I observed international rankings and accreditation systems, as well as HEIs actions and academics behavior. My findings corroborate one of the management accounting key concepts, ‘you get what you measure', and bring to light the emphasis placed by the academic community on research activities. This dissertation emphasizes the drawbacks of using such measurements in search for standardization of academic activities. In particular, I highlight that the improper use of the current performance indicators lead to several anomalies, such as the obscuration of the pedagogical career, which has lost its status and is now often regarded as a limited and shameful career choice.

Standard and Poor's began publication of Credit Watch in November of 1981 as an early warning list for firms whose debt is under review for a possible rating change. This dissertation is composed of three essays which address various aspects of Credit Watch and the impact on shareholder wealth. The first essay uses a discriminant analysis model to classify the Credit Watch status of firms which engaged in mergers and acquisitions activity in 1991. The model correctly classifies 69.85% of the in-sample firms and 65.83% of the out of sample firms. The second essay examines whether the stock market reacts more strongly to trigger events which cause Credit Watch placements than to the actual placement. Significantly larger negative abnormal return are found around the trigger event than the placement. No evidence is found for the differential reaction evolving over time. The third essay examines firm specific and economy-wide factors which may be related to the strength of the abnormal stock return around the Credit Watch removal date. The removal return is found to be positively related to the number of trading days a firm remains on Credit Watch, negatively related to the number of updates regarding the firm released by Standard and Poor's while on the list, and positively related to the cumulative abnormal return measured between the placement and removal. This evidence suggests that the number of trading days a firm remains on Credit Watch is a proxy for information leakage to the market. The negative relationship between the removal return and the number of updates implies that the market reacts to a string of negative news of which the removal announcement is the final announcement. Finally, the positive relationship with the cumulative abnormal return between placement and removal suggests that much of the information content of the removal has been impounded into the stock price at the time of the removal.

<p>Inequalities among different power groups are getting obvious in Kiru Valley, Tanzania mainly due to water scarcity. This paper aims to examine, by a case study, the increasing competition over irrigation water among Kiru Valley farmers in relation to socio-economic stratification. It is possible to divide the examined parts of Kiru Valley farmers into three dif-ferent power groups corresponding to their access to irrigation water. First, large-scale sugar cane farmers owned by Tanzanians with Indian origin located on strategic positions near the main rivers. Second, upstream small-scale rice cultivators receiving water from the IFAD (International Found for Agricultural Development) irrigation system and, third, downstream small-scale farmers cultivating rice in the Mapea wetland. To achieve the objectives in this study, Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) techniques have been used and especially wealth rank-ings to measure the socio-economic stratification.</p><p>The wealth rankings demonstrate differences among Kiru Valley farmers. Those farmers connected to the IFAD irrigation system and the large-scale farmers have in higher amount a steady access to irrigation water than farmers cultivating the Mapea wetland. Consequently Mapea farmers are forced to rely on left over water from upstream IFAD farmers and sur-rounding large-scale farmers, leading to unfair distribution patterns and tensions among Kiru Valley farmers.  Finally, it has further been found that access to irrigation water is reflected in household economy. Mapea farmers have less capital goods and households properties com-pared to both IFAD-irrigators and large-scale farmers.</p>

A “Value-Added” definition of school effectiveness calls for the evaluation of schools based on the unique contribution of schools to individual student academic growth. The estimates of value-added school effectiveness are usually used for ranking and classifying schools. The current simulation study examined and compared the validity of school effectiveness estimates in four statistical models for school ranking and classification. The simulation study was conducted under two sample size conditions and the situations typical in school effectiveness research. The Conditional Cross-Classified Model (CCCM) was used to simulate data. The findings indicated that the gain score model adjusting for students’ test scores at the end of kindergarten (i. e., prior entering to an elementary school) (Gain_kindergarten) could validly rank and classify schools. Other models, including the gain score model adjusting for students’ test scores at the end of Grade 4 (i. e., one year before estimating the school effectiveness in Grade 5) (Gain_grade4), the Unconditional Cross-Classified Model (UCCM), and the Layered Mixed Effect Model (LMEM), could not validly rank or classify schools. The failure of the UCCM model in school ranking and classification indicated that ignoring covariates would distort school rankings and classifications if no other analytical remedies were applied. The failure of the LMEM model in school ranking and classification indicated that estimation of correlations among repeated measures could not alleviate the damage caused by the omitted covariates. The failure of the Gain_grade4 model cautioned against adjustment using the test scores of the previous year. The success of the Gain_kindergarten model indicated that under some circumstances, it was possible to achieve valid school rankings and classifications with only two time points of data.

The purpose of this paper is to give a log-linear representation of a generalized Bradley-Terry (BT-) Model for paired comparisons which allows the incorporation of ties, order effects, concomitant variables for the objects and categorical subject specific covariates and interactions between all of them. An advantage of this approach is that standard software for fitting log-linear models, such as GLIM, can be used. The approach is exemplified by analysing data from an experiment concerning the ranking of European universities. (author's abstract) / Series: Forschungsberichte / Institut für Statistik

A “Value-Added” definition of school effectiveness calls for the evaluation of schools based on the unique contribution of schools to individual student academic growth. The estimates of value-added school effectiveness are usually used for ranking and classifying schools. The current simulation study examined and compared the validity of school effectiveness estimates in four statistical models for school ranking and classification. The simulation study was conducted under two sample size conditions and the situations typical in school effectiveness research. The Conditional Cross-Classified Model (CCCM) was used to simulate data. The findings indicated that the gain score model adjusting for students’ test scores at the end of kindergarten (i. e., prior entering to an elementary school) (Gain_kindergarten) could validly rank and classify schools. Other models, including the gain score model adjusting for students’ test scores at the end of Grade 4 (i. e., one year before estimating the school effectiveness in Grade 5) (Gain_grade4), the Unconditional Cross-Classified Model (UCCM), and the Layered Mixed Effect Model (LMEM), could not validly rank or classify schools. The failure of the UCCM model in school ranking and classification indicated that ignoring covariates would distort school rankings and classifications if no other analytical remedies were applied. The failure of the LMEM model in school ranking and classification indicated that estimation of correlations among repeated measures could not alleviate the damage caused by the omitted covariates. The failure of the Gain_grade4 model cautioned against adjustment using the test scores of the previous year. The success of the Gain_kindergarten model indicated that under some circumstances, it was possible to achieve valid school rankings and classifications with only two time points of data.

Submitted by Rodrigo Cunha (professorrodrigocunha@gmail.com) on 2016-03-21T20:06:04Z No. of bitstreams: 1 FGV-EBAPE - Tese de Doutorado em Administração - 2016 - Rodrigo de Magalhães Cunha.pdf: 7917557 bytes, checksum: 583a5ccf4aef3c87c6b36a9e78dd05ac (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by ÁUREA CORRÊA DA FONSECA CORRÊA DA FONSECA (aurea.fonseca@fgv.br) on 2016-03-23T15:45:05Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 FGV-EBAPE - Tese de Doutorado em Administração - 2016 - Rodrigo de Magalhães Cunha.pdf: 7917557 bytes, checksum: 583a5ccf4aef3c87c6b36a9e78dd05ac (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Maria Almeida (maria.socorro@fgv.br) on 2016-03-28T14:09:48Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 FGV-EBAPE - Tese de Doutorado em Administração - 2016 - Rodrigo de Magalhães Cunha.pdf: 7917557 bytes, checksum: 583a5ccf4aef3c87c6b36a9e78dd05ac (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-03-28T14:10:06Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 FGV-EBAPE - Tese de Doutorado em Administração - 2016 - Rodrigo de Magalhães Cunha.pdf: 7917557 bytes, checksum: 583a5ccf4aef3c87c6b36a9e78dd05ac (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-02-23 / Esta tese apresenta algumas abordagens ainda não exploradas na avaliação e construção de rankings, exclusivamente daqueles baseados em indicadores compostos. Para isso, três artigos foram desenvolvidos com o intuito de evoluir com uma literatura genericamente aplicável, ou seja, não restrita a contextos de rankings específicos. No primeiro desses artigos, composto por três estudos, mostrou-se que as informações percebidas pelos usuários através dos rankings nem sempre são fornecidas por eles. No segundo, o qual pode ser entendido como uma extensão do primeiro, propôs-se a criação de uma métrica – intitulada COMP – destinada a mensurar o grau de compatibilidade entre as informações percebidas pelos usuários e aquelas fornecidas pelos rankings. No terceiro artigo, independente dos dois primeiros, explorou-se o potencial da Teoria de Resposta ao Item (TRI) enquanto metodologia para a avaliação e construção de rankings. Para isso, dois estudos, o primeiro deles focado no Failed States Index (FSI) e o segundo no Index of Economic Freedom (IEF) foram desenvolvidos para mostrar as potencialidades da metodologia proposta. / This thesis presents some unexplored approaches in rankings evaluation and building, particularly in those based upon composite indicators. To do so, three papers have been developed with the goal of evolve a generic literature, that is it, not restricted to the specific context of a single ranking. In the first one, composed by three studies, it is shown that the information perceived by users toward rankings are not necessarily provided by the rankings. In the second paper, that could be interpreted as an extension of the first one, a metric – named COMP – has been proposed designed to measure the compatibility level between the information perceived by users with those provided by rankings. The last one, independent of the firsts, has explored the potential of Item Response Theory (IRT) as a methodology to be applied on rankings evaluation and building. To do so, two studies, the first one focused on the Failed States Index (FSI) and the last one on the Index of Economic Freedom (IEF) have been developed to show the potentiality of the proposed methodology.