An Enhanced Data-Analyses Method for the Graphical …
573
Table 3 Level of priority by value of P
Value of P
Level of priority
P > 80
Strategic
80 ≥ P > 60
High
60 ≥ P > 40
Moderate
40 ≥ P > 20
Low
20 ≥ P > 0
Lowest
0 ≥ P
Non-priority
Source Nicolino (2016), p. 92
Table 4 GAUSI prioritization criterium applied to the case study results
No.
Category
LAp1
LAp2
LAp3
SAt
UnI
P
Level of priority
13
COp
98.48
97.71
23.46
98.10
23.46
74.64
High
1
A&R
96.18
92.25
21.15
94.22
21.15
73.06
High
11
COp
96.95
96.56
24.81
96.76
24.81
71.95
High
14
COp
94.27
95.38
23.85
94.83
23.85
70.98
High
16
COp
98.47
98.09
27.91
98.28
27.91
70.38
High
2
A&R
87.31
87.50
17.31
87.40
17.31
70.10
High
15
COp
95.83
96.18
28.08
96.01
28.08
67.93
High
17
COp
91.92
92.69
25.78
92.31
25.78
66.53
High
22
COr
91.09
93.85
27.31
92.47
27.31
65.16
High
18
COp
96.15
96.15
31.40
96.15
31.40
64.76
High
3
A&R
90.77
91.86
31.30
91.31
31.30
60.02
High
4
A&R
83.08
86.05
25.38
84.56
25.38
59.18
Moderate
20
COr
93.89
96.18
36.82
95.04
36.82
58.22
Moderate
8
E&R
87.79
90.00
34.11
88.89
34.11
54.78
Moderate
21
COr
95.77
93.89
42.75
94.83
42.75
52.08
Moderate
23
COr
87.40
88.85
36.92
88.13
36.92
51.20
Moderate
9
E&R
98.85
97.33
46.90
98.09
46.90
51.19
Moderate
7
E&R
90.08
93.85
41.09
91.96
41.09
50.88
Moderate
12
COp
78.24
82.69
29.77
80.47
29.77
50.70
Moderate
6
E&R
73.46
81.15
29.07
77.31
29.07
48.24
Moderate
10
E&R
95.83
95.04
53.10
95.44
53.10
42.33
Moderate
19
COr
96.51
97.69
55.04
97.10
55.04
42.06
Moderate
5
E&R
95.42
96.54
64.89
95.98
64.89
31.09
Low