· The results also showed a significant negative

 

·        
The results also showed a
significant negative effect for the Business Continuity Plan Testing, Auditing,
and Maintenance (? = -0.14, N.S), (proving error 3/6).

·        
The data in the table also show a
negative effect – not significant – for the Business Continuity Plan
Development (name) (? = -0.08, N.S) and thus (prove error of (hypothesis 3/5).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

·        
The results did not show the effect
of the Business Impact Analysis on the efficiency of the performance of the
Faculty (? = -0.1, N.S), and thus (prove error 3/3 hypothesis).

·        
The Project Initiation had a very
weak effect, but the effect was not significant (? = 0.1, N.S), thus proving
the error of (hypothesis 3/1).

On the other side

·        
The results also showed a
significant effect on the efficiency of the performance of the second stage.
However, this effect was negative (? = -0.33, p <0.01), which may indicate error or failure in the application of the second stage in the Faculty. However, prove hypothesis 3/2), ·         The phases of the business continuity plan affect 56% of the efficiency of the business continuity plan implementation. The data in the table that the efficiency of the performance of the Faculty was more affected by stage VII (stage name) (? = 0.79, p <0.01) and thus (prove hypothesis 3/7). The performance efficiency of the Faculty was also affected by the fourth stage (? = 0.23, p <0.01) and thus (hypothesis 3/4). ·         The table (5-20) shows the phases of the business continuity plan affect 56% of the efficiency of the business continuity plan implementation. The data in the table that the efficiency of the performance of the Faculty was more affected by stage VII (stage name) (? = 0.79, p <0.01) and thus (prove hypothesis 3/7). The performance efficiency of the Faculty was also affected by the fourth stage (? = 0.23, p <0.01) and thus (hypothesis 3/4)