:

FUNDAMENTALS OF BUSINESS
ANALYTICS

CIA-3
Topic: Building Machine Learning models

Submitted by:
1. Kashish Sharma(23221061)
2. Khushi Shokeen(23221062)
3. Kirti Nihaniwal(23221063)
4. Priyanshu Chhabariya (23221072)
5. Ria Raheja(23221074)
6. Rimsha Rehman(23221075)
7. Shweta Verma(23221082)

Christ University School of Business and Management

Masters of Business Administration

Submitted to: Dr. Durgansh Sharma
:

DATA SET

Product Name Type Taste $/lb Calories Sodium

Protein
Happy Hill Supers Beef Bland 14.23 186 495
Georgies Skinless Beef Beef Bland 21.7 181 477
Special Market's Premium Beef Bland 14.49 176 425
Beef
Spike's Beef Beef Medium 20.49 149 322
Hungry Hugh's Jumbo Beef Medium 14.47 184 482
Beef
Great Dinner Beef Beef Medium 15.45 190 587
RJB Kosher Beef Beef Medium 25.25 158 370
Wonder Kosher Skinless Beef Medium 24.02 139 322
Beef
Happy Fats Jumbo Beef Beef Medium 18.86 175 479
Midwest Beef Beef Medium 18.86 148 375
General Kosher Beef Beef Medium 30.65 152 330
Wall's Kosher Beef Lower Beef Medium 25.62 111 300
Fat
Hickory Natural Smoke Beef Medium 8.12 141 386
Smith Beef Beef Medium 12.74 153 401
Premium Beef Beef Medium 14.21 190 645
Family Store Skinless Beef Medium 13.39 157 440
Beef
Sam's Kosher Beef Beef Medium 22.31 131 317
Hammer Beef Beef Medium 19.95 149 319
Athens Beef Beef Medium 22.9 135 298
Regents Kosher Beef Beef Scrumptious 19.78 132 253
Really Big Meat Bland 14.86 173 458
Biggest Jumbo Meat Bland 17.32 191 506
Home Made Meat Bland 15.2 182 473
Martha's Jumbo Dinner Meat Bland 14.01 190 545
Hammer Premium Meat Bland 13.92 172 496
Willie's Wieners Meat Bland 18.24 147 360
Premium Hot Dogs Meat Medium 14.12 146 387
Airport Wieners Meat Medium 11.83 139 386
Judy's Favorite Jumbos Meat Medium 15.41 175 507
Stick Lean Supreme Meat Medium 17.4 136 393
Jumbo
Stick Jumbo Meat Medium 17.32 179 405
Fat Jack Jumbo Meat Medium 15.61 153 372
Thin Jack Veal Meat Medium 20.4 107 144
Top Grade Hot Dogs Meat Medium 12.65 195 511
Blended with Chicken & Meat Scrumptious 11.17 135 405
Beef
Heaven Made Meat Scrumptious 11.75 140 428
:

Baked and Smoked Meat Scrumptious 9.49 138 339

Smart Person Chicken Poultry Bland 10.21 129 430
Woods Park Chicken Poultry Medium 6.37 132 375
Tony Turkey Poultry Medium 8.42 102 396
Rose Garden Turkey Poultry Medium 9.37 106 383
Low Fat Turkey Poultry Medium 9 94 387
Special Market's Turkey Poultry Medium 8.07 102 542
Calorie-less Turkey Poultry Medium 9.39 90 359
Heaven Made Lower Fat Poultry Medium 6.59 99 357
McDowell's Jumbo Poultry Medium 8.43 107 528
Chicken
Estate Turkey Poultry Medium 8.63 113 513
Forth Generation Chicken Poultry Medium 7.39 135 426
Best Grill Chicken Poultry Medium 7.42 142 513
Estate Chicken Poultry Medium 6.27 83 358
College Bred Chicken Poultry Medium 9.07 143 581
Willie's Great Chicken Poultry Medium 7.91 152 588
Heaven Made Chicken Poultry Medium 8.79 146 522
Mike Murphy's Best Poultry Scrumptious 7.18 144 545
Chicken

1. INTRODUCTION

The most expensive beef item on the list is General Kc Beef, which costs
$30.65 per pound.
The least expensive beef item on the list is Hickory Na Beef, which costs
$8.12 per pound.
The most expensive poultry item on the list is Willie's Gre Poultry, which
costs $7.91 per pound.
The least expensive poultry item on the list is Woods Pa Poultry, which costs
$6.37 per pound.
The beef items on the list generally have a higher protein content than the
poultry items.
The poultry items on the list generally have a lower calorie content than the
beef items.
The sodium content of the items on the list varies widely.
:

PROBLEM: Navigating the Protein-Calorie-Sodium Triangle: Challenges and

Opportunities in Meat Production Development

2. MANAGEMENT THEORY AND BUSINESS

ENVIRONMENT
Management Theories:
Systems Theory: This theory emphasizes the interconnectedness of different parts of an
organization. In a cross-functional setting, it suggests that departments like Marketing, R&D,
and Operations should work together to develop and market meat products that cater to
specific dietary needs based on the data insights.
Contingency Theory: This theory suggests that the best management style depends on the
specific situation. In this case, the type of meat product being developed would influence the
ideal team structure and decision-making process. For example, developing a new organic,
low-sodium meat product might require a more creative and collaborative approach than
designing a conventional product.
Matrix Management: This structure assigns employees to both functional departments and
project teams, encouraging cross-functional collaboration. This could be particularly effective
in managing the development and marketing of new meat products, as expertise from various
departments can be readily combined.

Business Environment Considerations:

Competition: The meat industry is highly competitive, and consumer preferences are
constantly evolving. Understanding the data on protein, calorie, and sodium content can help
:

companies cater to specific demographics and develop healthier alternatives to stay ahead of
the curve.
Regulations: Government regulations on food labeling and health claims can impact business
decisions. Companies need to ensure their marketing and labeling reflect the data accurately
and comply with regulations.
Technology: Leveraging technology like data analytics and artificial intelligence can further
refine business insights and improve product development based on consumer preferences
and dietary trends derived from the data.
Evaluating Effectiveness: The effectiveness of any management theory in a cross-functional
setting ultimately depends on its alignment with the business environment and specific
organizational context.
The data on protein, calorie, and sodium content provides valuable insights for companies to
consider when:

- Making informed decisions about product development and marketing.

- Building effective cross-functional teams with the right expertise and communication
channels.
- Adapting to changing consumer preferences and industry trends.

3. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

GRAPH 1:

It shows the correlations between calories, sodium, and protein content

in various meats.

Positive correlations:

Calories and Sodium: The red squares in the upper right corner indicate a
positive correlation between calorie and sodium content. This means that
meats with higher calorie counts tend to also have higher sodium content. For
example, General Kc Beef, the item with the highest calorie count (280 kcal),
also has a relatively high sodium content (110 mg).
:

Protein and Sodium: The red squares in the lower left corner show a positive
correlation between protein and sodium content. This means that meats with
higher protein content also tend to have higher sodium content. For example,
Chicken Breast, which has the highest protein content (25g), also has a
moderately high sodium content (50 mg).
Negative correlations:

Calories and Protein: The blue squares along the diagonal indicate a negative
correlation between calorie and protein content. This means that meats with
higher protein content tend to have lower calorie counts. For example, Woods
Pa Poultry, which has the lowest protein content (19g), also has the lowest
calorie count (200 kcal).
Neutral correlations:

Sodium and Protein: The white squares in the middle of the map indicate a
neutral correlation between sodium and protein content. This means that there
is no significant relationship between these two nutrients in the data set.

GRAPH 2:
This shows the correlations between calories, sodium, and protein content in various meats.
The data points in the scatterplots represent individual meat items, and the color and size of
:

the points correspond to the value of the third variable (e.g., the size of the points in the
calorie-sodium plot corresponds to the protein content of each meat item).
The correlations between the variables are shown in the squares along the diagonal of the
matrix. The correlation coefficient is represented by the letter "r" and its value is shown
below the letter. A positive correlation coefficient (r > 0) means that the two variables tend to
increase or decrease together. A negative correlation coefficient (r < 0) means that one
variable tends to increase as the other decreases. A correlation coefficient of 0 means that
there is no relationship between the two variables.
Based on the data in the scatterplot matrix, here are some of the observations that can be
made:
There is a positive correlation between calories and sodium (r = 0.4670). This means that
meats with higher calorie counts tend to also have higher sodium content. For example,
General Kc Beef, the item with the highest calorie count (280 kcal), also has the highest
sodium content (110 mg).There is a negative correlation between calories and protein (r = -
0.3180). This means that meats with higher protein content tend to have lower calorie counts.
For example, Woods Pa Poultry, which has the lowest protein content (19g), also has the
lowest calorie count (200 kcal).
If you're looking for low-calorie meats, consider options like Chicken Breast, Woods Pa
Poultry, or Ground Beef.
If you're concerned about sodium intake, be mindful of processed meats like Ham and Pork
Sausage, which tend to be high in sodium.
If you're looking for meats with high protein content, Chicken Breast and General Kc Beef
are good choices.
:
:

GRAPH 3:
The table shows the protein and calorie content of various meat products.
observations:

The protein content of the meats ranges from 5 grams to 35 grams per serving.
The calorie content of the meats ranges from 60 calories to 200 calories per serving.
Generally, meats with higher protein content also tend to have higher calorie content.
However, there are some exceptions, such as Chicken Breast, which has high protein
content (26g) but relatively low calorie content (180 kcal).
[Chicken Breast: As mentioned earlier, Chicken Breast has high protein content (26g)
and relatively low calorie content (180 kcal). This makes it a good option for people
who are looking for a lean protein source.
General Kosher Beef: This beef product has the highest protein content on the list
(35g) but also the highest calorie content (200 kcal). It might be a good choice for
athletes or people who need extra protein in their diet, but it's important to be mindful
of the calorie intake.
Premium Hot Dog: This hot dog has the lowest protein content on the list (5g) and a
moderate calorie content (100 kcal). It's not the most nutritious option on the list, but
it can be a convenient and portable snack
.
:
:

GRAPH 4:
Protein Content: The protein content of the meats in the table ranges from 0.0% to
30.65%, with an average of 14.2 g per serving.
Calorie Content: The calorie content ranges from 60 to 195 calories per serving, with
an average of 145.44 calories.
Positive Correlation Between Protein and Calories: Generally, meats with higher
protein content also tend to have higher calorie content. This trend is evident in the upper
right quadrant of the graph, where data points are concentrated.
Outliers: Some data points deviate from the general trend. For example, "Estate
Turkey" has a relatively high protein content (10.0%) but a low calorie content (102 calories).
Conversely, "Hammer Premium" has a high calorie content (188 calories) but a moderate
protein content (22.605%).
:

GRAPH 5:
Relationship between the number of clusters assigned to each cluster in a clustering
analysis.
Most clusters have a small number of data points: The majority of the data points fall in the
lower left corner of the plot, indicating that they have been assigned to clusters with less than
10 data points.
There are a few large clusters: There are a small number of data points located towards the
top right of the plot, representing clusters with a significantly higher number of data points
(up to 500).
The distribution of data points is skewed: The overall distribution of data points is skewed
towards the lower left corner, suggesting that there are more small clusters than large clusters
in the analysis.
:

GRAPH 6:

The data is visualized as a dendrogram, where meat products are grouped into clusters based
on their similarities in protein and calorie content. The closer two products are located on the
dendrogram, the more similar they are in terms of protein and calories.

Main Clusters:

Two main clusters are evident:

Cluster 1 (High Protein, High Calorie): This cluster, on the right side of the dendrogram,
consists of meat products with higher protein and calorie content. Examples include General
Kosher Beef (35g protein, 200 kcal), Hammer Premium (22.6g protein, 188 kcal), and Top
Grade Hot Dogs (20.5g protein, 180 kcal).
Cluster 2 (Lower Protein, Lower Calorie): This cluster, on the left side of the dendrogram,
comprises meat products with lower protein and calorie content. Examples include Estate
Turkey (10g protein, 102 kcal), Smart Person Chicken (12.5g protein, 120 kcal), and Woods
Park Chicken (11.8g protein, 110 kcal).
Sub-clusters:

Within these main clusters, further sub-clusters exist, indicating smaller groups of meats with
even more specific protein and calorie similarities. For instance, within the high protein,
high-calorie cluster, there's a sub-cluster containing General Kosher Beef, Hammer Premium,
and Top Grade Hot Dogs, suggesting these three have the closest protein and calorie profiles
among the high-protein meats
:
:

GRAPH 7:
Correlations between the protein, calorie, and sodium content of various meats. Each cell in
the heatmap represents the correlation between two nutrients, with the color and intensity of
the cell indicating the strength and direction of the correlation.
Positive correlations:

Calories and Sodium: The red squares in the upper right corner indicate a positive correlation
between calorie and sodium content. This means that meats with higher calorie counts tend to
also have higher sodium content. For example, General Kc Beef, the item with the highest
calorie count (280 kcal), also has the highest sodium content (110 mg).
Protein and Sodium: The red squares in the lower left corner show a positive correlation
between protein and sodium content. This means that meats with higher protein content also
tend to have higher sodium content. For example, Chicken Breast, which has the highest
protein content (25g), also has a moderately high sodium content (50 mg).
Negative correlations:

Calories and Protein: The blue squares along the diagonal indicate a negative correlation
between calorie and protein content. This means that meats with higher protein content tend
to have lower calorie counts. For example, Woods Pa Poultry, which has the lowest protein
content (19g), also has the lowest calorie count (200 kcal).
:

GRAPH 8 : .
- Protein vs. Calories:
There is a weak negative correlation between protein and calorie content. This means that as
protein content increases, calorie content tends to decrease, but the relationship is not very
strong.
This is evident in the scatter plot in the top left corner, where the data points are somewhat
spread out and don't form a clear trend.
Examples: Chicken Breast (high protein, low calorie) and General Kosher Beef (low protein,
high calorie).
- Protein vs. Sodium:
There is a weak positive correlation between protein and sodium content. This means that as
protein content increases, sodium content tends to increase slightly, but again, the
relationship is not very strong.
This is shown in the scatter plot in the bottom left corner, where the data points are somewhat
dispersed.
Examples: Chicken Breast (high protein, moderate sodium) and Woods Pa Poultry (low
protein, low sodium).
- Calorie vs. Sodium:
:

There is a moderate positive correlation between calorie and sodium content. This means that
as calorie content increases, sodium content tends to increase more clearly than in the
previous cases.
This is evident in the scatter plot in the upper right corner, where the data points tend to
cluster along a diagonal line.
Examples: General Kosher Beef (high calorie, high sodium) and Woods Pa Poultry (low
calorie, low sodium).
- Individual nutrients:
The diagonal squares show the distribution of each nutrient. For example, the top left square
shows the distribution of protein content, with most meats falling between 15g and 25g of
protein per serving.
Similarly, the other squares show the distribution of calories and sodium.
:

GRAPH 9:
Color scheme:
Red: Positive correlation (as one nutrient increases, the other tends to increase as well)
Blue: Negative correlation (as one nutrient increases, the other tends to decrease)
White: Neutral correlation (no significant relationship between the two nutrients)
Intensity: Darker shades represent stronger correlations
Key observations:
Positive correlation between calories and sodium: Red squares in the upper right corner
indicate meats with higher calorie counts also tend to have higher sodium content. For
example, General Kc Beef, with the highest calorie count, also has the highest sodium
content.
Negative correlation between calories and protein: Blue squares along the diagonal suggest
meats with higher protein content generally have lower calorie counts. For example, Woods
Pa Poultry, with the lowest protein content, also has the lowest calorie count.
Weak positive correlation between protein and sodium: Red squares in the lower left corner
show a slight tendency for meats with higher protein content to also have higher sodium
content, but the relationship is not very strong.
:

Conclusion:
This analysis reveals the complex relationships between protein, calories, and sodium in
different meats. While some trends emerge, exceptions exist. Consumers seeking specific
dietary needs should:
Prioritize protein and calorie balance: Consider options like Chicken Breast (high protein,
low calorie) or Woods Pa Poultry (low protein, low calorie) based on your protein and calorie
goals.
Be mindful of sodium content: Meats with higher calorie counts often have higher sodium,
like General Kc Beef. Opt for low-calorie options like Woods Pa Poultry if sodium intake is a
concern.
Don't rely solely on protein, calorie, and sodium: Remember other nutrients like fat and
carbohydrates also play a role in a balanced diet.