在另一个图表中，1 + 2强度与女性董事的比例相比较。计算一个全面的图表范围1 + 2强度的百分比计算，因为它们的价值远高于船上的妇女的百分比。从图表中可以看出，这个图表没有提供太多的重要数据，即使在取得百分比后，范围1 + 2强度的一些值在变量内显示出巨大的偏差，而在船上的女性百分比仍然在一个有限的范围内。这里相关系数R平方值也表明两个被考虑的变量之间有很多相似之处。
In the first chart of comparison of Cranfield and EIO rankings, however, the companies do not achieve similar rank in both the rankings, but their trend can be observed to complement each other. The companies which achieve Cranfield ranking higher than other its EIO ranking is also higher. If we place the ranking in two groups, higher and lower, 52% companies seem to lie in the same group, i.e. either higher or lower, while others lie in different groups with minor difference. The R squared value of trend line appears to be 0.9 that is near to 1, which means the correlation is much higher. There is also a major difference in few of the companies’ rankings. This may be due to the fact that the data of ghg emissions provided by several companies is not up to the mark in concern of transparency.
In the other chart scope 1+2 intensities are compared with percentage of women directors on board. To plot a comprehensive chart scope 1+2 intensities’ percentages were calculated, because their values were much higher to be compared with the percentages of women on board. This chart does not provide much significant data as it can be observed from the chart that even after taking the percentages, some values of scope 1+2 intensities show huge deviations within the variable, while percentages of women on board remains in a well bounded range. Here also the correlation coefficient, R squared value, shows that there is much similarity between the two considered variables.
The data presented in both the reports is utilized in study of this report. It is found that there is a need of more implication of transparency in their records. Be it more precise and transparent, stronger relationship can attained between the two concerned variables, that are, gender equality and performance related to climatic matters of a company