660 J. A Roquebert, R. L. Phillips and P. A. Westfall Table 3. VARCOMP results for each sample ndustry Error Total Industry Corporation Variance component estimate 2.510.392 n= 1752 Percent of total Estimate variance (diagonal 94045 Significance level 3.34 0072107 omponent estmate 100.34 92.121552008520.55116.76485.81 n=1773 42%240%100.0% riance(diagonal) 92860 7095600.350.84373150.75 5860933,3616.39 Sample 3 Variance 468,11 (diagonal) 39260 嚣盤醫 7399281990.8800020197573.05 n=1457 129%49,2%0.2%0.0%35.2%100.0% ariance(diagonal) 876.132096.78 0.00 Sample 5 Varance onent estmate 125.701.5617.851984760898 449.24 286739123.80 mple 6 Variance onent estimate 10560 145.9 13 488.11 =1512 Percent of tot stimate variance(diagonal 431.20 920.705577808510243 ample 7 Variance 173.9 173.00 2003162805 ce(diagonal 65284 232 317255.5244.788213544.77 Estimate variance(diagonal) 380.20 263,3 15859613.51 n=1721 Percent of tot 嚣嚣 354%100.0% 7.12657.22 Percent of tot 42.0% 36.1%100.0% Estimate variance(diagonal) 1496.55 507.75 1.70 Significance level 7.110.83 23.50 ercent of total 10.1% 179%371%04%2.3%32.2%100.0% average perce 10.2% 179%37.1%0.5%2.3%32.0%1000% in the rOAs of sBUs was in his analysis unre- Also, it is interesting to note that rumelt con- lated to industry, share, or corporate (firm) cluded his section on corporate effects with the effects. Thus, it should come as no surprise that observation that it was surprising to find only a include an vanishingly small additional term in the equation (SBU effects ), suggested that both his result and that of Schma some of the previously unexplained 80 percent lensee remains a puzzle and deserves further would be accounted for investigation'(1991: 182)