Slashdot Mirror
Female-Run Companies Often do Better Than Male-Run Ones (Video)
Today's interviewee, Viktoria Tsukanov, is one of the executives at predictive marketing company Mintigo who did a study in January, 2015 that seemed to show that large companies with female CEOs "achieve up to 18% higher revenue per employee than male CEOs." The study, titled "She’s the CEO and She’s Sensational," used financial data Mintigo collected on 20 million companies, and determined CEOs' genders by analyzing first names, so it was not subject to survey vagaries but was a straight data analysis job. Could this be a case of correlation and causation being unrelated? It's possible. It's also possible that the revenue per employee figures are affected by the fact that female CEOs are more common in healthcare and non-profit organizations, while men dominate manufacturing and construction -- and, as Viktoria pointed out in a blog post headlined "Women Just Raised the Bar. Big Time." there may be other factors at work as well.
The "18% higher revenue" figure specifically applies to companies with more than 1000 workers, while companies with fewer workers may average more revenue per employee if they have male CEOs. Besides discussing the study itself, in our interview Viktoria talks about how male employees might want to alter (or not alter) their behavior if they find themselves working for a female boss for the first time. She also discusses challenges a woman might face if she is suddenly put in charge of a heavily male IT or programming staff. Other thoughts she shares have to do with finding mentors and dealing with negative people, both of which apply to people of all genders. Interesting food for thought all around.
The "18% higher revenue" figure specifically applies to companies with more than 1000 workers, while companies with fewer workers may average more revenue per employee if they have male CEOs. Besides discussing the study itself, in our interview Viktoria talks about how male employees might want to alter (or not alter) their behavior if they find themselves working for a female boss for the first time. She also discusses challenges a woman might face if she is suddenly put in charge of a heavily male IT or programming staff. Other thoughts she shares have to do with finding mentors and dealing with negative people, both of which apply to people of all genders. Interesting food for thought all around.
They later went bankrupt. OFC it's Dailyfail, so take it with a grain of salt.
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
Same here. I felt like I was watching Youtube or a "Vine".
Amateur grade video warning signs:
1. Shakicam
2. Audio was taken with the video camera in a noisy environment instead of a dedicated lapel mic in a closed studio. AMPLIFY THERMAL NOISE!
3. Video resolution was crap.
4. The guy asking the questions sounded like he was on the "2nd hour" of his diet and was considering dipping his "victim" in ranch dressing. Backroom Casting Couch conducts better interviews than this guy!
Bet money she used Excel's "CORREL" function to crunch the data instead of a big girl tool like R.
Great example of statistics fail:
Per the "data scientist," let's assume that fumbles per play follows a normal distribution. This, in fact, does seem like a reasonable assumption based on the following Q-Q plot (the points should all fall near the line if the data is normal). ... ...
Given that the normality assumption is valid, we can calculate the Z-score for fumbles per play for the Patriots.
The problem is that this calculation also relies on the assumption of normality, which holds for fumbles per play, but NOT for plays per fumble (see the Q-Q plot)!
http://regressing.deadspin.com/why-those-statistics-about-the-patriots-fumbles-are-mos-1681805710
I just re-watched the intro video. Half the responsibility falls on "Slashdot TV" who is the primary bad agent responsible for bad production values. The audio levels of that hangover torture intro effect are WAY out of balance with the mic/voice audio. Did someone use Windows Movie Maker that couldn't figure out the audio tools?
So SlashdotTV screwed up, but what about the interviewee?
Here's where Miss.(I presume) Viktoria Tsukanov loses points:
-Just because you're wearing pearl earrings does not make you classy. You don't get free points because you remembered one tip from "ISBN-10: 1401600646".
IE. Sit still, stop smiling like you just got away with an April fools joke, and answer a question directly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decorum -read it
-I think this point bears repeating: if 10,000 people spend their morning watching this bush league video, and you can restrain yourself from saying "umm" try to appear less smug if the moron interviewing you asks a dumb question and you figure out how to evade it. You may think the question is unprofessional, but if I have to sit through this crap(I lasted 27 seconds) then your inability to keep a straight face while wasting everyone's time has a cost of 75 man hours. At $30/hr you just cost the planet $2,250 so you could fantasize about running a company some day.
If you don't get your shit together you're not going to be a successful CEO no matter how few employees you have and you'll be lucky to get hired as an administrative assistant if you behave like that during a job interview.
Grow up child. You've wasted too many tax dollars on your education to become another Barista with a liberal arts degree.
Ironic :) The finding is interesting though. I'm not sure why so many here are threatened by it.