Good read and within it he states the evidence doesn’t lie that private companies with more female representation at the executive level are more profitable. Being that these are by definition leadership positions and they are succeeding there, it would make sense in the public sector, particularly in government positions, as well IMO.
Good read and within it he states the evidence doesn’t lie that private companies with more female representation at the executive level are more profitable. Being that these are by definition “leadership” positions and they are succeeding there, it would make sense in the public sector as well IMO.
You can’t argue with the evidence 😎
not to mention more employee engagement/happiness.
Good read and within it he states the evidence doesn’t lie that private companies with more female representation at the executive level are more profitable. Being that these are by definition “leadership” positions and they are succeeding there, it would make sense in the public sector as well IMO.
You can’t argue with the evidence 😎
not to mention more employee engagement/happiness.
but hey, who cares about evidence, right?
Well, I have an EVP who is a woman and she is my boss’s, boss’s, boss.
I’ve met her a few times and she has never once asked/said my name or shown any interest in what I do. Just because a woman is a leader doesn’t make her a great leader by default.
But, there are many great executives in our company who are female. It’s important all organizations, including government, have the right balance.
Good read and within it he states the evidence doesn’t lie that private companies with more female representation at the executive level are more profitable. Being that these are by definition “leadership” positions and they are succeeding there, it would make sense in the public sector as well IMO.
You can’t argue with the evidence 😎
not to mention more employee engagement/happiness.
but hey, who cares about evidence, right?
“More female representation” likely means more diverse. More diverse is better. All women? Not as good as more diverse.
Good read and within it he states the evidence doesn’t lie that private companies with more female representation at the executive level are more profitable. Being that these are by definition “leadership” positions and they are succeeding there, it would make sense in the public sector as well IMO.
You can’t argue with the evidence 😎
not to mention more employee engagement/happiness.
but hey, who cares about evidence, right?
“More female representation” likely means more diverse. More diverse is better. All women? Not as good as more diverse.
I’m 100% positive Benioff was talking about more diverse, better representation.
It’s really a good read, highly recommend. Business leaders driving change.
Good read and within it he states the evidence doesn’t lie that private companies with more female representation at the executive level are more profitable. Being that these are by definition “leadership” positions and they are succeeding there, it would make sense in the public sector as well IMO.
You can’t argue with the evidence 😎
not to mention more employee engagement/happiness.
but hey, who cares about evidence, right?
Well, I have an EVP who is a woman and she is my boss’s, boss’s, boss.
I’ve met her a few times and she has never once asked/said my name or shown any interest in what I do. Just because a woman is a leader doesn’t make her a great leader by default.
But, there are many great executives in our company who are female. It’s important all organizations, including government, have the right balance.
majority are better. no one said by default. i actually said the exact opposite in a previous post.
Good read and within it he states the evidence doesn’t lie that private companies with more female representation at the executive level are more profitable. Being that these are by definition “leadership” positions and they are succeeding there, it would make sense in the public sector as well IMO.
You can’t argue with the evidence 😎
not to mention more employee engagement/happiness.
but hey, who cares about evidence, right?
“More female representation” likely means more diverse. More diverse is better. All women? Not as good as more diverse.
again: I am not saying all bosses/leaders should be female. why does it so often have to be all or none around here?
Good read and within it he states the evidence doesn’t lie that private companies with more female representation at the executive level are more profitable. Being that these are by definition “leadership” positions and they are succeeding there, it would make sense in the public sector as well IMO.
You can’t argue with the evidence 😎
not to mention more employee engagement/happiness.
but hey, who cares about evidence, right?
Well, I have an EVP who is a woman and she is my boss’s, boss’s, boss.
I’ve met her a few times and she has never once asked/said my name or shown any interest in what I do. Just because a woman is a leader doesn’t make her a great leader by default.
But, there are many great executives in our company who are female. It’s important all organizations, including government, have the right balance.
majority are better. no one said by default. i actually said the exact opposite in a previous post.
Never said you did. Was making a general reply in the flow of the conversation. Quoted you for context purposes.
Good read and within it he states the evidence doesn’t lie that private companies with more female representation at the executive level are more profitable. Being that these are by definition “leadership” positions and they are succeeding there, it would make sense in the public sector as well IMO.
You can’t argue with the evidence 😎
not to mention more employee engagement/happiness.
but hey, who cares about evidence, right?
“More female representation” likely means more diverse. More diverse is better. All women? Not as good as more diverse.
again: I am not saying all bosses/leaders should be female. why does it so often have to be all or none around here?
"I'm absolutely confident that for two years, if every nation on Earth was run by women, you would see a significant improvement across the board on just about everything ... living standards and outcomes."
Quote from obama on the article being discussed. So I kinda feel like it’s ok to say obamas comment was dumb and here is why. And guess what, it was pandering and dumb.
So if you can significantly improve living standards and outcomes by voting in Carly Fiorina, why did you say you wouldn't?
because I don't agree with absolutes. I agree with the idea in general, but I've been talking about "majority" this entire thread. and his statement is hypothetical.
What evidence is there that having all female leaders leads to a better society?
that’s just dumb. It’s just as dumb as saying the opposite. Basing it off of sex is dumb. I’m kinda surprised you’d argue for no diversity. Are you a diversity denier?
So if you can significantly improve living standards and outcomes by voting in Carly Fiorina, why did you say you wouldn't?
because I don't agree with absolutes. I agree with the idea in general, but I've been talking about "majority" this entire thread. and his statement is hypothetical.
His statement is hypothetical but it's definitely absolute - "every nation on Earth...improvement across the board." Honestly, I kinda think you and Cincy are on the same page, which is why I don't understand why you're giving him a hard time.
The only reason people get behind those studies is because it feels subversive. If you reversed the results, it would feel deeply misogynistic. Pointing to studies to assert objective superiority on a particular trait based on gender or race is the slipperiest of slopes. I would recommend avoiding the temptation of buying in when it produces a result you like.
it doesn't "produce a result I like". I researched it myself before posting it. As I said in the first post, I don't know where Obama came up with his claim. And yes, his claim is absolute, and I don't necessarily agree with that wholeheartedly, as I've stated several times and I hope I don't have to state it again. I'm going by results themselves. And my own personal experience, which I've laid out where I've given examples that are contrary to what obama said.
What evidence is there that having all female leaders leads to a better society?
that’s just dumb. It’s just as dumb as saying the opposite. Basing it off of sex is dumb. I’m kinda surprised you’d argue for no diversity. Are you a diversity denier?
you're ignoring everything i've stated in this thread. i am obviously not anti-diversity. come on. if we can't have a discussion without just unequivocal "it's dumb", then what's the point?
I'm not saying all females are better than all males.
it doesn't "produce a result I like". I researched it myself before posting it. As I said in the first post, I don't know where Obama came up with his claim. And yes, his claim is absolute, and I don't necessarily agree with that wholeheartedly, as I've stated several times and I hope I don't have to state it again. I'm going by results themselves. And my own personal experience, which I've laid out where I've given examples that are contrary to what obama said.
My issue is that this sort of "research" also produces output like The Bell Curve
What evidence is there that having all female leaders leads to a better society?
that’s just dumb. It’s just as dumb as saying the opposite. Basing it off of sex is dumb. I’m kinda surprised you’d argue for no diversity. Are you a diversity denier?
you're ignoring everything i've stated in this thread. i am obviously not anti-diversity. come on. if we can't have a discussion without just unequivocal "it's dumb", then what's the point?
I'm not saying all females are better than all males.
Relax I was just messing with you Re:diversity.
If you don’t agree with Obamas statement (never said you did), why do you have a problem with my opinion of his statement? I’m ignoring what you said cause the whole time I’ve been addressing what Obama said...in the article you posted...which I thought was the point.
And yes it’s a dumb statement by a smart guy cause he was pandering.
Do I think we need more female leaders? Yes. Likely around 50%.
Good read and within it he states the evidence doesn’t lie that private companies with more female representation at the executive level are more profitable. Being that these are by definition “leadership” positions and they are succeeding there, it would make sense in the public sector as well IMO.
You can’t argue with the evidence 😎
not to mention more employee engagement/happiness.
but hey, who cares about evidence, right?
Well, I have an EVP who is a woman and she is my boss’s, boss’s, boss.
I’ve met her a few times and she has never once asked/said my name or shown any interest in what I do. Just because a woman is a leader doesn’t make her a great leader by default.
But, there are many great executives in our company who are female. It’s important all organizations, including government, have the right balance.
From a school leadership perspective (sort of govt), I can say that the female principals I've had were petty, micro-managing control freaks who create one unsuccessful because unrealistic project after the other and can't make a consistent decision to save their lives. The females who are NOT like this never get promoted because they don't backstab and fake their way to the top.
The male principals are easy to read and get along with, and they focus on the right things to ensure the smooth daily operation of the school. I just recently put together a reference list for a new job. The only principals I listed were male because I know I can trust them.
As a female, I really hate saying this, but it's been my truth for a 26 year long career.
Yang's answer to this of course got laughs (pandering again) but it was just stupid as well. Focusing on 1 gender, 1 race, 1 anything like that is just really bizarre to me.
What do you get if you put a group of women in a room and leave them alone to long? Who the fuck cares. How about just get a diversity of thoughts and stop pandering like a bad comedy sit-com with the stupid bumbling dad/husband. It's not really funny.
I have no idea why we have to let the pendulum swing completely to the opposite side on these issues. It's a very valid issue to being up (lack of female leadership) in many instances instance (gov't, business, etc). But let's stop pretending it's so black and white and gender means something is better. Heck do you want the Real Housewives running anything? How about a group of dance moms (this does exist, it's real I know).
And I would think that Obama would be better with his words. But, he's usually so good, everyone is allowed a misstep. But that's what this is.
Yang's answer to this of course got laughs (pandering again) but it was just stupid as well. Focusing on 1 gender, 1 race, 1 anything like that is just really bizarre to me.
What do you get if you put a group of women in a room and leave them alone to long? Who the fuck cares. How about just get a diversity of thoughts and stop pandering like a bad comedy sit-com with the stupid bumbling dad/husband. It's not really funny.
I have no idea why we have to let the pendulum swing completely to the opposite side on these issues. It's a very valid issue to being up (lack of female leadership) in many instances instance (gov't, business, etc). But let's stop pretending it's so black and white and gender means something is better. Heck do you want the Real Housewives running anything? How about a group of dance moms (this does exist, it's real I know).
And I would think that Obama would be better with his words. But, he's usually so good, everyone is allowed a misstep. But that's what this is.
Yang's answer to this of course got laughs (pandering again) but it was just stupid as well. Focusing on 1 gender, 1 race, 1 anything like that is just really bizarre to me.
What do you get if you put a group of women in a room and leave them alone to long? Who the fuck cares. How about just get a diversity of thoughts and stop pandering like a bad comedy sit-com with the stupid bumbling dad/husband. It's not really funny.
I have no idea why we have to let the pendulum swing completely to the opposite side on these issues. It's a very valid issue to being up (lack of female leadership) in many instances instance (gov't, business, etc). But let's stop pretending it's so black and white and gender means something is better. Heck do you want the Real Housewives running anything? How about a group of dance moms (this does exist, it's real I know).
And I would think that Obama would be better with his words. But, he's usually so good, everyone is allowed a misstep. But that's what this is.
stereotypes are not the same as psychology.
you don't like the statistics posted?
Which ones?
All I’ve said is that Obama’s comment was asinine and pandering.
Look, I’m on your side that we need many more women leading companies and countries. I was really hoping for a strong female president to beat trump. I would love for a female president and think it’s last time to elect one. In fact it’s pretty embarrassing that it hasn’t happened yet.
I still think saying anything should be all 1 gender is just sit-com level junk.
Yang's answer to this of course got laughs (pandering again) but it was just stupid as well. Focusing on 1 gender, 1 race, 1 anything like that is just really bizarre to me.
What do you get if you put a group of women in a room and leave them alone to long? Who the fuck cares. How about just get a diversity of thoughts and stop pandering like a bad comedy sit-com with the stupid bumbling dad/husband. It's not really funny.
I have no idea why we have to let the pendulum swing completely to the opposite side on these issues. It's a very valid issue to being up (lack of female leadership) in many instances instance (gov't, business, etc). But let's stop pretending it's so black and white and gender means something is better. Heck do you want the Real Housewives running anything? How about a group of dance moms (this does exist, it's real I know).
And I would think that Obama would be better with his words. But, he's usually so good, everyone is allowed a misstep. But that's what this is.
stereotypes are not the same as psychology.
you don't like the statistics posted?
Which ones?
All I’ve said is that Obama’s comment was asinine and pandering.
Look, I’m on your side that we need many more women leading companies and countries. I was really hoping for a strong female president to beat trump. I would love for a female president and think it’s last time to elect one. In fact it’s pretty embarrassing that it hasn’t happened yet.
I still think saying anything should be all 1 gender is just sit-com level junk.
page 1. two posts in succession.
you don't think there is any truth to one gender being inherently better at certain things than others? men and women differ greatly in how they handle leadership roles, conflict, resolution, etc.
to break down Obama's statement, it was obviously hyperbolic and hypothetical in nature; we all know it could and would never happen. I think he was just stating overall the world would be in a better place. And I agree with that.
on one hand you are saying that "anything all one gender is junk" but then you also state in the same post you would love for a female president. a general statement about one gender. isn't that contradictory, or were you referring to a specific female candidate?
I can find good men and bad men, good women and bad women.
It makes sense to me that given long-standing gender roles in society (at the very least North American society), men would organically develop a hunger with power, and women would organically develop empathy.
When I was starting out my career and did a corporate profiling exercise, my results showed 99th percentile within the engineering discipline for empathy. I was told if I could harness it, it would be my best asset, and if I couldn't, it would be my biggest threat. I'm obviously biased, but I believe that advice is true, and I believe the upside potential of putting empathetic people in positions of power, is enormous.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Comments
but hey, who cares about evidence, right?
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
that’s just dumb. It’s just as dumb as saying the opposite. Basing it off of sex is dumb. I’m kinda surprised you’d argue for no diversity. Are you a diversity denier?
www.headstonesband.com
I'm not saying all females are better than all males.
www.headstonesband.com
If you don’t agree with Obamas statement (never said you did), why do you have a problem with my opinion of his statement? I’m ignoring what you said cause the whole time I’ve been addressing what Obama said...in the article you posted...which I thought was the point.
And yes it’s a dumb statement by a smart guy cause he was pandering.
leaders? Yes. Likely around 50%.
except for tulsi. and that elizabeth holmes from theranos.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
The male principals are easy to read and get along with, and they focus on the right things to ensure the smooth daily operation of the school. I just recently put together a reference list for a new job. The only principals I listed were male because I know I can trust them.
As a female, I really hate saying this, but it's been my truth for a 26 year long career.
What do you get if you put a group of women in a room and leave them alone to long? Who the fuck cares. How about just get a diversity of thoughts and stop pandering like a bad comedy sit-com with the stupid bumbling dad/husband. It's not really funny.
I have no idea why we have to let the pendulum swing completely to the opposite side on these issues. It's a very valid issue to being up (lack of female leadership) in many instances instance (gov't, business, etc). But let's stop pretending it's so black and white and gender means something is better. Heck do you want the Real Housewives running anything? How about a group of dance moms (this does exist, it's real I know).
And I would think that Obama would be better with his words. But, he's usually so good, everyone is allowed a misstep. But that's what this is.
you don't like the statistics posted?
www.headstonesband.com
I still think saying anything should be all 1 gender is just sit-com level junk.
you don't think there is any truth to one gender being inherently better at certain things than others? men and women differ greatly in how they handle leadership roles, conflict, resolution, etc.
to break down Obama's statement, it was obviously hyperbolic and hypothetical in nature; we all know it could and would never happen. I think he was just stating overall the world would be in a better place. And I agree with that.
on one hand you are saying that "anything all one gender is junk" but then you also state in the same post you would love for a female president. a general statement about one gender. isn't that contradictory, or were you referring to a specific female candidate?
www.headstonesband.com
It makes sense to me that given long-standing gender roles in society (at the very least North American society), men would organically develop a hunger with power, and women would organically develop empathy.
When I was starting out my career and did a corporate profiling exercise, my results showed 99th percentile within the engineering discipline for empathy. I was told if I could harness it, it would be my best asset, and if I couldn't, it would be my biggest threat. I'm obviously biased, but I believe that advice is true, and I believe the upside potential of putting empathetic people in positions of power, is enormous.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1