3 ms·

Young startup companies survive longer if they have a high proportion of women”

personjerry 4y ago
Why is "survive longer" the metric rather than "successful exit"? By default I would not equate "survive longer" with "success" because in my experience those are the startups that aren't "failing fast"!
potatototoo99 4y ago
The key term missing from this click bait title is "... in the workforce", specifically "in the respective industry".
bobbiechen 4y ago
A disappointing lack of detail in the article, and neither the interviewer nor the author address that hiring is a two-way street. Perhaps women who join startups are better at identifying those that will fail early, and choose not to join.
adolph 4y ago
The author's conclusion is not "high proportion" compared to overall employee count (i.e. >50%) but a proportion that is not "below average compared to the average in the respective industry." One outcome detailed in your book is that young start-up companies survive longer if the proportion of women in the workforce is higher. Women on the board and as CEOs also have an influence on salary distribution and productivity in companies. This all sounds very “politically correct”. But what are the facts behind this? I hadn't thought of it in that way, but yes, it can be interpreted like that, although it is not about that. If start-ups have a significantly below-average proportion of women in their workforce – below average compared to the average in the respective industry – then this suggests a distortion in the recruitment process. This means that well-qualified women are consciously or unconsciously disadvantaged compared to men. Such distortions are a clear indication that companies do not have an optimal personnel policy. If more women sit on the board, the pay gap between men and women will narrow, especially at levels below the boardroom.
yamtaddle 4y ago
Headline reads like it's a link to a study on the topic, but this is an interview promoting a book that's about a bunch of stuff, and barely mentions the thing from the headline. If you're looking for more details or further explanation on the effect mentioned in the headline, there's not much here.
PuppyTailWags 4y ago
This is an interview that seems to be promoting the author's new book, "Behavioral Economics for Leaders: Research-based insights on the weird, irrational, and wonderful ways humans navigate the workplace".
- adolph 4y ago
  It sounds like an interesting title: The author explains how to become a better leader by interpreting and understanding the actions of your team members, as well as how to identify hidden biases in yourself and others so you can combat inequalities and inefficiencies. He offers a view of what makes people tick at work, allowing leaders to understand and, in some cases, predict the actions and reactions of their team members. Bookstore link so it will appear in HN Books: https://www.amazon.com/Behavioral-Economics-Leaders-Research-Based-Irrational/dp/1119982979 https://www.amazon.com/Behavioral-Economics-Leaders-Research... https://hackernewsbooks.com/ https://hackernewsbooks.com/
jollofricepeas 4y ago
This might be survivor bias. But of the two successful startups I’ve been a part of both were started by guys but the early management and operations staff were female and outnumbered the men. Both companies first hires were women as well. A couple of takeaways: - All of the companies had experienced leaders (it wasn’t their first show) - All of the companies were conservative financially; none of the usual over the top startup perks - None of them were into micro management. Staff had a great deal of freedom over their day and to decide how to accomplish their tasks which was great for moms and dads. - Some departments were majority female or all female including (sales) account management, marketing, finance, customer service, procurement. - Software engineering, sales, analytics and legal were predominately male. - Both companies overall had more women than men. In some cases, women outnumbered men 2:1, 3:1 depending on the department.
orwin 4y ago
In my short career, I'd say it's that young startups (or teams) with a higher than average number of females WHO STAY THERE (ie low female co-workers turnover) that really survive the longest. If female devs/marketing/HR/management escape fast from the company, its a red flag to me.

Why is "survive longer" the metric rather than "successful exit"? By default I would not equate "survive longer" with "success" because in my experience those are the startups that aren't "failing fast"!

potatototoo99 4y ago

The key term missing from this click bait title is "... in the workforce", specifically "in the respective industry".

bobbiechen 4y ago

A disappointing lack of detail in the article, and neither the interviewer nor the author address that hiring is a two-way street. Perhaps women who join startups are better at identifying those that will fail early, and choose not to join.

adolph 4y ago

The author's conclusion is not "high proportion" compared to overall employee count (i.e. >50%) but a proportion that is not "below average compared to the average in the respective industry." One outcome detailed in your book is that young start-up companies survive longer if the proportion of women in the workforce is higher. Women on the board and as CEOs also have an influence on salary distribution and productivity in companies. This all sounds very “politically correct”. But what are the facts behind this? I hadn't thought of it in that way, but yes, it can be interpreted like that, although it is not about that. If start-ups have a significantly below-average proportion of women in their workforce – below average compared to the average in the respective industry – then this suggests a distortion in the recruitment process. This means that well-qualified women are consciously or unconsciously disadvantaged compared to men. Such distortions are a clear indication that companies do not have an optimal personnel policy. If more women sit on the board, the pay gap between men and women will narrow, especially at levels below the boardroom.

yamtaddle 4y ago

Headline reads like it's a link to a study on the topic, but this is an interview promoting a book that's about a bunch of stuff, and barely mentions the thing from the headline. If you're looking for more details or further explanation on the effect mentioned in the headline, there's not much here.

PuppyTailWags 4y ago

This is an interview that seems to be promoting the author's new book, "Behavioral Economics for Leaders: Research-based insights on the weird, irrational, and wonderful ways humans navigate the workplace".

adolph 4y ago
It sounds like an interesting title: The author explains how to become a better leader by interpreting and understanding the actions of your team members, as well as how to identify hidden biases in yourself and others so you can combat inequalities and inefficiencies. He offers a view of what makes people tick at work, allowing leaders to understand and, in some cases, predict the actions and reactions of their team members. Bookstore link so it will appear in HN Books: https://www.amazon.com/Behavioral-Economics-Leaders-Research-Based-Irrational/dp/1119982979 https://www.amazon.com/Behavioral-Economics-Leaders-Research... https://hackernewsbooks.com/ https://hackernewsbooks.com/

jollofricepeas 4y ago

This might be survivor bias. But of the two successful startups I’ve been a part of both were started by guys but the early management and operations staff were female and outnumbered the men. Both companies first hires were women as well. A couple of takeaways: - All of the companies had experienced leaders (it wasn’t their first show) - All of the companies were conservative financially; none of the usual over the top startup perks - None of them were into micro management. Staff had a great deal of freedom over their day and to decide how to accomplish their tasks which was great for moms and dads. - Some departments were majority female or all female including (sales) account management, marketing, finance, customer service, procurement. - Software engineering, sales, analytics and legal were predominately male. - Both companies overall had more women than men. In some cases, women outnumbered men 2:1, 3:1 depending on the department.

orwin 4y ago

In my short career, I'd say it's that young startups (or teams) with a higher than average number of females WHO STAY THERE (ie low female co-workers turnover) that really survive the longest. If female devs/marketing/HR/management escape fast from the company, its a red flag to me.