4 ms·

I've looked at the Credit Suisse study, which looks at company performance from 2005 to 2011. Choosing a suitable interval for selling company stocks is a stan

I've looked at the Credit Suisse study, which looks at company performance from 2005 to 2011. Choosing a suitable interval for selling company stocks is a standard device for professional bullshitters like Credit Suisse (professional bullshitters because they have to make up fairy tales to sell stock when nobody really can predict anything). If they had taken another interval, the results would have been different. I think this was even obvious from the charts they included in the study (it's been a while that I read it - anyway, I encourage everyone to do the same). If the theory is correct and women take less risks, then presumably the climate between 2005 and 2011 favored less risk taking (bear market?). At other times, more risk taking might have been more beneficial. It's actually well known that it's almost always possible to pick an interval on which any given stock shows a positive performance. And there are of course the other possible explanations, for example that successful companies might have an easier time attracting women because they can afford special perks to lure them in. It's amazing how often this Credit Suisse "study" has been cited by now. Many people just take it at face value because it suits their ideology. I wish people who believe it would just invest in female led companies or start an index fund of such companies. Let the market sort it out. (I have nothing against female leaders, just against ideological fairy tales).

ripb 12y ago
>Many people just take it at face value because it suits their ideology. Summarising the relationship between politics and science succinctly.
danieltillett 12y ago
I am amazed that the authors of this data mining study couldn’t do a better job. If you let me data mine to “prove” my desired conclusions I would be able to provide a much better job than this. It is almost as though they just picked the first data set that met their desired conclusion and couldn't be bothered rummaging through the data any further.
danieltillett 12y ago
>I wish people who believe it would just invest in female led companies or start an index fund of such companies. Let the market sort it out. This is a very clever suggestion. The beauty of starting a "female-led" index fund is not that it would provide superior returns, but that you could pink-mail pension funds into investing in it. Pure genius.
artsrc 12y ago
My ideological fairy tale is that hiring the most qualified person leads to better outcomes. My reading of this analysis is that they compared 100% male boards, to ones with at least one female (but still many males). And found under performance in the all male boards. And anyway do boards run companies, or do they just hire the people who do, and vet large decisions? Maybe a diverse board is better than a homogenous one, even if the individuals are less capable? I don't think the conclusion that women are better on average is well supported by the Credit Suisse study. > I wish people who believe it would just invest in female led companies or start an index fund of such companies. Let the market sort it out. I think a fund that invested in companies which made a reasonable attempt to hire the best people would out perform based on analysis I have seen. In particular about 10% of hereditary company CEOs are significantly worse managers than the 10% worst hired CEOs. (I am sure that can be phrased better, sorry)

ripb 12y ago

>Many people just take it at face value because it suits their ideology. Summarising the relationship between politics and science succinctly.

danieltillett 12y ago

I am amazed that the authors of this data mining study couldn’t do a better job. If you let me data mine to “prove” my desired conclusions I would be able to provide a much better job than this. It is almost as though they just picked the first data set that met their desired conclusion and couldn't be bothered rummaging through the data any further.

danieltillett 12y ago

>I wish people who believe it would just invest in female led companies or start an index fund of such companies. Let the market sort it out. This is a very clever suggestion. The beauty of starting a "female-led" index fund is not that it would provide superior returns, but that you could pink-mail pension funds into investing in it. Pure genius.

artsrc 12y ago

My ideological fairy tale is that hiring the most qualified person leads to better outcomes. My reading of this analysis is that they compared 100% male boards, to ones with at least one female (but still many males). And found under performance in the all male boards. And anyway do boards run companies, or do they just hire the people who do, and vet large decisions? Maybe a diverse board is better than a homogenous one, even if the individuals are less capable? I don't think the conclusion that women are better on average is well supported by the Credit Suisse study. > I wish people who believe it would just invest in female led companies or start an index fund of such companies. Let the market sort it out. I think a fund that invested in companies which made a reasonable attempt to hire the best people would out perform based on analysis I have seen. In particular about 10% of hereditary company CEOs are significantly worse managers than the 10% worst hired CEOs. (I am sure that can be phrased better, sorry)