Monday, July 27, 2009

Are women better managers?





Below is an interesting interview from an SVP at Elle, who claims that women are simply better managers than men are.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/26/business/26corner.html?_r=1&8dpc

Below is a picture of Carol. After I read the interview I could guess what she would look like. I am sure she is a great manager that follows all the proper procedures and guidelines.


I am also reading some books concerning the great European and Chinese explorers of the 15th century. And while men may not make good managers, these guys (and they were all men without exception) were pretty good leaders.


5 comments:

  1. I very much agree that men are better at certain things over women, and vice versa. M/F brains are constructed differently so of course.

    As far as personal experience with managers hmm the females ones have seemed more like human beings and less like barking machines ? but I like both, I think each manager can do well if placed in the right environment for them.

    A man who's driven to be innovative or push ahead (until they succeed, that's the key) is pretty rare. Most of those who dare are men, but I definitely don't think that all males are capable of this. Most people, male & female, are pretty complacent, lazy, easily discouraged.

    I'm glad the books make you feel so empowered ;) they make your eyes sparkle lol

    ReplyDelete
  2. Men seem to be represented more on both ends of the bell curve. You tend to see this in intelligence. People with exceptionally high IQs tend to be men. However, there are also more retarded men than women. The standard deviation is greater among men than women.

    Women tend to excel in organizational abilities, planning, communication and following the rules. All of these traits help women to be excellent managers. Men tend to excel in risk taking, innovation and the drive to get a task done.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think I may have worded my sentence badly. When I said rare, I don't mean rare versus women in pushing ahead. I mean rare just among men, male to male. Alot of men don't use this natural drive. Don't succeed, give up, fail, never try or just plain lazy. It's a rare man who accomplishes. I hope I'm making sense.

    So even though a good male trait, not all men ever tap into it. Some are content to smoke a pound of weed sit on youtube shouting "wimmen r dumb evil whore dogs" never do anything that matters. When you do vids like this it's fun to watch the comments though, makes me lol

    With what you were saying, weird is that really the general rule? I have an IQ over 160, have no organizational ability, poor planning, terrible communication skills (social retard). By the statistics if I were to have just been born with a penis I might have been smarter, done something great with my time on earth. Well hell, maybe next life :\

    ReplyDelete
  4. With an IQ over 160, you are pretty much at the genius level. You are in the top .1% of the population according the distribution of scores on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale.

    http://encarta.msn.com/media_461540296/distribution_of_iq_scores.html

    Obviously, it is rare for anyone (male or female) to reach such a high IQ. As such, group statistics are meaningless when applied to the individual. Statistics only are relevant when applied to a broad population.

    It should also be noted that exceptions to a rule, do not invalidate the rule. For example, most racehorses that have won the Kentucky Derby are male. But every once in awhile there is a female horse that wins (3 in the last 104 races). However, those three examples don’t invalidate the general rule that male horses are usually faster in the race.

    In humans, men to be over-represented in both ends of the bell curve. Most of the exceptionally smart people are male. Most of the exceptionally stupid (retarded) people are male. This does not mean that there are no examples of women that are geniuses or retarded.

    Of course, most people (male and female) are just average. For example, most men in the 15th century did not have the drive or the ability to become explorers such as Columbus, De Gama or Henry the Navigator. However, all explores of that era (no exceptions that I can think of) were male.

    This does not mean women did not influence explorations. Queen Isabella (by all accounts a beautiful woman) was a prime driver in ensuring Columbus received the funds for exploration. But she did not have to deal with rough seas, mutinous sailors and savages. Columbus had to deal with those issues in a very ruthless manner.

    Oh, btw, you have excellent communication skills. Your writing ability proves that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Really interesting read, I enjoy your writing style. Most of what I fill my skull with anymore is horrible, meaningless junk food (less that's in there, less I worry).

    I suppose when I do concentrate on the study of something I lean more toward general natural history. Certain human history and religion too, but I've never looked at anything I've read and thought this is a man that did this or what an incredible woman. Gender never presented itself to me as something important, the thing to note.

    Haven't learned too much about humans anyway, male female balance with one another in society, their brains. I see the cruelty of both, that's been enough. It's nice to read something deeper about people for a change, the way each works. You make it interesting.

    You're kind, Ramzpaul. My communication skills are fail. I do have a good friend that's helped me get better with it though.

    ReplyDelete