Idiocy Alert! Research says fat-faced CEOs perform better
 Subscribe to the Three Star Leadership Blog |
|
|
 |
|
|
Contact Wally about coaching, consulting, or speaking to your group. |
US News' HealthDay reports that "The width of a CEO's face may predict how well a company performs, according to a new study." That was enough to trip my rant switch all by itself.
I mean, really, even if it's true, what should we do with that finding, hire only chubby-cheeked CEOs? And how do you account for Steve Jobs who, even at his most boyish, could never be described as "fat-faced?"
If that had been all there was, there would be no blog post. I would have grumped a bit and gone on. But I made the mistake of reading the article, and that old rant switch tripped again. Here's what did it.
"Researchers compared the photos of 55 male CEOs of Fortune 500 organizations with their companies' financial performance. The study included only men because previous research found that a link between face shape and behavior applies only to men."
OK, I'm just a humble preacher's boy trying to make his way in the world, but I thought there were 500 CEOs in the Fortune 500. Only twelve are women just now, so why didn't the researchers study 488 male CEO photographs. Are the other 433 CEOs camera-shy? How did the researchers determine which 55 photographs to analyze?
It seems to me that if you're going to spend time and money and effort on a study, why study only 55 of 488 CEOs? If there's a reason, why not share it?
And the question remains about why to do a study like this at all. Besides ticking another publication box on the way to tenure, what's the purpose?
Boss's Bottom Line
This is the kind of research that gives academics a bad name.
Wally's Working Supervisor's Support Kit is a collection of information and tools to help working supervisors do a better job. It's based on what Wally's learned in over twenty years of supervisory skills training. Click here to check it out.
You ask a legitimate question, Wally, how did they select the 55 CEOs in their fat face study? I clicked the link to the article about the study and it said the Elaine Wong study would appear in the journal Psychological Science. I went to that journal and cannot find the article, so this press release must be far ahead of publication.
Reply to this
Thanks, Bret.
Reply to this
It is most certainly going to be explained as a "random sample". They probably just didn't have undergraduate students around to attribute characteristics to all 500
Reply to this
Could be, Peter, could be. Thanks for checking in.
Reply to this
You ask some legitimate questions, and after going to the source article, I have another rant about how people report or write about research that tends to raise many questions. If someone does not report on items such as limitations of the study, its resources for the initial hypothesis (literary review), or the extent that the findings can be applied, then it is useless and reckless. I believe the source article is poorly written and 55 seems low for any reliability or validity. As well, after a search on the APS website who publishes "Psychological Science," I found a little better explanation of the research with the following quote that makes a big difference:
"Don’t run out and invest in wide-faced CEOs’ companies, though. Wong and her colleagues also found that the way the top management team thinks, as reflected in their writings, can get in the way of this effect. Teams that take a simplistic view of the world, in which everything is black and white, are thought to be more deferential to authority; in these companies, the CEO’s face shape is more important. It’s less important in companies where the top managers see the world more in shades of gray."
Reply to this
Thanks for running that down, Dale. I agree that that explanation does make things clearer, but, to me at least, it seems to say "our theory is right, but those darned CEO don't act the way they should." In any case, I'm still stuck on the idea that you can draw conclusions about CEO performance based on only 55 of them, especially when there's 400 more with easily obtainable pictures and easily reviewable track records.
Reply to this
Well since the published article is still "in press," it would be difficult to run down their reasons for only 55, but from a population size of 500, and if they randomly assigned the pictures chosen, then 55 randomly assigned pictures may be adequate from a scientific standpoint of a sample size of the population, but as to the validity of picture use and correlating it to financial letters, etc. still seems more qualitative in nature and therefore you can not quantify any real correlation, just scientific speculation for further possible research.
As far as the "our theory is right," I did not get that from reading the further explanation at the site, but that the old top-down, black and white, my way or the highway run corporations cater more to the environment of subjective cave men mentality of aggression and power subjectively discerned by male peers & subordinates from physical attributes of face width.
If this is the case, I would take more from another reason that if you want a creative, innovative, & org. culture of success in today's economic environment, then change your org. culture. I don't believe these power structures of black and white worldview or top-down structure will be around much longer.
Reply to this
Thanks for adding so much to the discussion, Dale. I'm not sure I agree on the speed with which top-down structures will go away, but whatever happens I would hope we're picking CEOs because of their performance instead of their bone structure.
Reply to this
Since research also shows that CEO birth order, gender, and sports preference correlate highly with financial performance of Fortune 500 companies, I suggest we do away with HR departments and simply hire fat-faced, first-born males who play golf. Wait. Isn't that what we've been doing for the past 200 years?
Reply to this
Nicely done, Stephen. Thanks for my insightful chuckle of the morning.
Reply to this