+
upworthy
Innovation

Forbes' 100 Most Innovative Leaders list includes 99 men. Here's how their methodology was flawed

Come on, guys.

Forbes' 100 Most Innovative Leaders list includes 99 men. Here's how their methodology was flawed

The fine folks at Forbes are currently falling all over themselves trying to clean up the mess they created by publishing their 2019 list of 100 Most Innovative Leaders.

The problem: The list included 99 men and one woman. For those not so good with the math, that means according to Forbes, only 1% of the country's most innovative leaders are female.

Have you ever watched a movie that's so abysmally bad that you wonder how it ever even got made? Where you think, "Hundreds and hundreds of people had to have been directly involved in the production of this film. Did any of them ever think to say, 'Hey, maybe we should just scrap this idea altogether?"

That's how it feels to see a list like this. So how did Forbes come up with these results?


Let's start with the description at the top of the published list, synopsizing who compiled the list and how:

"Business school professors Jeff Dyer, Nathan Furr and Mike Hendron teamed up with consultant Curtis Lefrandt to measure four essential leadership qualities of top founders and CEOs: media reputation for innovation, social connections, track record for value creation and investor expectations for value creation. The researchers then ranked these visionaries in a high-powered selection of 100 innovators at top U.S. companies."

So right off the bat, we have four men in the business world deciding on the criteria for what makes an innovative leader. There's no way those men could have some biases they aren't aware of, right?

Perhaps that's not a fair assumption on its face, but when a list those men compile includes 99 men and one lone woman? Yeah, I'm gonna go with bias, conscious or unconscious.

Then we have the four criteria they used. Hoo boy. Here's where it becomes painfully obvious to anyone with an inkling of gender equality dynamics and an ability to do a Google search why only one woman ended up on their list.

RELATED: Women make better leaders despite lack of representation, study finds

Let's take a look at the criteria, which you can read about more here, one by one:

1) Media reputation for innovation

Yes, let's uses media reputation as criteria when women are famously underrepresented in the media.

As the Harvard Business Review reports, "Around the world, women are far less likely than men to be seen in the media. As subjects of stories, women only appear in a quarter of television, radio, and print news. In a 2015 report, women made up a mere 19% of experts featured in news stories and 37% of reporters telling stories globally."

We already know that women are underrepresented in top business leadership positions. Combine that fact with women being underrepresented in the media, and this one criteria alone already puts women at a disadvantage.

Next...

2) Social connections/Social capital

Umm, has no one at Forbes ever heard of the "good old boys" network? Are they unaware of the tendency for the historical wealth and power held by men to perpetuate because of men's "social connections" and "social capital" with one another?

How many business meetings are conducted at "gentlemen's clubs"? Cigars after dinner? Golf, anyone?

Of course Forbes know about this. They've even published articles about it.

Let's tack on the fact that the second most powerful leader in our nation won't meet with a woman without a chaperone, but has no problem meeting with a man alone.

Yeah. Those social "connections" and "capital" are sometimes generations deep and pretty obviously limited for women in multiple ways.

3) Track record of market value creation at the company they lead

This is a bit stickier of a criteria to examine, mainly because it seems like a pretty straight-forward data point. But when we break down what it takes for a company to create market value, it starts with funding to get the company off the ground to begin with.

And guess what—women receive far, far less venture capital than men do.

Wharton School of Management professor Ethan Mollick says that 38% to 40% of all U.S. startups have female cofounders, and 40% of companies are funded by venture capitalists. But those numbers don't overlap. Only 2% to 4% of VC funded companies have female cofounders.

"There are a bunch of reasons," says Mollick, "but one key reason seems to be — and this is a problem that we see in discrimination everywhere — something we call 'homophily.' It's the principle that 'birds of a feather flock together.' People like people like themselves. VCs tend to be mostly male; they have friend networks that are mostly male. As a result, you have a very strong network of men who talk to each other, and it's very hard for a woman to get access to these people."

"It doesn't matter how proactive and feminist you are as a guy," he continues. "If the network you are part of is mostly men, you're just not going to see as many women's projects, you're not going to hear in your network about as many successful women. You're not going to be able to do due diligence as easily. This has been a problem in a lot of fields."

So again, women are at a disadvantage on this criteria from the starting line—and it has nothing to do with how innovative they are.

RELATED: 11 facts about women-run businesses that prove the future really is female.

4) Investor expectations of future growth and innovation at their firm

You can probably guess by now what kinds of expectations investors (who we already know are primarily male) have of the future of women's businesses. But let's look at some data anyway.

Columbia University doctoral fellow Dana Kanze conducted a study on pitch competitions, where aspiring entrepreneurs attempt to convince investors to support their business ideas. Interestingly, her team found that investors ask men and women different kinds of questions—and those differences can affect how they view their likelihood of success, and therefore, their "expectations of future growth."

As Inc.com reports:

"Kanze and her team, which includes Laura Huang of Harvard Business School and Mark Conley and E. Tory Higgins of Columbia, dissected the video of 189 company presentations at TechCrunch Disrupt from 2010 to 2016. They found that 67 percent of the questions posed to male entrepreneurs were so-called promotion questions, on subjects such as the total addressable market. By contrast, some 66 percent of the questions asked of female entrepreneurs were prevention-focused: How to defend market share or protect intellectual property, for instance.

The entrepreneurs, not surprisingly, reacted in kind. Ask a guy how big his market is, and, not surprisingly, he'll tell you. Ask a woman how she'll defend her market share, and she'll answer. But the net result is that the women end up looking like they're playing defense, while the men end up looking like the ones with the big visions who are going to change the world. 'You're going to walk away from that conversation thinking the women just care about not losing money,' Kanze says. Her research found that for every additional prevention question an entrepreneur is asked, he or she raised $3.8 million less in aggregate funding."

The difference in questioning is subtle and unconscious. "No one is sitting there saying, 'Hey, you asked him different questions,' Kanze says. "This is the cycle of bias we are trying to break."

And it is this "cycle of bias" that is the entire problem with the methodology used to create the Forbes list. How all of this slipped past the folks responsible for it is baffling, but also a clear example of the problem—men in the business world are so deep in the pool they can't see the obstacles that keep others out of it.

What I can't figure out is how the final list was ever allowed to go to publication. I mean, this is 2019. Everyone is aware of bias at this point. As soon as the numbers were crunched, the data was aggregated, and the results came back with 99 men and one woman, a red flag should have waved in front of the face of everyone involved.

Moira Forbes, a fourth generation Forbes family member—and the first female to be part of the company (ahem)—expressed that she was "disheartened" to read the list, acknowledged that criticisms were warranted, and said she shared many of the same sentiments as those who have complained.

Forbes editor-in-chief Randall Lane wrote a "reflection" on the lack of women on the list, acknowledging that there were flaws in the methodology but falling short of recognizing the full extent of what those were.

"Our methodology was flawed, as well—at a minimum when it came to being more expansive with who was eligible to be ranked. While each data point individually made logical sense, as did focusing on data-rich public companies, the entire exercise collapses if the possible ranking pool doesn't correlate at least somewhat with the overall pool of innovative talent. It would be intellectually dishonest to construct a methodology designed to generate a predetermined result, but in this case the forest got lost in the trees."

Here's the thing, though—each data point only "made logical sense" if you are looking through the lens of a male who is oblivious of how those data points filter out women. No one is looking to "generate a predetermined result." What we want is a methodology that actually measures innovation in a meaningful way and not with criteria that simply reinforce the workings and dynamics of the male-dominated business world.

TLDR: You should have known better, guys—if not from the start, from the moment the results came back so completely male-heavy. And that fact that you either didn't notice the gender discrepancy—or did, but didn't bother to reexamine the methodology before taking the list to publication—is the crux of the entire problem in the first place.

Community

How to end hunger, according to the people who face it daily

Here’s what people facing food insecurity want you to know about solving the hunger problem in America

True

Even though America is the world’s wealthiest nation, about 1 in 6 of our neighbors turned to food banks and community programs in order to feed themselves and their families last year. Think about it: More than 9 million children faced hunger in 2021 (1 in 8 children).

In order to solve a problem, we must first understand it. Feeding America, the nation’s largest domestic hunger-relief organization, released its second annual Elevating Voices: Insights Report and turned to the experts—people experiencing hunger—to find out how this issue can be solved once and for all.

Here are the four most important things people facing hunger want you to know.

Keep ReadingShow less
Pets

Family brings home the wrong dog from daycare until their cats saved the day

A quick trip to the vet confirmed the cats' and family's suspicions.

Family accidentally brings wrong dog home but their cats knew

It's not a secret that nearly all golden retrievers are identical. Honestly, magic has to be involved for owners to know which one belongs to them when more than one golden retriever is around. Seriously, how do they all seem have the same face? It's like someone fell asleep on the copy machine when they were being created.

Outside of collars, harnesses and bandanas, immediately identifying the dog that belongs to you has to be a secret skill because at first glance, their personalities are also super similar. That's why it's not surprising when one family dropped off their sweet golden pooch at daycare and to be groomed, they didn't notice the daycare sent out the wrong dog.

See, not even their human parents can tell them apart because when the swapped dog got home, nothing seemed odd to the owners at first. She was freshly groomed so any small differences were quickly brushed off. But this accidental doppelgänger wasn't fooling her feline siblings.

Keep ReadingShow less
Photo via Canva, @WhattheADHD/Twitter

The 'bionic reading' font is designed to help keep you focused and read faster.

Reading is a fundamental tool of learning for most people, which is why it's one of the first things kids learn in school and why nations set literacy goals.

But even those of us who are able to read fluently might sometimes struggle with the act of reading itself. Perhaps we don't read as quickly as we wish we could or maybe our minds wander as our eyes move across the words. Sometimes we get to the end of a paragraph and realize we didn't retain anything we just read.

People with focus or attention issues can struggle with reading, despite having no actual reading disabilities. It can be extremely frustrating to want to read something and have no issues with understanding the material, yet be unable to keep your mind engaged with the text long enough to get "into" what you're reading.

Keep ReadingShow less

A guy passes out on his bed eating pizza.

A 29-year-old woman had a baby girl, and after a brief maternity leave, she had to return to work. She couldn't afford childcare, so her husband, 35, reluctantly agreed to watch the baby while she was at work.

“It’s important to know that he’s been unemployed since 2021,” the woman wrote on Reddit’s AITA subforum. “He receives benefits. It’s also important to know that he’s extremely lazy. He doesn’t cook, clean, or help out in any way. I was nervous about leaving her home with her father, but I had no choice.”

The mother had reason to be worried about leaving her baby home alone with her husband, but in the beginning, things seemed fine. “When I came back from work, she was clean and sleeping. The next few times I came home, he was either playing with her, feeding her, or out for a walk with her. I was happy,” she wrote.

Keep ReadingShow less

Only child asks her friends what it's like to grow up with siblings.

Ahhh, siblings. Sometimes they're your best friends and other times your living room turns into an MMA octagon over the remote control. If you grew up with brothers and sisters, it's hard to imagine what it would be like to be an only child. (That's not to say you didn't dream about it when your sister stole your favorite shirt for the 30th time.)

But not everyone has siblings, so it can be equally as hard for someone who grew up as an only child to picture what it would be like to have them. Only children also likely had moments where they dreamt of having a little brother or sister, not realizing the literal torment siblings can inflict on each other.

TikTok creator Lonnie IIV recently posted a video of himself with two other friends seemingly out to lunch, when the girl in the group asked what it was like to grow up with siblings. In less than a minute she realized she lucked out being an only child because her two guy friends gave her a crash course in sibling behavior.

Keep ReadingShow less
Photo: courtesy BioCarbon Engineering/WikiCommons

Technology is the single greatest contributor to climate change but it may also soon be used to offset the damage we've done to our planet since the Industrial Age began.

In September 2018, a project in Myanmar used drones to fire "seed missiles" into remote areas of the country where trees were not growing. Less than a year later, thousands of those seed missiles have sprouted into 20-inch mangrove saplings that could literally be a case study in how technology can be used to innovate our way out of the climate change crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less
Health

Artists got fed up with these 'anti-homeless spikes.' So they made them a bit more ... comfy.

"Our moral compass is skewed if we think things like this are acceptable."

Photo courtesy of CC BY-ND, Immo Klink and Marco Godoy

Spikes line the concrete to prevent sleeping.


These are called "anti-homeless spikes." They're about as friendly as they sound.

As you may have guessed, they're intended to deter people who are homeless from sitting or sleeping on that concrete step. And yeah, they're pretty awful.

The spikes are a prime example of how cities design spaces to keep homeless people away.

Keep ReadingShow less