None of this is to imply that new professionals are left without goals. Ironically, however, the primary goal for many becomes, in essence, getting compensated sufficiently for sidelining their original goals. Robert H. Frank, a Cornell University economics professor, tried to find out exactly how much compensation people deem sufficient for making this sacrifice. He surveyed graduating seniors at his university and found, for example, that the typical student would rather work as an advertising copywriter for the American Cancer Society than as an advertising copywriter for Camel cigarettes, and would want a salary 50% higher to do it for the cigarette company. The typical student would want conscience money amounting to a 17% salary boost to work as an accountant for a large petrochemical company instead of doing the same job for a large art museum. Indeed, employers that are seen as less socially responsible do have to pay a "moral reservation premium" to get the workers they want. Frank found that men are more likely than women to sell out, and this accounts for at least part of the gap in average salaries between equal men and women.[1]posted by Chuckles at 4:05 PM on May 8, 2010 [7 favorites]
1. Robert H. Frank, "Can Socially Responsible Firms Survive in a Competitive Environment?" in David M. Messick, Ann E. Tenbrunsel, editors, Codes of Conduct: Behavioral Research into Business Ethics, Russell Sage Foundation, New York (1996), ch. 4 (pp. 86-103). Chronicle of Higher Education, 21 February 1997, p. A37.
(Pitfalls in) Interpreting R2 and Adjusted R2I have two comments. First, I cling to the technicality that it is different to say that a low R2 means there is omitted variable bias and to say that a low R2 value may indicate there are omitted variables and that's my story and I'm sticking to it. And second, I'm going to punch found missing in the face.
...
3. A high R2 or R2 does not mean there is no omitted variable bias. (Nor does low R2 or R2 mean that there is omitted variable bias.)
Thus, the first diagnostic for omitted variables is a low R2 statistic. However, R2 less than 1 is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for omitted variable bias.So I claim that my weak statement that the low R2 values here may indicate omitted variables cannot be proven wrong. Har.
The gap between men and women is far, far larger in college applications--which means a smaller percentage of female applicants are accepted and enroll relative to male applicants. I'm not saying this itself is obviously misogynistic, but it does mean that the on-campus "gender gap" is a misnomer, because a larger percentage of male applicants are able to attain education than are female applicants.Are you sure that that is not due to very poor statistical analysis? A similar effect was shown to be an example of Simpson's paradox (not accounting for confounders) in this paper:
Turnover is really expensive, says Steve Sanger, chairman of General Mills. "If we've invested in recruiting and developing good people, then we want them to stay." On average, replacing an hourly worker costs an organization 50% of that worker's annual salary; replacing a professional worker costs 150% of her annual salary. Why so much? Add up screening and hiring costs, opportunity costs for the employees doing the hiring, and lost productivity until the replacement worker gets up to speed, and you're talking about a lot of money.Implementing Babcock's suggestions from that link would involve altering workplace culture norms (eg, mentoring including specific negotiation coaching for all aspects of the mentee's job, not just salary; fostering a workplace culture that exposes unfounded stereotypes of "pushy" women vs "go-getting" men, rather than letting them slide). That would have its own difficulties, but perhaps not as entrenched as what would be involved in salary transparency.
Factor in the low morale of employees who have to pitch in while replacements are found and trained, and the costs skyrocket. Our calculations show that turnover costs can have a huge impact on the bottom line of a typical midsize company--costing as much as 3.4% of revenues and an astounding 45% of profits.
« Older C.W. Roberts Contracting in Florida has come up wi... | Everybody Edits... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Malice at 1:49 PM on May 8, 2010