CEOs' facial structure predicts their firms' financial performance
Firms whose male CEOs have wider faces (relative to facial height, also known as FWHR) achieve superior financial performance. The average male facial width-height ratio (based on lots of studies) is 1.88
Researchers have theorized that innate personal traits are related to leadership success. Although links between psychological characteristics and leadership success have been well established, research has yet to identify any objective physical traits of leaders that predict organizational performance. In the research reported here, we identified leaders' facial structure as a specific physical trait that correlates with organizational performance.Specifically, we found that firms whose male CEOs have wider faces (relative to facial height) achieve superior financial performance. Decision-making dynamics within a firm's leadership team moderate this effect, such that the relationship between a given CEO's facial measurements and his firm's financial performance is stronger in firms with cognitively simple leadership teams.
92 / 52 = 1.77
Your facial width-height ratio is below average, which is very bad for CEOs
I am sorry @"DickFuld"
165 / 81 = 2.04 (very high)
No wonder JPM is one of the largest banks in the world
112 / 59 = 1.90 (slightly above average, considerably higher than Mr. Fuld)
845 / 381 = 2.22 (very very high)
That's it, I'm all in on BAC
this is science
Precisely.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24324651
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24015226
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24194904
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23326328
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22880088
http://www.larspenke.eu/pdfs/Lefevre_Lewis_Perrett_Penke_in_press_-_fWH…
http://pss.sagepub.com/content/24/11/2329.abstract
http://jlo.sagepub.com/content/19/2/164.abstract
154 / 83 = 1.86 (slightly below average)
Hardcore science right here.
I can pull up hundreds of studies relating a higher fWHR to higher testosterone, aggressiveness, prejudice, etc.
I dare you to find 10 that state otherwise.
I'm sorry, but the original post to which I was responding was regarding fWHR and financial performance not testosterone. Pull up those hundreds of studies and then link them to successfully running a bank (with peer-reviewed scientific research). I dare you to waste your time on this to show some random guy off on an internet forum brah.
correlation is not causation, but an interesting study nonetheless. I also would be curious to see what Ken Lewis' face structure scores at, given that under him BAC went into the shitter.
also want to see different industries: I wonder what the data are for guys like Welch, Walton, Buffett, David Cote, Goizueta, Gates, Ellison, and Jobs.
Also would be curious to see if any data exist for money managers. Klarman does not have a great face (according to this model), but is arguably one of the better investment managers out there. others in that camp would be Pabrai, Marks, Dreman, Ben Graham, and Charlie Munger. All very round faced (Marks the least so, but still), curious.
132 / 74 = 1.78
Unfortunately I don't have the time or attention to do all the those people.
If you want to try, here is how to measure:
Find a straight on, unedited picture
Copy URL
Paste it in https://pixlr.com/editor/
Click and drag to draw a box that encompasses the face's bizygomatic breadth, top lip, and the nasion (just above eye area).
I appreciate it, didn't know if you got this all from a site instead of doing them all manually. I don't have the time either but an interesting study nevertheless, thanks for sharing.
I'm curious if body build (weight) and height also play a factor
I wonder if there's a dick ratio. That'd be hilarious.
Facial broadness is associated with higher pubertal/developmental testosterone levels. Overall, high T leads to aggression. Just measure the fWHR of the top UFC fighters or soccer players.
140 / 61 = 2.30
145 / 64 = 2.27
188 / 89 = 2.11
This is a great picture. Just look how much more aggressive the guy on the right is.
This is directly correlated with developmental testosterone levels.
whooo fat faces FTW!
At least you had the sense to put me first in the lineup. Everything else is pure bullshit though, from the 'science' to the measurements.
That's the exact answer I would expect from someone with such an abysmal fWHR.
W: 206 H: 91 W/H = 2.26
I think I'm doing it wrong. I don't look at stocky as those UFC guys up top.
this is the weirdest thread i've ever seen
Acceptance is the first step to improvement.
How?
interesting topic i guess, and thanks for posting all the examples, i think @"Charlotte York" just kinda took things off course
.
So what you are saying is that if you want to be CEO you should be spending every dollar of your seamless stipend on steak and potatoes? Yea I'll stick with living past 50.
I'm launching a new ETF that tracks shares of companies with wide faced CEOs and a 4x bullish ETF wide faced CEOs for kick ass returns.
Bump
Eveniet eius deleniti sit et ab. Ut illo labore blanditiis voluptas illo praesentium ad. Ut velit quia ut vel. Ut odit aspernatur veritatis soluta illo quis dolor. Ea eos sapiente nobis corporis. Dolore laudantium ipsa voluptatem commodi veniam.
Accusantium sint et eveniet voluptatem. Consequuntur quibusdam ea corporis temporibus eos aliquid.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Blanditiis voluptates aliquam neque molestias inventore. Quis libero est quod nulla ut culpa ut. Quaerat aspernatur consequatur et modi atque deleniti. Ea quia a et aliquam nemo eligendi. Fuga perferendis neque quaerat sit non. Eveniet pariatur deleniti nostrum atque sunt id.
Voluptates ut accusantium quae ut quaerat. Neque occaecati et velit pariatur. Fuga quis tempore modi inventore in et veniam. Nisi non vero voluptatem distinctio eaque rem ea. Dignissimos at architecto suscipit laboriosam. Enim quo molestiae id nihil assumenda porro.
Quasi ullam sunt officia. Voluptas voluptatem placeat quia quia alias nemo. Dolores hic quos doloribus necessitatibus non. Magnam consequuntur debitis ipsum perferendis ex placeat. Est illum sit ad consequatur necessitatibus est.