bullshit Statistics  - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: hamdi.tn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 05:23:04 pm
content: i just saw this graph in linkedin, shared by at least by 3 or 4 CEO ( by their age i can tell they are generation X) and sharing what supposed to be an accurate representation of generation involvement at work. am just curious about how everyone feel about this crappy stereotype bullshit.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 05:57:54 pm
content: Working in a place with an excellent sample size of all three populations, I can't argue with any of those conclusions. Dunno how they came up with the exact percentage numbers, though.

author: dferyance
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 06:06:13 pm
content: If there isn't any information listed where data comes from or how it was gathered, it is best to ignore the data. Too often I have seen decent studies misinterpreted by the media or for political reasons. The ones that sound true are the worst because no one bothers to check -- it just feels right, or re-enforces existing beliefs. I find this a good general principal to look for a source of any data you find. It is even helpful if you don't have time to read up on it. People who are honest will provide a source and people with something to hide or don't care will omit it.Upper-level managers are more likely to not care the source or how the data was gathered. They simply don't have time for that, they just want nice clear graphs. So they are even more likely to accept these kinds of things. I have a study that shows this to be 90% true -- just don't ask where that number comes from.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 06:34:16 pm
content: Hmm, without posting the methodology how this survey was done it is meaningless.There are so many potential biases - such as how do you determine that some is "lazy".(Wouldn't a "boomer" CEO be the one complaining about millennials being lazy? Would the result be potentially different if it was a millennial CEO employing "boomers" instead?)Unless this was controlled for them, it is only a flamebait and junk meant to attract business to the agency that has published it. UXC is apparently some outfit delivering expensive IT consultants to governments, hardly someone qualified to actually conduct sociological surveys.

author: rrinker
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 07:39:59 pm
content: I always love the category of "Tech Savvy". Just what does that mean, anyway? Or even better, how applicable is it? I'm sure my kids know how to do more things with their phones than I do, mainly because I've had no need to learn more about it than I currently have. But details, details, details - I don't even have to guess that I know far more about how the thing actually works than they do. So who's more tech savvy, those who know how to use more features that appeal only to a certain subset of the device's users, or someone who understands how to build the device in the first place? Or another one - any secretary or paralegal I will guarantee knows more about using features of Microsoft Word than I do. But can they build a server and workstation infrastructure and configure it all so that they can even launch Word, save documents, and print them out? Who's more savvy? Depends on what you are trying to accomplish, if it's creating documents, then they are. If your business is building the infrastructure to enable those people to do their jobs, then I am the more savvy one.Yes, I am a crusty old man - so get off my lawn. Also, every one of these 'charts' that comes out, the cutoff for each generation changes. Apparently now I'm considered to be part of GenX.

author: hamdi.tn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 07:46:08 pm
content: Quote from: janoc on January 06, 2016, 06:34:16 pmexactly, i don't know how this is could be determine.Quote from: dferyance on January 06, 2016, 06:06:13 pmThis one exactly do that.

author: hamdi.tn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 07:52:49 pm
content: after investigating a little more , UXC just took data out of this articlehttp://www.businessinsider.com.au/how-millennials-gen-x-and-boomers-shape-the-workplace-2013-9them self took it from this onehttp://www.multivu.com/mnr/63068-ernst-and-young-llp-research-younger-managers-rise-in-the-ranksand the survey is done by thishttp://www.ey.com/as i understand they do some insurance , i don't know , maybe they like to make generation X feel good about their management capability and invest some money.funny thing, i found the original post in linkedin of this UXC and some gen X actually brag about being X .. how stupid is that

author: electr_peter
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 07:58:45 pm
content: BS stats about BS definitions thatare defined post-factum. Moving along...

author: hamdi.tn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 08:01:47 pm
content: Quote from: rrinker on January 06, 2016, 07:39:59 pmnice exemple about the kids, ppl often consider the person who use a thing a smartphone and a computer to be "Tech Savvy" and they are not aware about how the thing actually work.This graph is just not giving any thing except the ready to consume data, ready to be believed by some ppl.but as many article now are talking about relationship between entreprises and young employee as they don't feel confortable with what previous generation use to have , fixed hours and long term stability within a company ( as generation Y , tend to hate long fixed empty hour, and tend to jump from one job to an other ). i think the talking around this subject is more deep than what this graph is cheaply trying to give as a general idea.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 09:17:21 pm
content: You might not be so skeptical of those conclusions if you worked around new-hire training in a large, high-tech company.We regularly encounter individuals who completely reinforce those summaries.

author: hamdi.tn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 09:32:53 pm
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on January 06, 2016, 09:17:21 pmyou right. i did encounter some of those, but in general i do understand the lack of enthousiasme some new-hire my manifest, we all had some unrealistic expectation about jobs and what will do and how will exiting, then some days are, some not that much and some you can get suicidal. this doesn't necessary make a whole generation "lazy" and "unproductive".

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2016, 11:22:16 pm
content: News flash: Study foundmore girls expecting to be future mothersby wide marginover similarly aged boys expecting to be a future mother.Baby Boomers as defined are those born before 1963 (age 53). Their "less adaptable" is likely because of biological age than the influence of the period. As "GEN X" or "Millennials" have their habits settled for 50 years, they too will be less adaptable. No different than sayingBaby Boomers are more prone to senility than the "GEN X" or "Millennials". Yes they are, but give GEN X another 15 years and more of them will be afflicted with senility.Baby Boomers at almost 53 are the "grand pa" of the group. Surely a new-hire is not going to be mentoring by another recently hired. Grand Pa on the other hand will most likely be the ones with the experience and the position to be a mentor.Give GEN X & Millennials some more time, then more of them will have the experience to be mentors.GEN X is 15 years older than the Millennials. They have 15 years more experience and 15 years more seniority, thus more GEN X'ers already grew to be managers.In another 15 years, there will be as many millennials with desire and experience to be manager.GEN X'ers have 15 more years to find their opportunity and is exploiting or already exploited their opportunities - while Millennials are still looking for their first shot. 15 years ago, I bet GEN X would have been more opportunistic than those 7 years old's running around without wiping their runny nose. 15 years ago, if they had such a survey question, they will findGEN Xer's are better dressersbecause by percentage, a much higher percent of Millennials were running around with just diapers.Millennials are opportunistic because most of them have yet got their first opening.More of them try to go at it themselves (entrepreneurial), like GEN X'ers going at it themselves 15 years agowhen they found so many Baby Bloomers blocking their path of advancement into executive and management ranks.That Silicon Valley even existed is a miracle because GEN X'ers were not as an entrepreneurial a groupas Millennials, isn't it? Count the IPO's in the three periods and one would likely see Millennials probably created less IPO than either of the two periods.On average (20-36 years old) half of them just got out of college or got their MBA and not yet seated with their first career job. They areacting just like the GEN Xers were before them at the same age, and like the Baby Boomers were when they were at the same age.The inclusion of those really just age-dependent factors makes the study less credible as a well designed study. It is generalization of how people behaves at certain age rather than how different generations are/were affected by the environment of their period.Even with that doubt, I continue to look for if the survey is "self-assessment" or "assessment by colleagues" or "assessment by management." I suspect these three will be very different results from each other. That too was missing. I have no idea what this survey really means.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2016, 10:05:40 pm
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on January 06, 2016, 09:17:21 pmYeah, but stereotyping != valid statistics or survey methodology. Rick Law summed it up very well - the "study" is just restating the obvious in pretty charts, nothing more.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2016, 01:14:33 am
content: One huge gap in the collection and development of statistics - is they are usually generated to support a specific argument, or are polled in such a way that ignores criteria that are 'not of interest' to the argument being examined.While this may be 'correct' in the current environment, it often ignores those mistakes taken in the past to get here - setting the pollster up to fail in exactly the same way as was done in the past.I respect objective, template driven solutions - ONLY if they also support subjective criticism, review and modification ! (i.e. not government driven!)

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2016, 07:30:31 am
content: Quote from: rrinker on January 06, 2016, 07:39:59 pmKnowing how to click on the "like" or "share" button when they see the next dreamalistic indiegogo scam.

author: janoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2016, 02:59:04 pm
content: Quote from: Galenbo on January 08, 2016, 07:30:31 amAre you talking about Gizmodo "journalists"?