An MIT study of such [...]]]> Online brand communities are popular vehicles for gathering consumer intelligence (e.g., pre- and post-purchase information) and fostering brand affiliation (e.g., generating buzz, increasing loyalty). However, effectively (and efficaciously) managing these communities remains something of a mystical art akin to voodoo, relying as much on luck and happenstance as on strategy.

An MIT study of such communities sought to identify some causality with respect to what actions community managers can take to produce positive outcomes. The study concluded that online communities require constant attention if they are to increase a brand’s sales.

The mere existence of such a community does not “strengthen relationships and drive sales. Rather, it is the exchange of high-quality information on these sites that drives a strong customer response.” Community members who “obtained higher levels of relevant, frequent, lengthy, and timely information” experienced a stronger relationship with the corresponding brand. No single one of those dimensions of communication was sufficient on its own–”only members who received higher levels of all four…ultimately made purchases from additional categories of products and…bought more products from the same category.”

This poses a chicken-or-the-egg conundrum: are organizations more efficacious because of their gender-diverse boards [...]]]> As of April 2012, 15% of Fortune 500 boards have one or more female members. Organizations with boards which are characterized by 30% gender diversity “outperform those with no women by a wide margin measured through multiple metrics” [Source: SmartBlog on Leadership].

This poses a chicken-or-the-egg conundrum: are organizations more efficacious because of their gender-diverse boards or are more efficacious organizations more likely to be more equitable in their recruitment of board members?

“After controlling for several factors, the authors found that the quantity and quality of friendly relationships with other customers was key. Customers [...]]]> A burgeoning number of brands are establishing consumer-centric online communities. A January 2012 University of Michigan study suggested that consumers spend, on average, 19% more after having joined such a brand-based online community.

“After controlling for several factors, the authors found that the quantity and quality of friendly relationships with other customers was key. Customers who had many friendly relationships, or who befriended more important or prominent customers, were likely to spend more on the firm’s products. Those who displayed more products on their profile page also tended to rack up purchases.”

Source: Strategy + Business

In stressful situations, most people become agitated. Psychopaths, however, tend to calm during “moments of heightened tension.” This emotional self-control may be one of the enviable [...]]]> In The Wisdom of Psychopaths, research psychologist Kevin Dutton highlights some psychopathic qualities which are frequently billed as essential to corporate leadership, e.g.:

• Persuasiveness
• Beguiling charm
• Focus under pressure

In stressful situations, most people become agitated. Psychopaths, however, tend to calm during “moments of heightened tension.” This emotional self-control may be one of the enviable qualities we should strive to emulate.

This comparison prompts us to consider: is psychopathy a good thing in business leadership? Should we strive to emulate its characteristic qualities or re-evaluate our rubric for a successful business leader?

From, Do psychopaths make good CEOs?

From, “How one billion women will shake the business world.”

“Men with shaved heads are perceived to be more masculine, dominant and, in some cases, to have greater leadership potential than those with longer locks or with thinning hair, according to a recent study out of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School.”

From, “Study shows [...]]]> This contradicts my experience, but nonetheless intrigued (and inspired hope):

“Men with shaved heads are perceived to be more masculine, dominant and, in some cases, to have greater leadership potential than those with longer locks or with thinning hair, according to a recent study out of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School.”

From, “Study shows baldness can be a business advantage.”

“Women who are offered promotions ‘generally feel they need to know 80% to 90% of their current job before they feel ready to step up into a new role,’ she says. [...]]]> Women are not promoted as frequently or as far as men are. How much of this is attributable to circumstance, prejudice, or women’s preference?

“Women who are offered promotions ‘generally feel they need to know 80% to 90% of their current job before they feel ready to step up into a new role,’ she says. But if you are smart and knowledgeable, “probably somewhere closer to 40% to 50%” is all that you need. Men, on the other hand, feel no such constraints.”

“The Journal report was based on the comments of a task force set up to study the obstacles that women continue to face in the workplace. According to a McKinsey study quoted in the article, women get 53% of entry level jobs and ‘make it to ‘the belly of the beast’ in large numbers.’ But then ‘female presence’ drops sharply, ‘to 35% at the director level, 24% among senior vice presidents and 19% in the C-suite.’”

From, Do Women Shy Away From Promotions?

This, from a neat case for recruiting introverts to your team, written by Susan Cain who recently published a book on the topic and has been highlighted by TED, et al.