On 25 December 2012 14:00, James Salsman <jsalsman(a)gmail.com> wrote:
For those outside of the U.S.,
http://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Wikimedia-Foundation-Reviews-E38331.htm
(2.8, 55%) should resolve correctly. Because Glassdoor is susceptible
to sour grapes, it is probably best read in comparison to similar
nearby companies. For example:
(...)
I hope the Board and leadership find some way to
exceed the employee
satisfaction scores of at least one of those nine others in the coming
year.
Of the other nine companies, seven have a fairly clear bell curve
distribution of rankings (peaking around 3-4) and several hundred
comments; the two exceptions are Wikia (four comments) and Twitter
(19).
In the case of WMF, as well as having a low number of respondents
(currently 13, it's had another since your first email), the
distribution looks very different - it's skewed to the extremes and
has no "neutral" rankings at all. My gut feeling would be that this is
a sign not to place too much weight on it; it's a very small sample,
not helped by it being a small organisation, and the data doesn't
really look like the theoretically "similar companies".
The comments are interesting, but any interpretation of the numbers
should probably be treated very cautiously.
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray(a)dunelm.org.uk