What in the world am I doing? Something like this – YES! It’s about politicians!
I’ve just crunched the data and generated the graphs – this should be FUN!
Anyway, this an ACADEMIC exercise on the perceived similarity/dissimilarity between the leadership styles of:
- Chiz Escudero,
- Manny Villar,
- Loren Legarda,
- Ping Lacson,
- Noli De Castro,
- Mar Roxas and
- Erap Estrada.
Let’s start off with the Matrix:
If you want to crunch the data yourself (and maybe do some ANOVA analysis?) you can download it here, I’ve cleaned it up a little bit also.
The question is, how many dimensions? You can start and arbitrary number, say 6 and try to do the analysis – in this case, I tried 6 and the raw stress was 0 (zero), then 5 (raw stress=zero), 4 (raw stress=still zero), and then when I reach 3 – BINGO.
Here’s the Raw Stress chart:
and from there you can draw the scree plot – notice that the plot “screes” off at 2 dimensions (which means you should do your computations at 2 dimensions!)
Okay. So 2 dimensions then. Normally you try Dimension 1 vs. Dimension 2. If it doesn’t make sense, let’s do Dimension 2 vs. Dimension 1.
Here we go. Dimension 1 vs Dimension 2 first.
QUESTION: Does this scatterplot make sense to you? (Okay, compared to the next one …)
In MDS – if the scatterplot doesn’t tell you anything – when it looks like “random noise” then try another scatterplot. Based from the 2 scatterplots, the first one makes more sense. What does it tell us?
– taken in general, Villar has an entirely different leadership style compared to the other 6
– Mar has an entirely different style as the other 6 also (if you separate her from the cluster)
– Villar and Mar have distinct leadership styles compared to the other 5 candidates
– from both scatterplots – Mar, Villar, Erap and Noli have distinct styles from one another
– it seems that Chiz is in the middle of the leadership styles, the word “blended” comes to mind
Did that make sense?
Maybe if we put up the scatterplots for the 3 dimensions, might make more sense. Think of a Rubik’s cube and you’re looking at it from 6 SIDES:
Okay, which one of the SIX scatterplots make sense?
Maybe this will help? (this is for Dimension 1 vs. Dimension 3)
We can actually graph this in 3 dimensions if you want to see it better:
We now have to come up with dimensions that will describe these candidates (your guess is as good as mine, so please feel free to comment):
– based from the charts Noli and Loren seem to be clustered together at dimension 2 – what’s common with them? Their broadcasters – so I’ll term dimension 2 as Broadcast/Public service-based leadership – something that you acquire from the perception of the masses because you came from a mass media background
– obviously most will score in the middle but those who are from the province (farther from Manila), like Mar or from an entrepreneurial background like Villar will score very low on Dimension 2
– Mar scores very high on Dimension 1 – what could that be? He’s the only “provincial” candidate or non-Manila-centric – so probably, Dimension 1 can be non-Manila style leadership. Villar since he is a known Metro Manila subdivision developer obviously scores very low on this as well as Loren. The rest are in the middle except Noli. This can be explained because of his “Ka Noli” persona – he’s probably embraced by people as somebody with some “provinciano” or non-Manileno appeal
– what of Dimension 3? I looked hard and long on dimension 3 and I realized what it is – this is the “pure execution” dimension – who among them will actually execute as an executive (and not be mired in legislative and judiciary entanglements) – from the survey most of the candidates except Ping, Erap and Chiz are in the middle. Ping is perceived as someone who will execute “purely” – maybe he won’t do the legislative mind-games that GMA did and maybe Ping would not spur the Supreme court to legislate something like the “Writ of Amparo”. We know Erap won’t execute – he couldn’t get past 2 years of execution as a President (btw, this is perception and “might” have no bearing to reality). The tricky part is Chiz – maybe as a legislator and since people have no perception of him as an “executive”, he ranks closely to Erap than anyone else. Maybe because of his youth – he’s not perceived as a “true executive” compared to the others.
So there you have it. For two dimensions you have a
Dimension 1 is the perception on how closer to Metro Manila-style (think MMDA) leadership you have.
While Dimension 2 is perception on how close you to the broadcast/mass media ideal – if you come from the media you’re perceived to be a more “public servant”/public service type leader.
If you add a 3rd dimension – it’s how people perceive you as someone who will be a “pure executive” vs. someone who will actually divide their time trying to get “deals” with the legislature and the judiciary.
There may be OTHER INTERPRETATIONS. Please feel free to comment or Twitter me.
posted by Paul “The Pageman” Pajo