Beyond Herself

Toasting our dean’s lasting impact

In July, Ann Harrison stepped down from her duties as dean to continue her economics research, join the Council of Foreign Relations, and rejoin her family in New York. She’ll continue to be a half-time tenured faculty member.

Since becoming dean in January 2019, Harrison has elevated and advanced Haas across the board. Poets&Quants, when naming her Dean of the Year in 2023, called her tenure an “unimaginable and nearly breathtaking record of achievement.”

One of her top priorities was to embed a sustainability mindset in all of Haas’ programs and operations. Her dedication resulted in a new MBA dual degree and certificate program, a new undergraduate minor, curriculum enhancements, and hiring Haas’ first chief sustainability officer.

She orchestrated a major diversity, equity, inclusion, justice, and belonging (DEIJB) effort that included hiring the school’s first chief DEI officer and broadening the profile of the school’s faculty, board, and student body as well as creating learning opportunities and anti-bias training for the community.

Her focus on innovation and entrepreneurship resulted in a new faculty group and an entrepreneurship hub, slated to open this fall, for students from across Berkeley to envision new ventures.

In addition, Harrison expanded the school’s degree offerings with the Flex online MBA cohort and hired 40 new ladder faculty, 19 of whom are women. She also stepped up fundraising and raised $236 million since 2019, including the largest single gift in the school’s history—$30 million—to turn the upper-division undergraduate business program into a four-year program. Not to mention her own generosity. She’s a Builder of Berkeley and named Chou Hall’s Jose P. Madrigal Classroom in honor of her husband’s late father.

Here are some Haas voices on the ways Harrison’s top priorities have changed their lives.

Thank You So Much, Ann, for…

…raising the bar during unprecedented times.

“Under Ann’s leadership, Haas navigated the pandemic and a complex macro environment, allowing Haas to continue to thrive despite these challenges. In addition, Ann has been instrumental in her fundraising efforts, which will significantly enrich our academic programs for years to come. On behalf of the board, we are grateful to have had such an amazing leader and celebrate Ann for her profound impact on Haas today and in the future.”

—Elena Gomez, BS 91
Chair, Haas School Board and CFO, Toast

…hiring and retaining top academic talent.

“Ann’s commitment to expanding the faculty has been tremendous. It has been an exciting time for me to join an expanding and diverse community of talented and emerging scholars. We have a dynamic group of junior faculty, and research ideas are flowing.”

—Solène Delecourt
Assistant Professor, Berkeley Haas

…envisioning a totality of possibility.

“Ann has been driven to realize the full potential of Haas within UC Berkeley. She hasn’t stayed in one lane. She has expanded the faculty, raised record funding, grown our programs, and more. That is incredibly impressive.”

—Courtney Chandler, MBA 96
Senior Vice Dean & Chief Operating and Strategy Officer, Berkeley Haas

…making sustainability a necessity.

“Haas has been transformative for me. It connected me with a community of passionate, impact-driven people and equipped me with the skills I needed to grow as a climate leader. Seeing Haas’ commitment to sustainability has inspired me to continue my journey toward building a sustainable future for all.”

—Arnaud Paquet, MBA 24
Power Origination Manager, Crusoe

…amplifying entrepreneurship and increasing innovation faculty.

“Ann Harrison has been like rocket fuel for Berkeley entrepreneurship and innovation. Generations of future founders will be thanking her for bringing the new eHub to life (opening this fall!), helping grow SkyDeck, and doubling our entrepreneurship faculty.”

—Brett Wilson, MBA 07
Member, Haas School Board and General Partner, Swift Ventures

…championing inclusion with real resources.

“The HBCU fellowship at Haas has afforded me an incredible network of bright, forward-thinking peers and mentors committed to challenging the status quo in our fields. The spirit of inclusivity and belonging is alive and real at Haas. I am now VP of DEI for the student body, motivated to continue the mission of advocating for diversity and enhancing the experience for all students at Haas.”

—Brittany Jacob, MBA 25
Inaugural HBCU fellowship recipient

New Interim Dean

Alumna and longtime professor leads Haas

Woman in a blue suit coat with arms folded, smiling at camera.

Professor Jennifer Chatman, who is known for pioneering research in organizational culture, was appointed interim dean of Berkeley Haas, effective August 1.

Chatman, the Paul J. Cortese Distinguished Professor of Management, joined the Haas faculty in 1993. As associate dean of academic affairs from 2022 to 2024, she was instrumental in helping Haas significantly increase the size and diversity of its faculty. From October to December 2023, she led the school as acting dean during Dean Harrison’s sabbatical.

Chatman has a strong connection and commitment to Berkeley. A double Bear, she earned her BA in psychology in 1981 and her PhD in business administration in 1988 from Berkeley.

“It will be my honor to serve the school and campus, and I look forward to hearing your ideas and concerns so that we can accomplish great things together in the year ahead,” Chatman says. “Let’s continue to let our Defining Leadership Principles inspire the best in us.”

A renowned organizational psychologist, Chatman studies how organizational culture, group norms, leadership, and group composition influence behavior. She co-created one of the most widely used tools to assess organizational culture, and her research has garnered numerous accolades, including the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Academy of Management.

She also co-founded and co-directs the Berkeley Center for Workplace Culture and Innovation with Haas Professor Sameer Srivastava. In March 2024, they launched a podcast, The Culture Kit with Jenny and Sameer, in which they help solve listeners’ workplace culture problems.

As a teacher, Chatman is much lauded. She’s won the Cheit Award for Excellence in Teaching and was named among the “World’s Best B-School Professors” by Poets&Quants. She’s also shared her expertise with some of the most innovative and successful firms through consulting services and by teaching in the Berkeley Executive Education program.

The search for a permanent Berkeley Haas dean will begin in early fall.

Kind of a Big Deal

Former Dean Rich Lyons, BS 82, takes the helm of the mothership as chancellor of Berkeley

In the hours following his announcement as UC Berkeley’s 12th chancellor, Rich Lyons made headlines in major media outlets in California as well as national publications, including The New York Times, Bloomberg, and Sports Illustrated (since he’ll be overseeing Cal’s athletics program). News of his appointment was later splashed onto giant screens at the New York Stock Exchange. If ever there was a time to toot one’s own horn, this was it.

But on Lyons’ X account, to which he posts frequently, the 63-year-old former Haas School dean had just six words: Today was kinda a big day. He then expressed appreciation for all the “lovely messages” he’d been sent. Those who know Lyons know this wasn’t a humble brag. He is, quite simply, humble: an authentic leader who exudes enthusiasm for all things Berkeley, where he’s worked for the past 31 years—not to mention his years as a student. In fact, he’s the first UC Berkeley undergraduate alum to become the campus’s chancellor. 

During his 11 years as the rock-star dean of Haas, Lyons racked up numerous successes: the construction of the nation’s greenest academic building, Chou Hall; a curriculum revamp that emphasized experiential learning and soft leadership skills, like creative problem framing; new dual-degree programs with Berkeley Engineering and the Department of Molecular and Cell Biology; and, perhaps most notably, a strong culture codified in the four Defining Leadership Principles (DLPs): Question the Status Quo, Confidence Without Attitude, Students Always, and Beyond Yourself.

Since his move to the broader campus in 2020, he’s built out the entrepreneurship and innovation efforts at the university with an eye toward increasing opportunities for all members of the community and creating new sources of revenue. His role oversaw Berkeley’s startup accelerator SkyDeck (which he helped found as Haas dean) and its expansion to both Italy and Japan, as well as the technology transfer office, managing IP licenses for breakthroughs like Nobelist Jennifer Doudna’s CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing. And he initiated a data project that led to Berkeley’s #1 ranking for its number of venture-backed companies founded by undergraduate alumni and #2 for its number of founders in PitchBook’s 2023 rankings.

Now his leadership will be tested at an impressive scope as he guides some 70,000 students, faculty, and staff and the world’s top public university into the future.

How will his leadership skills honed at Haas translate to the university level? Will the DLPs go Berkeley-wide? What’s his vision for the university? And will he still play his guitar in public? Read on for the answers.

Culture champion

As chancellor, Lyons will continue to focus on culture. “If I’m obsessive about anything,” he said in a Berkeley News article about his appointment, “I’m obsessive about how leaders work with their people to strengthen culture.”

But that doesn’t mean the DLPs, so pivotal to Haas’ identity, will be adopted by the university. “Berkeley is a wonderfully complex organization,” Lyons says. “If somebody thinks I’m starting by thinking about how am I going to get those four principles to the campus level—no. It’s a much bigger set of opportunities for values leadership.”

For Lyons, “values leadership” means identifying and elevating the qualities that distinguish Berkeley from other great institutions of higher education. One place to start, he believes, are UC Berkeley’s principles of community, which were developed collaboratively by students, faculty, staff, and alumni. The seven principles call for, among other things, civility and respect in personal interactions and participation and leadership in addressing society’s most pressing issues.

“The principles of community are profoundly important to this university,” Lyons says. “But people don’t know how many there are. They can’t even name very many of them.” Partly, he says, this is because the principles of community weren’t designed to be differentiating. “We don’t just codify values in order to be differentiated,” says Lyons. “But I think we have some headroom to be more differentiated at the campus level.”

Values leadership is one of three “domains of opportunity”—along with resource leadership (fresh funding opportunities) and research leadership (life-changing discoveries in all disciplines)—that Lyons says will be key for Berkeley’s future success.

Long-term societal benefit

Though Lyons is still in the listening phase of his tenure and expects his ideas to get shaped and adjusted, he does articulate a vision for Berkeley. “I’ve been here for a long time,” he says, “so I do have some thoughts.”

On a macro level, he wants to continue pursuing what he refers to as the core of the 10-campus, UC-wide mission statement: Long-term societal benefit. “But I want to pivot on that and then start asking questions,” he says. “Like, how does Berkeley, with all the long-term societal benefit that it already provides, go up a level or two on that?”

Within 10 years, Lyons says, “We’re going to make Berkeley the university of choice for faculty, staff, and students. Period.” And that means embracing being a public school. “All the other great research universities that come first to people’s minds in the U.S. are not public,” he says. “We are the only public that’s in the pantheon.” But no Ivy League school, for example, comes close to Berkeley’s operating scale with undergraduates, nor can those schools match Berkeley’s reputation for challenging convention (like birthing the Free Speech Movement). “That doesn’t make everybody want to be at Berkeley, but it makes a lot of people want to be at Berkeley, because there’s so much meaning and purpose here,” Lyons says.

A bear mascot smiles at a man whose hands are thrown up in surprise.
Oski surprised Lyons at an alumni event in Southern California the day after his appointment was announced at the UC Board of Regents meeting in Los Angeles. Photo: Keegan Houser

A Berkeley narrative

In his previous role, as Berkeley’s first-ever chief innovation and entrepreneurship officer, Lyons began developing that sense of purpose. Part of his charge was to harness Berkeley’s myriad opportunities and make entrepreneurship and innovation more inclusive campuswide.

One of Lyons’ solutions was the Berkeley Changemaker program, a series of more than 30 undergraduate courses across disciplines that share three through lines: critical thinking, communication, and collaboration. Inspiration for the program came from the course, later a book, called Becoming a Changemaker by Haas professional faculty member Alex Budak, who was the first lead faculty for the Berkeley Changemaker gateway course. To date, some 20% of Berkeley undergrads (a subset that tends to be more diverse than the general undergrad population) have enrolled in Changemaker courses, which involve more than 60 faculty from over 30 academic departments and 11 schools and colleges.

The idea is to encourage entrepreneurial thinking in humanists and scientists alike and to offer a signature Berkeley way of being: questioning the status quo to benefit society. The curriculum helps students articulate their passions, develop a sharper sense of what they want to accomplish, and understand how to make that happen.

“Berkeley Changemaker is emerging as a narrative and an identity,” Lyons says. “There are students who are saying, ‘That’s who I want to be. And I might apply and go to Berkeley because I’m seeing that narrative and a curriculum to back it.’”

Currently, students can earn a certificate, though Lyons and his co-lead in the effort, Haas professional faculty member Laura Hassner, EMBA 18, would love for it to be a minor. And while there are a few Changemaker courses available to graduate students, he’d love to build that out too.

Man in a suit coat surrounded by several smiling people.
Lyons made a surprise appearance at April’s annual Alumni Conference where he greeted members of the Haas community soon after being announced as Berkeley’s next chancellor. Photo: Brittany Hosea-Small

Novel revenue streams

Of course, all the purpose in the world isn’t going to resonate if there isn’t money to support the top faculty, students, and staff. Berkeley simply doesn’t have the coffers to rival top private institutions. To remedy this, Lyons is seeking unconventional funding opportunities, beyond advocating to legislators in Sacramento and courting major donors. He’s galvanized by this question: “How does Berkeley participate more in the economic value that it creates in ways that are consistent with its mission and values?”

It’s not a new question for Lyons. He’s spent the last four years seeking novel revenue streams for the university via Berkeley’s innovation and entrepreneurship ecosystem.

His vision has involved capacity-building platforms to combine the many thriving ecosystems on campus while still keeping them decentralized. One such platform is the Berkeley Research Infrastructure Commons, which makes scientific instruments on campus, say a mass spectrometer or a DNA sequencer, available to industry users for commercial purposes when they’re not in use. These external companies pay fees to Berkeley but retain their intellectual property, a system that significantly lowers the cost of R&D.

“We’re going to make Berkeley the university of choice for faculty, staff, and students. Period.”

Another platform involves shared-carry (or shared-return) venture funds, which pay the university a portion of their profits. The idea is this: In any venture fund, there’s a general partner and a limited partner. Typically, the general partner receives 20% of the return on the whole portfolio. For the seven UC Berkeley shared-return funds, the general partner gives back to Berkeley half of its return, or 10% of the total. The funds, while a separate entity from the university, can use Berkeley branding via an affiliation agreement.

Inflows stemming from Berkeley’s IP portfolio are a small slice of the cash flow that will be needed to secure Berkeley’s future. People have started bringing Lyons transformative ideas, he says. One could potentially generate $300 million in unrestricted dollars in 10 years, which could be used for the core and the harder-to-fund things, like doctoral students, research in the humanities, and deferred maintenance on research facilities. This is the magnitude of the solutions he’s seeking. “If we have nine or 10 ideas that could generate a $100 million cash flow that’s unrestricted and can fund the core over the next 10 years,” Lyons says, “that’s where I see a lot of opportunity.”

Authentic leadership

Family of four sitting on a staircase with a dog.
Lyons with his wife, Jen; son, Jake; daughter, Nicole; and dog, Winston. Photo: Courtesy of Rich Lyons

Lyons says he’s going all-in as Chancellor—which includes breaking out his guitar for a song now and again. “I don’t want to overdo it,” he says, but he will, “when the time is right.” He and his wife, Jen, are moving into University House on campus. “We’re going to be totally present,” he says. “For example, I’m going to pop in sometimes when I walk by a tour with prospective students and their families and just say, ‘Hey, welcome to Berkeley! I’m the Chancellor. Thanks for being here.’”

Those personal touches—the kind he was known for at Haas—should serve him well. In one of outgoing-Chancellor Carol Christ’s final campus interviews, she was asked what it takes to lead UC Berkeley. In addition to having good listening skills and tolerance for different opinions and protests, she said, “It takes liking students, understanding the time in life it is for them.”

For Lyons, interacting with students is one of the joys of his work at Berkeley. “I love to teach, and I love staying connected to students,” he says. “And students can sense authentic connection or the lack thereof from a mile away.”

Professional faculty member Thomas Fitzpatrick, MBA 11, witnessed this authentic connection firsthand at Caffe Strada the month before Lyons was named chancellor. Lyons had been deep in conversation with a colleague at the cafe, and when he was leaving, a student caught his attention.

Lyons didn’t appear to know the young man, but they spoke for a few minutes, then Lyons took off a pin he was wearing on his lapel and gave it to him. “They were both beaming,” Fitzpatrick says. Even more than the kind gesture, Fitzpatrick, who specializes in leadership development and communications, was struck by Lyons’ demeanor throughout the interaction.

“He wasn’t so busy that he couldn’t pause what looked like an important conversation to connect with a student,” Fitzpatrick says. “He didn’t rush it. He was really enjoying the encounter.”

The student turned out to be Owen Knapper Jr., a then-sophomore majoring in political science. Knapper didn’t know Lyons, but he wondered where he got the pin he was wearing, a 3D gold bear in mid-stride. Knapper explained that he often wears suits to student-government meetings, and he’d been looking for one just like it.

Three weeks later, when Lyons was announced as chancellor, Knapper told his fellow members of student government his crazy story about meeting him. “It looked like he was in a hurry, but he did stop to engage with me,” says Knapper, who’s been wearing his pin at his summer internship in Washington, D.C., with Congress member Barbara Lee. “And I think that’s what’s important, because he stopped and listened and had a conversation.”

Knapper, who’s currently a student senator, is one student among some 45,000, but it was a good first impression. “Having that interaction with him was impactful, and I can’t wait to see the amazing work he does,” Knapper says. “I would love to learn some of his plans for communities of color on campus, transfer students, formerly incarcerated students. Just seeing how he will listen to students and try to create tangible solutions. I only can vouch for him so much, but I hope that he will be off to doing great things.”

Challenges and optimism

For all his enthusiasm, Lyons acknowledges that he’s becoming chancellor during a fraught time for college campuses nationwide, including Berkeley. Demonstrations, sometimes volatile, have fractured campus communities, leaving some feeling angry, scared, and alienated.

“Every moment in history is complicated, but this is an especially complicated time in higher education by a lot of objective measures,” Lyons says. “People are feeling the pressure societally, these tectonic shifts.”

Which is why the values leadership he espouses is so important for Berkeley’s future. Getting it right will be a true test of his skill as chancellor.

“My goal as a leader then and now is to facilitate and sustain a culture that supports diversity of perspective, provides every student with a true sense of belonging, and encourages educational innovation,” Lyons told Berkeley News.

That’s not going to be easy for any college or university leader, but Lyons has a quiet confidence that, years from now when his term is over, Berkeley will be in an even better place. “I see 10 years out that we could really make some remarkable advances and deliver even more into that mission of long-term societal benefit,” he says. “So I go in with eyes open and lots of optimism.

From politicians to pop stars to professionals, gender stereotypes shape how we view power and status

Photo collage top row: General Motors CEO Mary Barra, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Oprah Winfrey, TV host, actress, CEO. Center: Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank. Bottom: Popstar Taylor Swift, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin, Warren Buffet, chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway.
Top row: General Motors CEO Mary Barra (Sipa USA via AP); Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos (zz/Dennis Van Tine/STAR MAX/IPx); Oprah Winfrey, TV host, actress, and CEO (Brad Barket/Invision/AP). Center: Christine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank (Arne Dedert/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images). Bottom: Pop star Taylor Swift (AP Photo/Nati Harnik); Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin (Sergey Guneyev, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP); Warren Buffet, chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway (Sipa USA via AP).

Russian President Vladimir Putin and pop star Taylor Swift have something in common as two of the world’s “most powerful” people, according to Forbes. But while Putin rose to power as the leader of the world’s largest country, Swift amassed status and wealth as a wildly popular singer and performer.

These two paths to prominence—through power and status—are deeply tied to gender stereotypes that shape how society views them, according to new research published in the journal Psychological Science. While men are more typically linked to power, or having control over valuable resources, women are more often associated with status, defined as being respected by others.

“We noticed there seemed to be a fundamental difference between Forbes’ list of powerful people and its separate list of powerful women, and we wanted to find out whether this was indicative of broadly held gendered associations,” says lead researcher Charlotte Townsend, PhD 24, who began the project as a doctoral student and is now a postdoc at Cornell University. “We found deeply held stereotypes in how we recognize leaders—whether they are leading a company or running for president.”

Household names

Just five of the 75 people on Forbes’ last “World’s Most Powerful People” list are women, while 99 women—plus a plastic doll, with the recent addition of Barbie—appear on the separate “World’s Most Powerful Women” list.

Townsend, working with Berkeley Haas Professor Laura Kray and Sonya Mishra, PhD 23, an assistant professor at Dartmouth’s Tuck School of Business, used Forbes’ lists to test how men and women are viewed differently in terms of power and status, and to examine the implications of these stereotypes.

In one experiment, the undergraduate student participants rated men on the Forbes list higher in power but lower in status compared to the women, while they rated the women higher in status than the men. What’s more, the men were more likely to be recognized if they were perceived as powerful, while the women were more likely to be recognized if they were viewed as having high status.

“The most powerful men tend to be household names, while for women it’s those with the most status,” says Kray. “We pay more attention to high-status women like Taylor Swift and high-power men like Jeff Bezos, and less attention to high-power women like General Motors CEO Mary Barra.”

In the experiments, the researchers measured power using statements about authority and control (e.g. supervising subordinates, administering discipline or rewards), while status was measured using statements about whether the person was admired, respected, and sought out for their opinions. The studies were done in 2020 and 2022, and used Forbes’ 2018 “Most Powerful People” list and 2019 “Most Powerful Women” list. (Note: Forbes stopped updating its “Most Powerful People” list in 2018 but continues to update its “Most Powerful Women” list).

Public attention

The researchers then collected data on media mentions and social media followers for the Forbes’ list members that had been rated high on power or status. The analysis found it was the “powerful” men who garnered more media mentions and social media followers, while “powerful” women had fewer. Conversely, the women rated as “high status” had more media mentions and social media followers compared with high-status men.

The fact that society gives more attention to powerful men and high-status women “aligns with past research finding that people are more likely to notice and recall information that confirms their stereotypes,” says Mishra. “These mental shortcuts reduce our cognitive load as perceivers.”

Deeply ingrained biases

To test whether gender stereotypes around power and status persist with people who aren’t household names, the researchers selected photos of lesser-known people from Fortune‘s “40 Under 40 Finance List.” They used an Implicit Association Test (IAT) to measure unconscious biases with another group of undergraduates, and again found strong associations between men and power, and women and status—supporting the idea that these gender stereotypes are deeply ingrained.

The study also confirmed that participants viewed men as having more societal power and status overall, even though women were more strongly associated with status.

Self-perceptions

A final experiment tested how men and women view themselves. (The study samples included too few participants who identified as neither a man nor a woman for a separate analysis.)

They found that women, in particular, tended to associate themselves more with status than with power. When asked directly about themselves, women reported feeling less powerful than men, but more status-oriented.

Yet when asked about what they wanted, both men and women reported similar desires for power and status.

So while women might not necessarily be shying away from power, they might be aware of the backlash they’d incur from wanting power, the researchers suggest. Townsend noted that they have preliminary findings for a follow-up paper showing that women expect less backlash for seeking status than power.

Backlash

This builds on prior research on how women’s fears of backlash shape their behavior, such as highlighting their accomplishments in an interview, Another recent study by Mishra and Kray found that women who are seen as going after power are more likely to face a backlash than those viewed as seeking status in addition to seeking power.

“Power-seeking women experience backlash because they are seen to violate feminine stereotypes,” Mishra says. Although women might have more leadership opportunities today compared to 20 years ago, seeking and possessing power still convey more masculine stereotypes than feminine stereotypes.

It will be interesting to see how this phenomenon plays out in the 2024 presidential election, the researchers note, since Vice President Kamala Harris became the presidential candidate somewhat by default after President Joe Biden stepped aside. This could be an advantage.

“It could be that Harris is perceived as less power-hungry, and as a result, she might encounter less backlash compared with a candidate like Hillary Clinton, who campaigned heavily for her candidacy,” Mishra suggested.

And while both power and status are important in social hierarchies, they come with different expectations. Social status tends to be more fragile than power, and more easily taken away, says Kray. And those with status are more often expected to be fair and kind, which can limit their ability to use their rank effectively, and limit them to roles with less control over resources, she adds.  “Unfortunately, this further entrenches the stereotype that women’s power must be limited to being highly respected while men’s power encompasses tangible control over resources,” Kray says.

The researchers note that the study involved mainly college students and U.S. adults, so may not be applicable to everyone. But what’s clear is that achieving full gender equality will require continuing examination of—and challenges to—these deeply held stereotypes.

Key takeaways:

  • Men are often linked with power, women with status.
  • This stereotype affects public recognition and self-perception.
  • Despite being respected, women’s association with status can limit their control over resources.

Read the full paper:

Not All Powerful People Are Created Equal: An Examination of Gender and Pathways to Social Hierarchy Through the Lens of Social Cognition
By Charlotte H. Townsend, Sonya Mishra, and Laura J. Kray
Psychological Science, August 2024

Acknowledgement: This study was partially supported by the Center for Equity Gender and Leadership at the University of California, Berkeley.

 

 

 

Polling 101: How accurate are election polls?

A pile of 2024 election buttons with American flag backdrops.
Image: AdobeStock

Between the assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump, the announcement by President Joe Biden that he’ll step aside, the candidacy of Vice President Kamala Harris, and her announcement of running-mate Tim Walz, the 2024 presidential campaign so far has been full of unexpected plot twists. 

And there’s still 12 weeks to go before the general election.

So what to make of the myriad election polls offering near-daily updates on which candidate seems to be gaining—or losing—an edge? 

We sought insights from Professor Don Moore, the Lorraine Tyson Mitchell Chair in Leadership and Communication and an expert on overconfidence, and Aditya Kotak, BA 20 (Statistics, CS), a former research apprentice in Moore’s Accuracy Lab. Kotak teamed up with Moore after growing curious about the confidence intervals that are often listed in fine print below polls. They published their analysis in 2020.  

First off, brief us on your headline finding.

Don Moore: Most polls report a 95% confidence interval. But we found that the actual election outcome only lands inside that interval 60% of the time—and that’s just a week before the election. Further out, the hit rates fall even farther. Polls taken a year before the election stand only a 40% chance of getting the vote share from the actual election inside the poll’s 95% confidence interval.  

Why do polls include a margin of error and a confidence interval, and what do they tell us? 

Aditya Kotak: Both the margin of error and the confidence interval capture “sampling error,” which represents how much the poll’s sample population might differ from the true population of voters. A confidence interval refers to how often the result is expected to fall within the range of the margin of error. It’s important to note, though, that the margin of error only reflects expected imperfections in random sampling, and ignores other sources of error.

You describe sampling error as a “statistical error.” What are some of the non-statistical errors that can make a poll less accurate?

Moore: Sometimes there is bias generated by the method by which pollsters reach respondents. If it’s random-digit dialing, for instance, it will only reach people who have phones and who answer them when pollsters call. If those people are different from those who vote, then the poll’s predictions might be biased.  

In your paper, you conclude that in order for polls to be 95% accurate just a week before an election, they should double the margin of error they report. Give an example.

Kotak: Let’s say a candidate is polling at 54% a week before the election, with a margin of error of plus-or-minus 3%. The 95% confidence interval implies a 95% chance that the candidate will win 51% to 57% of the vote. Our analysis shows that in reality, you’d have to double that margin of error to plus or minus 6% to get 95% accuracy. That means that the outcome is less certain; the candidate is likely to get anywhere from 48% to 60% of the vote.

Don, as an expert on overconfidence, why do you think the confidence intervals reported by pollsters are so consistently overconfident? Why don’t they increase the margins of error?

Moore: I think poll results are overconfident for many of the same reasons that everyday human judgments are overconfident: We are wrong for reasons that we fail to anticipate. The electorate is changing, and prior elections are imperfect predictors of future elections. When we are wrong about the future and don’t know it, we will make overconfident predictions.  

How can the voting public gauge which polls are more accurate?

Moore: The voting public will have difficulty gauging poll accuracy–pollsters have difficulty gauging poll accuracy! But we can tell you what the voting public should NOT do: Choose to selectively believe the poll results that favor their political preferences. If a poll is inaccurate, it is less likely to be due to intentional bias by pollsters, and more likely due to the inherent uncertainty in polling.  

You looked at polls from the 2008, 2012, and 2016 general elections, as well as primaries in 2008, 2012, and 2016. Did you find any evidence that polls accuracy has grown less accurate over time?

Kotak: No, we did not see any statistically significant difference in individual poll accuracy over the various election years. When breaking out our data by year, each election cycle showed the same trend towards 60% accuracy a week before an election, with no significant variation from one year to another.

Do your findings apply to aggregated polls, such as those collected by FiveThirtyEight? Should we be more confident in those averages?

Moore: No, and this is an important point. Poll aggregators like FiveThirtyEight try to adjust for the unreliability in individual polls. 

Kotak: Often, these aggregators use custom methodology to account for individual polling inaccuracies. Our research suggests that there is indeed a need for such adjustments, but we did not review their methodologies to opine whether they are more or less reliable. 

Given the uncertainty in this year’s election, do you expect the polls to be even less accurate than usual? 

Moore: No, we have little reason to expect the problem to be getting worse. Polls have always been flawed. Don’t listen to the vapid “horse race” coverage of candidates’ standing in the polls. Instead, pay attention to the candidates’ stances on the issues and plans for what they will do in office.

Video Transcript  

Don Moore: I’m Don Moore. I’m a professor here at the Haas School of Business.

Aditya Kotak: I’m Aditya Kotak. I’m a Cal Class of 2020 alum in statistics.

Don: You are gonna see a lot of results from polls—political polls—collected between now and the election in November. We were interested in the accuracy of polling results. And so we did this study back in 2020.

Aditya: The question we sought to ask was: How often is the true election result falling within the 90%, 95% confidence interval that these polls usually publish when they include a margin of error. So what we did is we looked through over 6,000 different polls that were published in the past several election cycles and did an analysis to see how many times that the polls’ margin of error actually included the final election outcome.

And what we found was that just in the weeks prior to an election, a 95% confidence interval really only captured the true election outcome 60% of the time.

Don: For a poll to be accurate, its 95% confidence interval should include the truth 95% of the time.  That confidence interval reflects the uncertainty around the poll’s results that come from sampling just a subset of the larger voting population.

Now, our results suggest that in order to capture the actual election result 95% of the time, a poll taken a week before the election would have to double its margin of error.

So when you see a poll result that indicates it’s accurate to plus or minus 3 percentage points, which is standard for a poll taken with approximately 800 likely voters, you would need to grow that for a poll taken the week before the election to at least 6 percentage points above or below the forecast result.

And the further you go ahead of the election, the wider you’d have to make that confidence interval such that it includes the actual election result 95% of the time.

Aditya: So if you’re looking at a polling and asking yourself how confident should you be? Well, as we know a week is an eternity in politics and more often than not, you should stay skeptical when looking at those poll results.