Podcasts about comparability

Or on the types of prioritization, their strengths, pitfalls, and how EA should balance them The cause prioritization landscape in EA is changing. Prominent groups have shut down, others have been founded, and everyone is trying to figure out how to prepare for AI. This is the first in a series of posts examining the state of cause prioritization and proposing strategies for moving forward. Executive Summary Performing prioritization work has been one of the main tasks, and arguably achievements, of EA. We highlight three types of prioritization: Cause Prioritization, Within-Cause (Intervention) Prioritization, and Cross-Cause (Intervention) Prioritization. We ask how much of EA prioritization work falls in each of these categories: Our estimates suggest that, for the organizations we investigated, the current split is 89% within-cause work, 2% cross-cause, and 9% cause prioritization. We then explore strengths and potential pitfalls of each level: Cause [...] ---Outline:(00:37) Executive Summary(03:09) Introduction: Why prioritize? Have we got it right?(05:18) The types of prioritization(06:54) A snapshot of EA(16:45) The Types of Prioritization Evaluated(16:57) Cause Prioritization(20:56) Within-Cause Prioritization(25:12) Cross-Cause Prioritization(30:07) Summary Table(30:53) What factors should push us towards one or another?(37:27) Possible Next Steps(39:44) Conclusion(40:58) Acknowledgements(41:01) en-US-AvaMultilingualNeural__ Modern geometric logo design with text RETHINK PRIORITIES(41:55) Appendix: Strengths and Pitfalls of Each Type(42:07) Within-Cause Prioritization Strengths(42:12) Decision-Making Support(42:37) Comparability of Outputs(44:18) Disciplinarity Advantages(45:45) Responsiveness to Evidence(46:48) Movement Building(48:06) Within-Cause Prioritization Weaknesses and Potential Pitfalls(48:12) Responsiveness to Evidence(50:54) Decision-Making Support(52:45) Cross-Cause Prioritization Strengths:(53:06) Decision-Making Support(54:49) Responsiveness to Evidence(56:08) Movement Building(56:22) Comparability of Outputs(56:45) Decision-Making Support(57:14) Cross-Cause Prioritization Weaknesses and Potential Pitfalls(57:20) Comparability of Outputs(58:01) Disciplinarity Advantages(58:41) Movement Building(59:09) Decision-Making Support(01:00:27) Cause Prioritization Strengths(01:00:32) Decision-Making Support(01:02:01) Responsiveness to Evidence(01:02:52) Movement Building(01:03:28) Cause Prioritization Weaknesses and Potential Pitfalls(01:04:28) Decision-Making Support(01:06:08) Responsiveness to EvidenceThe original text contained 23 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. --- First published: April 16th, 2025 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/ZPdZv8sHuYndD8xhJ/doing-prioritization-better-2 --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:

COMPARISON of RELATIONSHIP | 1.5-6For to which of the angels did God ever say…Psalm 2.72 Samuel 7.14Psalm 97.7 (or Deut 32.43)COMPARISON of ROLE | 1.7-12Of the angels he says…Psalm 104.4But of the Son he says…Psalm 45.6-7Psalm 102.25-27COMPARISON of RANK | 1.13-14And to which of the angels has he ever said…Psalm 110.1

  Can you prove that you are the one someone should hire or buy from?   There is certain content that will prove you're the one to hire. You have the opportunity to craft messages in your copy and content that will prove you're the one to hire or buy from. When you focus on these 5 claims in your content, people will understand you are the one to work with. Telling stories is part of the content that will differentiate you so that your soulmate clients understand why you are the one to work with. If you aren't resonating with them, you won't prove that you are the one they should hire.   The 5 Claims you need in your content to connect with your soulmate client Convenience – prove that working with you is convenient and fast, that you are easy to work with and compatible with them. Comparability – measuring yourself up against other solutions or competitors. Commitment – dedicated to them, employees, or a cause. Connection – you know your customers and they know you will be there for them. Confidence – you want customers to know that you deliver what you say you will deliver.   Examples of the 5 claims to include in your content to prove you're the one to hire   Claims come in the form of mottos, taglines, social media posts, email copy, and website copy. Referring to these claims will help you create content that will prove you're the one to hire.   Read the full show notes and access all links.    Website for Melanie Deziel Prove It: Exactly How Modern Marketers Earn Trust by Melanie Deziel   Learn more about and apply for The Success Without Social Mastermind Business Growth Program.   Additional Resources   Why you need a pre-launch copy strategy and how to create it – Episode 158   A personal brand is many things, but differentiation is key – Episode 79   You need "time" to create a brand story - Episode 225   Download more free resources to grow your business without an emphasis on social media.

Supreme Court to Decide Comparability Test for Citizen Suits Under Clean Water Act; Chesapeake Bay Commission Issues 2022 Annual Report; Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection Publishes Phase 3 Watershed Implementation Program 2022 Progress Report Summary.        Hosted by Al Jones, Research Assistant—With Brook Duer, Staff Attorney—Produced & Written by Al Jones Penn State Center for Agricultural and Shale Law https://aglaw.psu.edu/ Follow us on Twitter: @AgShaleLaw Like us on Facebook: Penn State Center for Agricultural and Shale Law This material is based upon work supported by the National Agricultural Library, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Can we trust wellbeing surveys? A pilot study of comparability, linearity, and neutrality, published by Conrad S on March 17, 2023 on The Effective Altruism Forum. Note: This post only contains Sections 1 and 2 of the report. For the full detail of our survey and pilot results, please see the full report on our website. Summary Subjective wellbeing (SWB) data, such as answers to life satisfaction questions, are important for decision-making by philanthropists and governments. Such data are currently used with two important assumptions: Reports are comparable between persons (e.g., my 6/10 means the same as your 6/10) Reports are linear in the underlying feelings (e.g., going from 4/10 to 5/10 represents the same size change as going from 8/10 to 9/10). Fortunately, these two assumptions are sufficient for analyses that only involve the quality of people's lives. However, if we want to perform analyses that involve trade-offs between improving quality and quantity of life, we also need knowledge of the neutral point, the point on a wellbeing scale that is equivalent to non-existence. Unfortunately, evidence on all three questions is critically scarce. We propose to collect additional surveys to fill this gap. Our aim with this report is two-fold. First, we give an outline of the questions we plan to field and the underlying reasoning that led to them. Second, we present results from an initial pilot study (n = 128): Unfortunately, this small sample size does not allow us to provide clear estimates of the comparability of wellbeing reports. However, across several question modalities, we do find tentative evidence in favour of approximate linearity. With respect to neutrality, we assess at what point on a 0-10 scale respondents say that they are 'neither satisfied nor dissatisfied' (mean response is 5.3/10). We also probe at what point on a life satisfaction scale respondents report to be indifferent between being alive and being dead (mean response is 1.3/10). Implications and limitations of these findings concerning neutrality are discussed in Section 6.2. In general, the findings from our pilot study should only be seen as being indicative of the general feasibility of this project. They do not provide definitive answers. In the hopes of fielding an improved version of our survey with a much larger sample and a pre-registered analysis plan, we welcome feedback and suggestions on our current survey design. Here are some key questions that we hope to receive feedback on: Are there missing questions that could be included in this survey (or an additional survey) that would inform important topics in SWB research? Are there any questions or proposed analyses you find redundant? Do you see any critical flaws in the analyses we propose? Are there additional analyses we should be considering? Would these data and analyses actually reassure you about the comparability, linearity, and neutrality of subjective wellbeing data? If not, what sorts of data and analyses would reassure you? What are some good places for us to look for funding for this research? Of course, any other feedback that goes beyond these questions is welcome, too. Feedback can be sent to casparkaiser@gmail.com or to samuel@happierlivesinstitute.org. The report proceeds as follows: In Section 1, we describe the challenges for the use of self-reported subjective wellbeing data, focusing on the issues of comparability, linearity, and neutrality. We highlight the implications of these three assumptions for decision-making about effective interventions. In Section 2, we describe the general methodology of the survey. For the following sections, see the full report on our website. In Section 3, we discuss responses to the core life satisfaction question. In Sections 4, 5, and 6, we describe how we will assess co...

Comparability studies are a significant issue for those working in biotherapeutics development, as undetected product changes are considered high risk. Listen as Kevin Hennegan, Lisa Erickson and Sarah Roemer take us through several considerations when Playing the Comparability Game in Biotherapeutics Development.  

This episode Mexican person of partner compatibility and respect to the price of love. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/romantictruth/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/romantictruth/support

Hello lovely humans, todays show I'm sharing the signs that you are a compatible match with your partner or for future partner ! Tell me your thoughts ? Whilst chemistry is a must being compatible predicts the success of the relationship ! Let me know how you find this podcast and tell me what you would like me to discuss on here ! Come work with me 1.1 on an epic healing journey do you never opt in to toxic again DM @sallykalan IG

本期节目的嘉宾是我们的朋友吴桑。吴桑是美国卡内基梅隆大学Tepper商学院会计学博士候选人，研究方向是会计信息结构和经济激励。会计常常被看作是一种“实用”的技术，从审计到税收等很多情境下都需要会计学知识和职业人才帮助公司、个人完成投资等操作。但在实用之外，会计学为什么也是一门被教授、研究的学科呢？博士阶段的会计学研究和本科阶段的教育有什么不同？上市公司在准备财务报表时应该遵循哪些准则？这些准则又会如何影响公司、投资者的决策？在理解会计准则的作用之后，我们如何运用这些知识来帮助我们更好地进行个人投资？ 从瑞幸咖啡的财务造假讲起，吴桑和我们在这期节目中聊到了会计准则、服务对象、会计学的目的等话题。本期嘉宾吴桑内容提要+精彩预告00:35 嘉宾介绍01:00 什么是财报？04:00 会计学包含什么？财务会计：“公司希望利润越高越好”税务会计：“公司希望利润越低越好“管理会计：“公司希望信息越准确越好“05:50 以财务会计为例，会计学如何通过设计会计准则而服务于投资者？“投资者在进行投资决策时需要在不同的公司之间进行比较，如果每个公司采用不同的会计方法，公司之间就很难比较”“会计规则降低了投资者处理信息的成本”17:00 如此“实用”的会计学是一个学科吗？会计学领域研究什么？“本科教育培养学生运用规则准备会计信息，不是一个学科““博士阶段研究：拥有怎样特质的会计信息会引导投资者做出怎样的决定，又会怎样影响资源、资本的社会分配；拥有怎样特质的会计信息会影响公司是否主动披露这些信息”21:00 税务会计如何处理公司收益和政府税收的潜在矛盾？“经济学研究如何有效地配置资源；会计学研究在信息不对称的情况下，如何设计这些信息可以辅助配置资源的过程”“政府并不是希望税收越高越好”“会计学研究如何规范会计信息的准备过程，从而尽量减少信息不对称，帮助大家做更好的决定”27:30 理想世界下的完美信息对称为什么不存在？“没有一种衡量和传播信息的方式是完美的”30:00 会计准则的各个要素之间有什么需要权衡取舍的部分？Relevance-reliability tradeoff（相关性-可靠性权衡）Comparability tradeoff（可比性权衡）37:50 进入股市之前应该考察什么？“股票价格取决于公司本身的价值，和其他投资者对于公司价值的判断”“重要的是别人认为这个公司的价值高还是低”44:00 会计学在股票市场中扮演什么角色？——信息结构可以影响共识偶像行业的例子49:50 投资经验小分享“长期投资被舆论影响的程度较小”“短期投资卖出价格更多地取决于社会舆论”“需要知道公司财务报表的数字说明了什么”54:00 学习会计学如何影响了吴桑的生活？56:20 总结 参考资料互联网与娱乐怪盗团. (2020年04月06日). “瑞幸咖啡到底是怎么做假账的？——基于财报的分析.” 新浪财经-自媒体综合. 检索自https://finance.sina.com.cn/stock/stockzmt/2020-04-06/doc-iimxyqwa5255176.shtmlCorona, Carlos and Wu, Sang, "Heterogeneous Interpretations of Public Disclosure, Price Efficiency, and Keynesian Beauty Contests" (November 27, 2019). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3388309 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3388309Demski, J. S. (2007). Is accounting an academic discipline? Accounting horizons, 21(2), 153-157.Dye, Ronald A., and Sri S. Sridhar. "Reliability‐relevance trade‐offs and the efficiency of aggregation." Journal of Accounting Research 42.1 (2004): 51-88.Financial Accounting Standards Board. (Septermber 2010). “Conceptual Framework for Financial Reporting.” Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts No. 8. Retrieved from https://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/Document_C/DocumentPage?cid=1176157498129&acceptedDisclaimer=trueWu, Sang and Xue, Wenjie, "Optimal Comparability, Relative Accounting Performance, and Real Effects" (August 2, 2019). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3409454 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3409454 片头片尾音乐《Sunrise at Seaside》by 王乾 封面图片Portrait of Luca Pacioli (c. 1495–1500). Attributed to Jacopo de' Barbari. Retrieved from http://www.ritrattopacioli.it/.Luca Pacioli（1445–1517）开创了现在通用的复式记账法，被认为是会计学之父. -----------双重意识是一档「让我们认识到那些我们以为此时此刻与我们生活需求没有关联的东西其实和我们紧密相关」的播客节目。你可以在苹果播客, 喜马拉雅，网易云音乐，荔枝fm，小宇宙APP和Spotify搜索"双重意识DoubleConsciousness"找到我们，关注我们并收听我们的节目， 给我们留言、提供反馈意见。希望加入听友群的朋友可以关注公众号，后台回复“听友群”扫描二维码来和我们一起聊天。

In this TP Talks Special Edition podcast, Kartikeya Singh (Transfer Pricing Partner, PwC US), Marta Milewska (Transfer Pricing Partner, PwC Mexico), and Paul Tang (Transfer Pricing Partner, PwC China) discuss transfer pricing benchmarking and data limitations impacting comparability, delineating atypical conditions, and adjustments or refinements that may be considered to improve comparability in light of the current economic climate.Support the show (https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/tax/transfer-pricing.html)

Topics Discussed: • Of God(s) in Israel • Elyon and Yahweh in Deuteronomy • God(s) Prior to the Creation of the Heavens and Earth • Psalm 82 and the Council of God(s) • The Denial of Comparability to Other Gods • Creational Monotheism and God(s) Mark Heiser's "God's of the Bible:" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cS50l31lyI

Day 22-10 Questions to Better Operationalized Compliance I conclude this month’s series inspired by an article in the Harvard Business Review, entitled “Does Management Really Work?” by Nicholas Brown, Raffaella Sadun and John Van Reenen. I found the article very useful because it gave succinct advice about what a business can do to improve its management practices and determined that this advice can be applicable to a compliance program. Based upon this article I have developed 10 questions which you might want to put use as a starting point for operationalizing your compliance initiatives going forward. I would challenge you to think about some of the answers to these questions in the context of your compliance program. Interconnectedness of Targets - How are compliance goals cascaded down to individual workers? Everyone recognizes the importance of ‘tone-at-the-top’ as it is enshrined in every description of a best practices compliance program. However, operationalizing compliance means moving towards an appropriate tone in the middle and at the bottom. As stated in the Department of Justice (DOJ) Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs (Evaluation), under Prong 1, “How have senior leaders, through their words and actions, encouraged or discouraged the type of misconduct in question? What concrete actions have they taken to demonstrate leadership in the company’s compliance and remediation efforts? How does the company monitor its senior leadership’s behavior? How has senior leadership modelled proper behavior to subordinates?” Clarity and Comparability of Goals - Does anyone complain that your compliance targets are too complex? Certainly the initial role out of a compliance program can be quite a large undertaking. Perhaps another approach might be to focus on high risk areas and remediate them by rolling out initiatives to manage those risks first and then move to other areas. Many companies have reviewed and remedied the third party sales side of their business but are only now looking at the Supply Chain or Procurement side of the equation. If you work on one such problem at a time, it can help move the overall process forward in a more orderly fashion. Consequence Management - How do you deal with repeated compliance failures in a specific business segment or compliance program area? This is certainly one question that you would want to consider carefully. Do you have problems with one business unit or one geographic area from the compliance perspective? Are gifts in China, for example, an ongoing issue for your company? What about travel and entertainment? Consider this carefully as the DOJ asks the following about accountability in the Evaluation, “What disciplinary actions did the company take in response to the misconduct and when did they occur? Were managers held accountable for misconduct that occurred under their supervision? Did the company’s response consider disciplinary actions for supervisors’ failure in oversight? What is the company’s record (e.g., number and types of disciplinary actions) on employee discipline relating to the type(s) of conduct at issue?” Instilling a Mind-Set - How does your company show that attracting and developing talent who will engage in ethical business conduct is a top priority? This is a key part of operationalizing your compliance program and one where your Human Resources (HR) Department should take the lead. If top management will make a commitment to this, you should work to create the appropriate mind-set of doing business the right way throughout your organization. Removing Poor Performers - How long is compliance underperforming tolerated? The DOJ asks in the Evaluation, “Has the company ever terminated or otherwise disciplined anyone (reduced or eliminated bonuses, issued a warning letter, etc.) for the type of misconduct at issue?” I think that many companies would clearly say that they will discipline, up to and including discharge, any employee who engages in practices that violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). But this question drills deeper and forces a more rigorous analysis on not just FCPA failures by employees but poor ethical choices which may be less than full FCPA violations. Unique Employee Value Proposition - What makes it distinctive to work at your company? What is the culture of your organization? Is it to do business ethically or simply make your numbers no matter how unrealistic they are aka Wells Fargo? More pointedly, how can your compliance challenges be turned into business leadership opportunities? Ethisphere annually shows that its top list of the Most Ethical Companies out performs the Standard & Poor (S&P) 500. If you more fully operationalize your compliance program into your company, it could well make your business not only more efficient but at the end of the day, more profitable. Continuous Improvement - How do compliance programs that are not working typically get exposed and remediated? There is a difference between auditing and monitoring. Monitoring is a commitment to reviewing and detecting compliance programs in real time and then reacting quickly to remediate them. A primary goal of monitoring is to identify and address gaps in your program on a regular and consistent basis. Auditing is a more limited review that targets a specific business component, region or market sector during a particular timeframe in order to uncover and/or evaluate certain risks, particularly as seen in financial records. A robust program should include separate functions for auditing and monitoring. While unique in protocol, the two functions are related and can operate in tandem. Monitoring activities can sometimes lead to audits. For example, if you notice a trend of suspicious payments in recent monitoring reports from a country in the Far East, it may be time to conduct an audit of those operations to further investigate the issue. Performance Tracking - What key compliance indicators do you use for compliance tracking? What metrics have you developed around the operationalization of compliance. A good starting point can be with your hotline or helpline. What can you determine from the calls or reports submitted through these systems? What if you have not had any reports for several years, what should that be telling you about your communication to your employee base? Or does it mean that people have not been properly and effectively trained that a hotline or helpline exists and is available for their use or, more ominously, are afraid to make any reports for fear of retaliation or even losing their jobs? This is certainly something you should consider, whichever way the metrics are going for your company. Root Cause - For a given compliance problem, how do you identify the root cause? The DOJ asked in Root Cause Analysis – “What is the company’s root cause analysis of the misconduct at issue? What systemic issues were identified? Who in the company was involved in making the analysis?”Clearly the reason is that if you do not know what the cause of a problem is, you cannot successfully work towards remedying that problem. This does not simply mean firing any persons involved in a potential FCPA violation. You need to dig down and found out what allowed this issue to arise. I once heard that the difference between Japanese and American post-incident investigations is that in the US there is an attempt to assess blame, conversely in Japan there is an attempt to find a solution to the problem. This is the approach that I believe compliance practitioners should take, to try and find a solution by determining the root cause of a compliance failure. Retaining - What are you doing to retain your top employees from the compliance perspective? This is not a question that is typically asked in the compliance department, however it fully encapsulates the entire concept of operationalization. Have you considered what your company is doing to retain, promote and take to senior management those employees who do business in an ethical manner and in compliance with your company Code of Conduct? I found the article to be very useful when applied to the compliance practitioner by not only using the triumvirate of targets, incentives and monitoring as a management practices but also the questions that the authors posed in the context of your company’s own compliance program. Compliance practitioners continually face the challenge of keeping up with the ever-evolving compliance best practices with little or no budget increase. By asking yourself and of your compliance program these questions you may create a road map to more fully operationalize your compliance regime. Three Key Takeaways What are the unique compliance targets you have set and how interconnected are they to your business unit goals? Use a root cause analysis to determine why compliance initiatives are not successful. Retraining employees in compliance is an under-utilized tool. This month’s series is sponsored by Advanced Compliance Solutions and its new service offering the “Compliance Alliance” which is a three-step program that will provide you and your team a background into compliance and the FCPA so you can consider how your product or service fits into the needs of a compliance officer. It includes a FCPA and compliance boot camp, sponsorship of a one-month podcast series, and in-person training. Each section builds on the other and provides your customer service and sales teams with the knowledge they need to have intelligent conversations with compliance officers and decision makers. When the program is complete, your teams will be armed with the knowledge they need to sell and service every new client. Interested parties should contact Tom Fox. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This 7-part series shares biblical principles to create healthy relationships modeled after the Trinity. In Part 3, Pastor Miles reviews the Bibles' first marital relationship, to explain that our marital relationships are to reveal and reflect God's character.

The Alliance for Excellent Education and the Global Learning Network Invite You to Participate in a Webinar on The OECD Test for Schools: Global Comparability and School and District Improvement in the United States Panelists Ashley Berner, Deputy Director, Johns Hopkins Institute for Education Policy Clem Ukaoma, Upper School Principal, University Academy Public Charter School […]

VCE Accounting