Across the country, jockeys and track officials are poised for Saturday’s biggest race of the year, the Grand National. The horses trot out of the gates, pulling single-seat chariots behind them and carrying riders in garish green and bright pink silks. The clip-clop of their hooves rises to a cacophony. The announcer calls them out, and they’re off.
For most of human history, horse races were more than just a spectator sport. They were a test of skill and strategy. The earliest records of organized horse racing date back to the chariot races of ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome. Throughout the centuries, the sport continued to evolve, with different cultures creating their own variants of equestrian competition. Today, the classic succession “horse race,” in which a company chooses its next CEO through an overt contest between several recognized candidates within a set time frame, is widely used and lauded by many executives and governance observers. The approach has been successful in identifying talented leaders for global giants including General Electric, Procter & Gamble and GlaxoSmithKline. But it’s not without its critics. Some executives and governance observers worry that the horse race can damage the culture of a company, lead to an overly narrow leadership pipeline and undermine an organization’s ability to innovate and adapt to change.
While some horse-racing fans point to economic benefits from the industry, others have serious concerns about animal welfare. The number of race horses who die each year at tracks and training facilities has become a major issue for many observers, especially following the 2008 collapse of Eight Belles in the Kentucky Derby. According to the website Horseracing Wrongs, at least 10,311 thoroughbreds have been killed since 2014 alone.
Some observers also raise questions about the financial health of the horse-racing industry, which relies on private investment and betting to support its workers. These employees—trainers, jockeys, veterinarians and other support staff—work in a labor market where keeping above the poverty line is challenging and a single wrong move can put them out of work.
When journalists cover elections with a focus on who is in the lead—known as horse race coverage—voters, third-party candidates and the news industry itself suffer, a growing body of research shows. This updated collection of research explores the effects of horse-race coverage, as well as recent studies on probabilistic forecasting and TV news coverage. It also looks at how new data-driven methods for predicting the outcomes of elections can help improve journalism.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.