« Comparing Federer and Agassi | Main | Hiding the message with bar charts »



For the first question, it seems that large organizations rate the attributes on a different scale. I wonder what the chart would look like if you normalized.


As you said, it is clear that the large organizations tend to give higher ratings for all categories so normalizing can help.
This actually raises another troubling issue, concerning how they decided which categories are "most important", "important" and "not so important". In the top chart, this appears to be solely determined by ranking from the large businesses. Was that the rule they used or was it a coincidence, it's hard to tell.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


Link to Principal Analytics Prep

See our curriculum, instructors. Apply.
Marketing analytics and data visualization expert. Author and Speaker. Currently at Columbia. See my full bio.

Book Blog

Link to junkcharts

Graphics design by Amanda Lee

The Read

Good Books

Keep in Touch

follow me on Twitter