Azerbaijan vs Kuwait: Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score

Azerbaijan
1
in 2018
Kuwait
1
in 2018
Azerbaijan rank
117th
Kuwait rank
117th

Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score over time

  • Azerbaijan
  • Kuwait
00.511.52181319152018

How they compare

Azerbaijan currently reports 1 against 1 in Kuwait, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 55 shared years of data; in 1963 it was Kuwait ahead.

Azerbaijan ranks 117th and Kuwait ranks 117th of 166 countries.

Azerbaijan has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Azerbaijan Kuwait Difference Ahead
1960s 1 1 0 β€”
1970s 1 1 0 β€”
1980s 1 1 0 β€”
1990s 1.11 1 0.1111 Azerbaijan
2000s 1 1 0 β€”
2010s 1 1 0 β€”

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher competitiveness of executive recruitment score, Azerbaijan or Kuwait?
Azerbaijan, at 1 against 1 in Kuwait as of 2018.
What is the difference in competitiveness of executive recruitment score between Azerbaijan and Kuwait?
0, with Azerbaijan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Azerbaijan and Kuwait?
55 years are reported by both, from 1963 to 2018.
How do Azerbaijan and Kuwait rank globally for competitiveness of executive recruitment score?
Azerbaijan ranks 117th and Kuwait ranks 117th of 166 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score
Source
Polity 5 (2020) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
167 places, 17,813 data points, 1789–2020
Last refreshed

Indicates the extent to which executive recruitment is competitive. It ranges from executive power being seized (score of 0), over the executive being selected by elites (score of 1), and dual selection-election or transitional arrangements (score of 2), to the executive being elected (score of 4).