Congo vs Thailand: Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score

Congo
0
in 2018
Thailand
0
in 2018
Congo rank
150th
Thailand rank
150th

Competitiveness of Executive Recruitment Score over time

  • Congo
  • Thailand
0123180019092018

How they compare

Congo currently reports 0 against 0 in Thailand, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 5 times across 55 shared years of data; in 1960 it was Congo ahead.

Congo ranks 150th and Thailand ranks 150th of 166 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Congo averaged higher in 1 and Thailand in 5.

Head to head by decade

Decade Congo Thailand Difference Ahead
1960s 1.33 0.3333 1 Congo
1970s 1 1.62 0.625 Thailand
1980s 1 2.2 1.2 Thailand
1990s 1.78 3 1.22 Thailand
2000s 0 2.4 2.4 Thailand
2010s 0 1.22 1.22 Thailand

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher competitiveness of executive recruitment score, Congo or Thailand?
Congo, at 0 against 0 in Thailand as of 2018.
What is the difference in competitiveness of executive recruitment score between Congo and Thailand?
0, with Congo ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Congo and Thailand?
55 years are reported by both, from 1960 to 2018.
How do Congo and Thailand rank globally for competitiveness of executive recruitment score?
Congo ranks 150th and Thailand ranks 150th 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).