It's Forbes magazine, so the focus is on wealth. But what is there to disagree with in their methodology for calculating influence? Reach, power and wealth. I have two questions. Are we normalizing a masculine model of power, therefore downplaying areas in which women have power? (Or ought to be seen as powerful.) And would that not create an apples vs oranges scenario? Perhaps the interest is in exploring the areas in which women are most successful compared to men and vice versa and watching the shifting demographics. The feminization and subsequent remaking of certain industries, or occupations within them. These lists can only go so far.
Women are still more powerful in entertainment and politics than business or technology. Although, arguably a few women have always had strong political influence, so what is changing? These days a women is not always politically powerful through family and marital alliances.