191–200 of 252 posts
I'm thinking of a Jadzia Dax in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine. Jadzia is among the lucky few among her race, the Trill, implanted with a "symbiote" carrying the memories of all of its previous hosts. Carrying a symbiote is an unrealized dream for many Trill who wash out of the rigorous application and training process and are told they're incompatible. In one episode, one such disgruntled fellow tries to steal Jadzia's.…
> Plenty of middle-managers could do as well as the average CEO. I’ve worked with several CEOs and countless senior executives, both at very large companies and small, who had varying degrees of competency. I don’t think this is generally true. Being successful at that job entails a specialized skill set that is rarely evident in middle management. What you are “managing” at the most senior levels of large organizati…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s nothing you can do because the companies are dictatorships or oligarchies at best, not democracies or meritocracies. If he’s the founder presumably he had enough ownership in the company to force the company to keep him in that position. Changing that up requires a radical redesign of how companies are legally constrained in the US or a cultural change that causes an expectation of worker ownership so that th…
Employee-owned companies aren't entirely unheard-of in the US. Legally, they're structured as companies where employees own more than 50% of its shares via an ESOP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employee_stock_ownership
ESOPs were invented as a way for owners to cash out. Not really an altruistic thing that works well imho.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That whole setup could use some free market love.
This is going to start happening to an extent now that there actually is a free market, after...whatever that last decade was.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is going to start happening to an extent now that there actually is a free market, after...whatever that last decade was.
Please, excuse me. But, what?! I honestly cannot make out what you're trying to reference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many corporate boards have an "executive chairman" which means the CEO is also the Chairman of the Board. Perhaps even more importantly a substantial number of board members are executives from other companies, meaning CEOs sit on each others boards and wash each others' backs.
I have to wonder if it should be considered a legal conflict of interest for a CEO to sit on the board at all, forget being chairman. The powerful really love rigging stuff in their favor huh
I'm a bit surprised this article only mentions replacing the CEO. It takes for granted that companies are top-down organisations
Some companies perform well without even a CEO, as featured in _Capitalism: A Love Story_ from Michael Moore, and several press cases, like a national teabag brand close to my place.
Also, in every company that I saw, improvements were made by applying ideas from the lowest levels of management (like automating boring tasks), and neither HR nor CEO level.
I don't get why we need CEOs, if it's not to tweet and to have friends to get contracts.
Why won't investors experiences with other models of management, when the CEO is underperforming ?
When is the particular CEO underperforming, and when is the model underperforming ?
The company board’s sole job is to hire and fire the CEO when appropriate: https://reactionwheel.net/2021/11/your-boards-of-directors-i... However, having been on a team that prepares board materials and also having presented to a company board, I can tell you that the information they receive is extremely carefully managed in a way that allows responsibility to seem to flow downwards rather than upwards. What you se…
Are board members rewarded for digging in beyond what's provided to them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is usually resolved by requiring a minimum ownership stake for each prospective board member, and to make sure it represents a significant fraction of their total net worth. To guarantee that the board would lose their shirts if they make decisions completely opposite to reality, thus motivating a more thorough investigation of what they see and hear.
I think that's the exception, not the rule. Many large public companies have many board members with only trivial ownership stakes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
corporations are not democratic institutions
In essence, they are. Shareholders elect board members who hire for important roles. This is similar to democratic governments. In no democracy will voters elect the Minister of Energy or Transport or Defense or Labor or the foreign secretary. This is chosen by the elected officials.
shareholders don't have all equal vote. Employees have no vote. Its closer to aristocracy if anything