makes sense given their employee to revenue ratio for Salesforce. They had 73,000 employees with just ~31B/year of revenue. That’s just 424k of revenue per employee. Such a ratio only makes sense with high growth rates.
Am I the only one who thinks $424k/employee is quite a lot? May be a too european perspective?
Here is a list of (American?) companies that make the most profit per employee. You can also see the list in terms of revenue per employee: https://tipalti.com/profit-per-employee/
At the top of the list is Air Lease, generating more than $4m profit per employee.
Co-heads is always a subtext for executive disfunction. I don't think I've ever heard of it working out long term at any level from division co-head to co-CEO. It's also fascinating the opposite direction is also allowed to persist - the guy who is CEO of 4 companies at once. As a lowly high income IC, I am prohibited from almost any outside business activity and in some cases forced to divest when joining a new firm…
> Co-heads is always a subtext for executive disfunction. I don't think I've ever heard of it working out long term at any level from division co-head to co-CEO Don’t VC’s generally prefer that a startup has co-founders? Having such a team mate fosters better decisions, acts as cheerleader when one person is feeling down, etc. I don’t see a material difference between that and having a co-CEO setup… What do you think…
VC also strongly suggests that it is made clear one person is the CEO, so when push comes shove, some one can make a decision and things can be resolved.
I remembered reading it is better to have 51/49 rather than 50/50 equity for that reason. Though to be honest I am not sure if I read that in the “good advices you should follow” or the “shitty toxic advices you should avoid”. Hard to differentiate sometimes.
Co-heads is always a subtext for executive disfunction. I don't think I've ever heard of it working out long term at any level from division co-head to co-CEO. It's also fascinating the opposite direction is also allowed to persist - the guy who is CEO of 4 companies at once. As a lowly high income IC, I am prohibited from almost any outside business activity and in some cases forced to divest when joining a new firm…
> Co-heads is always a subtext for executive disfunction. I don't think I've ever heard of it working out long term at any level from division co-head to co-CEO Don’t VC’s generally prefer that a startup has co-founders? Having such a team mate fosters better decisions, acts as cheerleader when one person is feeling down, etc. I don’t see a material difference between that and having a co-CEO setup… What do you think…
Even with co-founders, one of you is still the CEO.
You need an executive function to set direction and unblock stupid territory squabbles. Someone whose decisions are final. If you have two actual CEOs, you don’t have that.
There are over two jobs open for every layoff. People haven’t realized how crazy the labor market is about to get with a collapsing workforce population over the next many decades.
We haven’t been preparing for the massive retirement of the boomers. It’s tough in many cases where they spend their careers keeping younger people out of leadership.
Then they complain to national papers that workers aren’t hustling enough to get into leadership.
There will be volatility as a new generation takes over at companies. Each generation is larger and more educated than the last so demand will keep up.
But I just saw this commercial on TV where Mathew McSomethingOrOther led legions of happy looking people through the streets of a city pledging to change how the world works all because of Salesforce.com . It looked like an expensive commercial. I know I'd sign up if I could. Is this the first step? How exciting.
There are over two jobs open for every layoff. People haven’t realized how crazy the labor market is about to get with a collapsing workforce population over the next many decades.
There are, but the people aren't necessarily where the jobs are. I've got positions in Huntsville, AL that aren't remote-capable, and we cannot get people to even apply.