Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs
businessinsider.com
Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs
1–10 of 386 posts
Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs
#2My company did a big round of layoffs and it was pretty revealing that not a single director or above were laid off. Despite reduced headcount, the org chart got DEEPER in some cases. For all the talk of bloat in the tech world, nobody wants to point fingers at directors who have little to do but schedule very expensive meetings with the directors under them.
Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs
#3This is based upon the assumption that layoffs are a failure rather than a feature which, while I find it distasteful using people's livelihoods in such a way, doesn't actually seem to be the reckoning for a lot of people. When times are good why wouldn't you hire to maximize profits and then cut people loose when times are getting bad? If you can ignore the human factor it makes sense.
Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs
#4[flagged]
Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs
#5Yes but also no.
They should be held responsible for the results of their actions.
But current firings might not be the result of their actions.
So putting boni (which often are a major part of their sallery) in a trust to be payed out years later and which act similar to a security deposit would be a rough idea for a direction this can take.
But I think the main problem are not CEOs but how the current form of the stock/investment marked is _extremely_ hotly to long term sustainable company management. Stock holders are not seldom the main drive for bad CEO decisions due to a combination of which CEO and how they pressure the CEO (or what they tolerate). It not rare to see major stock holders push knowingly for long term devastating decisions because they short term yield high dividends and stock spikes and when things come crashing down they don't hold the stock anymore (quasi/oversimplified, to avoid consequences they might use all kinds of tricks to make it look different).
Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs
#6[flagged]
This is an opinion piece.
Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs
#7This is based upon the assumption that layoffs are a failure rather than a feature which, while I find it distasteful using people's livelihoods in such a way, doesn't actually seem to be the reckoning for a lot of people. When times are good why wouldn't you hire to maximize profits and then cut people loose when times are getting bad? If you can ignore the human factor it makes sense.
It's not even clear to me that tech employees (as a whole) would be better off if such an overall system were in place for the last decade. Instead of (highly-visible) layoffs now, you'd have seen substantially less hiring across the last decade (invisibly) and probably much lower market-clearing compensation levels as a result.
You can't have the benefits of go-go-gang-busters hiring sprees without sometimes having layoffs, IMO.
Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs
#8> Any executive who participates in decision-making that leads to hundreds or thousands of people losing their jobs should be the one leading them out the door
But executives that hire hundreds or thousands, regardless of if those jobs were ever needed in the first place deserve praise? Anyone making such an argument is stupid and deserves to be ridiculed, shamed, and insulted for defending it.
Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs
#9The US is not a command economy and given the open nature of hiring and firing (few encumbrances) results in firms being able to hire quickly and fire quickly. It allows for a more dynamic economy. Obviously this adds some uncertainty to affected parties (firms and labor). Individual contributors lose their source of income and firms may be less financially stable (may now have financial constraints) on the other hand many people who would have otherwise been unemployed and not benefitted from being a hire, got hired, gained experience and earned income. Firms got to try some things out they might not have otherwise.
It looks to me the reporter of this piece is trying to ride an emotional wave for their own benefit and narrative.
That said, why aren't journalists and journalism firing contributors and editors when they get stories completely wrong for years and are found to be in cahoots with the establishment to carry water for them?
Re: Tech CEOs Should Be Held Accountable, or Even Fired, Amid Layoffs
#10it only really matters whether the CEO is the right person to lead the company into the future.
if shareholders think the CEO / board is the right leader for the company, it wouldn’t make sense to fire them.
if, on the other hand, they didn’t believe the CEO is the right person to lead the company, it would make sense to fire them. good example is Bob Chapek of Disney who got replaced recently by dormer CEO Iger.