Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

overpaid.lol

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 395 posts

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#261

Post by ghaff »

mc32 wrote: post #231
hibikir wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But a lot of "proven" talent with a huge price tag is also no good, really achieved what they did elsewhere due to sheer luck/help from a product that couldn't go wrong, and will drag you into a hole with their comp. I have seen this over and over again: Big pedigree, top of the line personality, zero results. Everyone thinks they are hiring the star, not the fraudster, or just the lucky one. That's how we end up wit…

The guy who took over JC Penney's after leaving Apple's Retail division is a good example of this. On paper great pedigree. Success --but did not understand a different, albeit retail, market so well and things tanked horribly.

Yeah, JC Penney was not Apple Stores (which by the way probably looked awful to a lot of people on paper--see Microsoft's attempt to clone). But JC Penny was a discount brand whose shoppers absolutely weren't looking for an expensive Apple Store experience.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#262

Post by notfromhere »

bob1029 wrote: post #234

I have learned that the purpose of a CEO in many (most?) companies is not to actually run the company. Their purpose is to be the human delegate that represents the corporate entity. They are empowered to act on behalf of the entire organization. This is important because a corporation of many individuals generally cannot act as one. You can sometimes get close with really, really good teamwork, but that's still not…

sure, that doesn't mean pay is justified

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#263

Post by pixelatedindex »

zamadatix wrote: post #254
4lx87 wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh. The sales team at my company is the one who closes millions in ARR and all the enterprise contracts - not the CEO. I’m sure being the “conduit of information and a representative element” is very important though. Someone has to attend investor meetings…

None of these other teams ever involve the CEO for key activities? E.g. sales has a major client that wants top level visibility to sign the contract on the big deal? I was in sales many years and anything from letters of commitment to flyouts with the CEO was always a big factor in the large deals - it gave a sense of "we have full assurance they are focused on this" to the customer and was very helpful. I'm not sur…

Not at my workplace, the highest as far as I know is two levels below the CEO, usually a VP of some kind.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#264

Post by mikert89 »

pj_mukh wrote: post #258
e_i_pi_2 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue that the "rampant cynicism and nihilism" and more a result of the environment than algorithms manipulating people, the content is also made by other people, and it just serves up what people want. Your feed is often just a reflection of what you're feeling since everyone has their own feed instead of the reddit or HN approach with a shared feed. Also the phrase is that a few bad apples spoil the batch, nobo…

"Your feed is often just a reflection of what you're feeling" No it is not. The feed is optimized for what will increase the intensity of feelings, and bad feelings are more easily optimized than good. Meta (patient zero for this nonsense) has pretty much said so, multiple times. " more a result of the environment than algorithms" What environment? People are sitting on their algorithms for 100x more time than any ph…

i dont think hating on ivy league types is that common, and 90% of people have no real life experience with this kind of thing, or are even aware of how corporate hiring/funding works at the higher level.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#265

Post by karagenit »

conductr wrote: post #246
tonic_note wrote: post #204

Good satire. I find the "RTO is because of RE valuations" to be the most bizarre thing about the post pandemic work discourse. Office leases are a rounding error to large employers. They are not coercing employees back to the office because their worried about the value of a single portfolio asset falling (assuming they even own it). They are doing it because it's about power. Middle managers do not trust their staff…

I’ve been on Csuite of 3 orgs since the pandemic forced wfh normalization. Your correct the RE thing has always been a false narrative. I’ve never seen or read of it coming from an executive. To my knowledge, it was dreamt up by pundits, speculators, and is just a lazy attempt to understand what goes on in boardrooms driving these decisions. What I have witnessed, with empirical evidence, is that productivity and/or…

Can I ask how your orgs measured productivity before and after remote work/RTO? I agree that employees would have a much easier time accepting RTO if they were given hard evidence it makes the business more productive, but it seems like almost all companies don’t do this and simply justify RTO “because we know best” which frustrates ICs.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#266

Post by notfromhere »

conductr wrote: post #246
tonic_note wrote: post #204

Good satire. I find the "RTO is because of RE valuations" to be the most bizarre thing about the post pandemic work discourse. Office leases are a rounding error to large employers. They are not coercing employees back to the office because their worried about the value of a single portfolio asset falling (assuming they even own it). They are doing it because it's about power. Middle managers do not trust their staff…

I’ve been on Csuite of 3 orgs since the pandemic forced wfh normalization. Your correct the RE thing has always been a false narrative. I’ve never seen or read of it coming from an executive. To my knowledge, it was dreamt up by pundits, speculators, and is just a lazy attempt to understand what goes on in boardrooms driving these decisions. What I have witnessed, with empirical evidence, is that productivity and/or…

output only slows down because companies don't want to adjust how they work. its a complete skill issue if you cant manage a remote org. if a company/team is already spread out across multiple offices, its a remote org

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#267

Post by RajT88 »

bob1029 wrote: post #234

I have learned that the purpose of a CEO in many (most?) companies is not to actually run the company. Their purpose is to be the human delegate that represents the corporate entity. They are empowered to act on behalf of the entire organization. This is important because a corporation of many individuals generally cannot act as one. You can sometimes get close with really, really good teamwork, but that's still not…

That is why the E stands for Executive. COO's run the company. The CEO wines and dines and handles vision and escalations. You have described it to a T.

Now, sometimes CEO's run he company. Often not though.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#268

Post by cmiles74 »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #223
cmiles74 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Steve Jobs even a good example of "the type of person I want to hire as CEO"? I think he probably is not. He was a demonstrably bad CEO, so much so that the Apple board fired him. He then went on to get better at the job through running another two companies until, eventually, Apple purchased one of these companies (it was very much unsuccessful, BTW). Then he became CEO and the company and was, finally, phenomena…

You can still find articles lambasting the iphone for having a small screen, 'who would want to surf the web on their phone'. The CEO is in large part responsible for picking what products have hope to grow the company. The iphone was far from a slam dunk, many thought it would fail. Now it's responsible for over half their revenue and they're one of the largest companies in the world. >Then he became CEO and the com…

Yes, my opinion is that after being the CEO of Next and Pixar he became the CEO we associate with Apple's success in the 2000s.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#269

Post by ghaff »

antasvara wrote: post #174
kibwen wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an equally valid hypothesis that a "good" CEO is just one that keeps their hands off the levers of power, doesn't rock the boat or fuck anything up, and quietly lets a good company perform; whereas a bad CEO is one who, due to ego and self-aggrandizement, can't help but impose themselves via meddling and prevent a good company from performing. By that measure, you might as well save yourself the executive com…

> a "good" CEO is just one that keeps their hands off the levers of power, doesn't rock the boat or fuck anything up, and quietly lets a good company perform How can you tell if a company is good? Because trillions of dollars are spent by banks, private equity, hedge funds, and others truing to figure out if a company is "good." > By that measure, you might as well save yourself the executive compensation and potenti…

There are plenty of anecdotal examples of co-CEOs not working very well.

Re: OverpAId – Fire your CEO. Hire the future

#270

Post by cmiles74 »

NDizzle wrote: post #227
cmiles74 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Steve Jobs even a good example of "the type of person I want to hire as CEO"? I think he probably is not. He was a demonstrably bad CEO, so much so that the Apple board fired him. He then went on to get better at the job through running another two companies until, eventually, Apple purchased one of these companies (it was very much unsuccessful, BTW). Then he became CEO and the company and was, finally, phenomena…

Man, everyone is demonstrably bad - until they aren't. Some things, like being CEO, are much more rare in the "try, try, try again" space, but it does seem to work like most things. My son was a terrible, demonstrably bad hitter for ~2 years. Then, all of a sudden, he was not, nor will he ever be again.

Agreed. I was thinking more along the lines of what does it mean to say "I want to hire the next Steve Jobs as our CEO"?
Post reply on HN