34 ms·
Marissa was explicitly and publicly hired to turn around the company. She's being paid to take the personal risk of career-ending failure. It's a way for her t
by henrikschroder 11y ago
Marissa was explicitly and publicly hired to turn around the company.
She's being paid to take the personal risk of career-ending failure. It's a way for her to hedge the bet she made that she could turn the company around.
This goes for all CEOs, the high salary is not compensation for labour, it's a risk premium the shareholders pay to get someone to take the job. For example, in many jurisdictions, the CEO is personally responsible for certain crimes that employees are committing, e.g. the CEO can go to jail if the company commits tax fraud.
That said, it's also a complete old boys' network and the risk premiums are extremely inflated, but that's nepotism for you.
- existencebox 11y agoSure; I accept the explicit reason, my above was just to enumerate a few of the most common ways I saw people thinking about her/any CEO's position in this sort of situation. Your final line re: network/inflated premiums seems to agree with the broader sense of what I was saying, unless I'm misunderstanding?
- henrikschroder 11y agoI'm pretty sure we are in agreement. :-)
- Natsu 11y agoThat seems more historical than anything. I don't know the last time one of them has gone to jail for much of anything, you're very right about inflation/nepotism, as well. And I don't really think anything is career-ending for that matter. I mean, look at the mess there was after Carly Fiorina and she's found other things to do.