4 ms·

I think one thing that's important to keep in mind is that some part of that compensation is for effectively jettisoning her career. Proportional/justifiable?

I think one thing that's important to keep in mind is that some part of that compensation is for effectively jettisoning her career. Proportional/justifiable? I don't know. But now she's the woman that drove Yahoo! into the ground - that'll forever be her "thing", regardless of what role she played vs. unavoidable reality of sinking ship. That can have the effect of depressing compensation elsewhere, even if it certainly doesn't stop her getting another executive role (as we all know). If you're going to pay someone to be the captain of a cruise liner that has an 80% chance of sinking on its next voyage (even if it's not like the Titanic where everyone dies), that's going to take some money, too. He won't be piloting cruise ships for a while.

tyingq 9y ago
There's probably a niche for riding big, but tainted companies into either an exit or some cultural, product, or whatever pivot. For example, I could see MM being pitched as a replacement for Kalanick if Uber's board had any teeth.
gaius 9y ago
compensation is for effectively jettisoning her career It doesn't work like that. Take Carly Fiorina for example. Measured either by jobs or by shareholder value destroyed, she has a fair shot at the title of "worst CEO in history, ever". And yet people still thought that that experience qualified her for a shot at the Presidency. Indeed she even claimed that her business experience was what made her the best candidate! MM will probably be Uber's next CEO without missing a beat.
- abalashov 9y ago
  Yeah, I know, and I was mindful of that in trotting out the hypothesis. But I suspect there is a taxonomy within the upper strata of the CxO world where the optics of "running Yahoo into the ground" may disqualify her from the crème de la crème CEO jobs or pay packages, forcing her to settle for merely $ungodly_sum with not so hefty a multiplier. They're also rules that most likely apply only when making lateral moves within the field, subject to the highly idiosyncratic rules of the Fortune 100 exec recruitment game. The headers get stripped when you move into something like the Presidency, since there is an alchemy by which you can parlay a previous stint as a Fortune 100 executive into the vague catch-all digest of "business experience". I mean, look at our current President.

tyingq 9y ago

There's probably a niche for riding big, but tainted companies into either an exit or some cultural, product, or whatever pivot. For example, I could see MM being pitched as a replacement for Kalanick if Uber's board had any teeth.

gaius 9y ago

compensation is for effectively jettisoning her career It doesn't work like that. Take Carly Fiorina for example. Measured either by jobs or by shareholder value destroyed, she has a fair shot at the title of "worst CEO in history, ever". And yet people still thought that that experience qualified her for a shot at the Presidency. Indeed she even claimed that her business experience was what made her the best candidate! MM will probably be Uber's next CEO without missing a beat.

abalashov 9y ago
Yeah, I know, and I was mindful of that in trotting out the hypothesis. But I suspect there is a taxonomy within the upper strata of the CxO world where the optics of "running Yahoo into the ground" may disqualify her from the crème de la crème CEO jobs or pay packages, forcing her to settle for merely $ungodly_sum with not so hefty a multiplier. They're also rules that most likely apply only when making lateral moves within the field, subject to the highly idiosyncratic rules of the Fortune 100 exec recruitment game. The headers get stripped when you move into something like the Presidency, since there is an alchemy by which you can parlay a previous stint as a Fortune 100 executive into the vague catch-all digest of "business experience". I mean, look at our current President.