3 ms·

> it wasn't the bullshit that caused its downfall this wasn't stated, so i don't understand your complaint. the post even says "Bullshit might get you to the

by abiox 9y ago

> it wasn't the bullshit that caused its downfall this wasn't stated, so i don't understand your complaint. the post even says "Bullshit might get you to the top, but it won’t keep you there."

candiodari 9y ago
Many tops don't require staying there. In the age of golden parachutes for executes, why would anyone want to stay at the top ? Besides, staying at the top of a company or even country requires things very different from what you'd want to. The game changes, but it doesn't change from being a good bullshitter to being good at the job ... it requires changing from being good at self-promotion to being good at the opposite: not letting others successfully self-promote. Besides, all of western industry runs on favors and counter-favors. Take the career of Stephen Elop, and explain to me how this person gets any job more important that toilet cleaner ... His career: 1) Lotus Development Corporation -> victim of hostile takeover by IBM 2) CIO for Boston Chicken -> chapter 11 bankruptcy 3) Macromedia -> Dissolved after takeover, his resignation was demanded by by Adobe a few months later 4) COO of Juniper Networks -> he was legendary at this company for his incompetence 5) Head of Microsoft office -> where he "successfully" "held off" competitors to office like Google Docs (well done !) 6) CEO of Nokia -> google "burning platform". Half the company was sold off because it was the only way to avoid bankruptcy 7) Rehired at Microsoft as Executive Vice President (along with the devices unit of Nokia, which has since been fully disbanded). His job ended ... when Microsoft terminated a) Stephen Elop b) 7800 people, mostly those working for Stephen Elop c) another 1600 people (later) Note: Microsoft paid 7.6 BILLION dollars for the privilege of not having Stephen Elop in the company, and even that absurd number doesn't include several extra charges he caused: 1 billion the year after he left for eliminating the last of his department, the 7.3 billion for the Nokia acquisition he talked them into and the $300 million that Stephen Elop his Nokia position in the first place. 8) Telstra -> he is "Group Executive Technology, Innovation and Strategy", stock price has dropped by a little over 33% since his joining And let me tell you one thing is for sure. There has been ZERO Technology innovation or strategy in Telstra. Zero. In fact Telstra is systematically losing marketshare because of enormous gaps exactly there. (Not that that's particularly strange for a telco incumbent, but still). In case you wonder, yes, I have encountered "guidance" from Mr. Elop twice in my career, and I have a central policy to my current and future employment: if my employer so much as makes a deal with Mr. Elop, I immediately look for employment elsewhere. Every single one of his jobs turned into a complete disaster for anyone working for him, and only his first and third positions did not turn into disasters for shareholders of the companies he worked for. Whether all of it is his fault ? Of course not. But at his pay grade, he needs to be able to turn things around and ... to put things VERY mildly, he's not up to that (or even up for that. His behavior has always been to systematically eliminate any political threat to his position, including of course anyone showing even slight traces of rational thought. Ironically, this has often helped him avoid blame. For instance, he claims that his decisions at Nokia were supported by the entire management staff under him, and they were ... after he replaced most of them. There was collective action by company directors, who went to the board of Nokia directly to point out just how bad his decision was. But Elop had cemented his position in the board, not by rational thought, but by money) And allow me to add, as a commentary on this guy, just listen to his own words: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owvtKGlYFVA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owvtKGlYFVA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOxCtZSi_Jw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOxCtZSi_Jw (he is explaining, yes really, "how to create longevity for your company") So I think this conclusively illustrates that you can be incredibly successful while being, not just incompetent, but literally be a shit version of king Midas. Everything this guy has ever touched turned to shit in record short time. Everything. He is known for immediately surrounding himself with yes-men, for constantly delivering ridiculously bad motivational speeches (and I mean ridiculously bad, as in 1960 B horror movie bad, as in people laughing when they know it can get them fired), for immediately biting off the head of anyone doing the slightest bit to criticize him (including firing people 5 levels below him for this). As an executive to one of the most important companies providing vital services to 30+ million people, he cannot get a room for 30 people to fill up ... What is there to say about just how incompetent this guy is ?

by abiox 9y ago

> it wasn't the bullshit that caused its downfall this wasn't stated, so i don't understand your complaint. the post even says "Bullshit might get you to the top, but it won’t keep you there."

candiodari 9y ago

Many tops don't require staying there. In the age of golden parachutes for executes, why would anyone want to stay at the top ? Besides, staying at the top of a company or even country requires things very different from what you'd want to. The game changes, but it doesn't change from being a good bullshitter to being good at the job ... it requires changing from being good at self-promotion to being good at the opposite: not letting others successfully self-promote. Besides, all of western industry runs on favors and counter-favors. Take the career of Stephen Elop, and explain to me how this person gets any job more important that toilet cleaner ... His career: 1) Lotus Development Corporation -> victim of hostile takeover by IBM 2) CIO for Boston Chicken -> chapter 11 bankruptcy 3) Macromedia -> Dissolved after takeover, his resignation was demanded by by Adobe a few months later 4) COO of Juniper Networks -> he was legendary at this company for his incompetence 5) Head of Microsoft office -> where he "successfully" "held off" competitors to office like Google Docs (well done !) 6) CEO of Nokia -> google "burning platform". Half the company was sold off because it was the only way to avoid bankruptcy 7) Rehired at Microsoft as Executive Vice President (along with the devices unit of Nokia, which has since been fully disbanded). His job ended ... when Microsoft terminated a) Stephen Elop b) 7800 people, mostly those working for Stephen Elop c) another 1600 people (later) Note: Microsoft paid 7.6 BILLION dollars for the privilege of not having Stephen Elop in the company, and even that absurd number doesn't include several extra charges he caused: 1 billion the year after he left for eliminating the last of his department, the 7.3 billion for the Nokia acquisition he talked them into and the $300 million that Stephen Elop his Nokia position in the first place. 8) Telstra -> he is "Group Executive Technology, Innovation and Strategy", stock price has dropped by a little over 33% since his joining And let me tell you one thing is for sure. There has been ZERO Technology innovation or strategy in Telstra. Zero. In fact Telstra is systematically losing marketshare because of enormous gaps exactly there. (Not that that's particularly strange for a telco incumbent, but still). In case you wonder, yes, I have encountered "guidance" from Mr. Elop twice in my career, and I have a central policy to my current and future employment: if my employer so much as makes a deal with Mr. Elop, I immediately look for employment elsewhere. Every single one of his jobs turned into a complete disaster for anyone working for him, and only his first and third positions did not turn into disasters for shareholders of the companies he worked for. Whether all of it is his fault ? Of course not. But at his pay grade, he needs to be able to turn things around and ... to put things VERY mildly, he's not up to that (or even up for that. His behavior has always been to systematically eliminate any political threat to his position, including of course anyone showing even slight traces of rational thought. Ironically, this has often helped him avoid blame. For instance, he claims that his decisions at Nokia were supported by the entire management staff under him, and they were ... after he replaced most of them. There was collective action by company directors, who went to the board of Nokia directly to point out just how bad his decision was. But Elop had cemented his position in the board, not by rational thought, but by money) And allow me to add, as a commentary on this guy, just listen to his own words: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owvtKGlYFVA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owvtKGlYFVA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOxCtZSi_Jw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOxCtZSi_Jw (he is explaining, yes really, "how to create longevity for your company") So I think this conclusively illustrates that you can be incredibly successful while being, not just incompetent, but literally be a shit version of king Midas. Everything this guy has ever touched turned to shit in record short time. Everything. He is known for immediately surrounding himself with yes-men, for constantly delivering ridiculously bad motivational speeches (and I mean ridiculously bad, as in 1960 B horror movie bad, as in people laughing when they know it can get them fired), for immediately biting off the head of anyone doing the slightest bit to criticize him (including firing people 5 levels below him for this). As an executive to one of the most important companies providing vital services to 30+ million people, he cannot get a room for 30 people to fill up ... What is there to say about just how incompetent this guy is ?