That's not really a good analogy for a CEO's job, though. A CEO's job would be someone who makes a small number of very broad, directional choices (should the

That's not really a good analogy for a CEO's job, though. A CEO's job would be someone who makes a small number of very broad, directional choices (should the home be Victorian, or Brutalist?) then hires and manages a team of people to hire and manage teams of people to hire and manage teams of people to build a house. Given that the only decision they made was "Victorian vs Brutalist" and then hiring some decent managers, should they still receive that much compensation just for (in this case!) happening to have made the right choice?