The expression "case in point," like the expression "exempli gratia," explicitly offers that a certain thing is an example of a phenomenon, not justification fo

The expression "case in point," like the expression "exempli gratia," explicitly offers that a certain thing is an example of a phenomenon, not justification for it. Therefore, while it is extremely interesting to ask if concentrating power is a cause or consequence of institutional rot, I don't think we can complain about a sample size of 1 if the argument doesn't say that this one case proves the effect. But yes, it is extremely interesting to ask whether removal of oversight causes rot, or if it is a consequence of rot. In other words, if we randomly appoint certain successful CEOs to chair their own boards, will their companies do worse than a control group that retain separate governance? Hard to conduct that experiment, but it would be interesting. Thanks for the suggestion.