6 ms·

How Can You Tell When A CEO Is Lying?

26 points by tortilla 16y ago

rbanffy 16y ago
Whenever his lips move.
- bravura 16y ago
  That's actually the punchline to the more accurate joke: "How do you know when a CEO is pitching?"
pavel_lishin 16y ago
In other words, Kumar was asked, "Can your books be trusted?" And he replied by saying, "We hire the very best auditors." Larcker says that can be a big warning sign. "You basically are not answering the question. You're basically making reference to somebody else, and those are the kinds of things in psychology you look for," he says. I'm glad someone went out and did the research necessary to prove that when someone doesn't answer your question, they don't want to answer your question.
- smokinn 16y ago
  I don't understand why the media lets them get away with it. Politicians do this constantly. In the last US VP debates Palin didn't even bother answering something related. She'd say: I'm happy you asked me that but I just want to mention [cue pre-prepared talking point that doesn't have anything to do with the question]. Why do interviewers allow them to get away with such obvious tricks? One of the reasons Andrew Warner is such a good interviewer is because he doesn't put up with that kind of weasely response, he'll just repeat his question until it gets answered or he gets a response that directly addresses the fact that the interviewee doesn't want to answer it.
  - ZachPruckowski 16y ago
    >I don't understand why the media lets them get away with it. Because those CEOs/politicians/officials are key news suppliers. And if you abuse your suppliers too much, you get hosed.
fleitz 16y ago
CEOs are the ones that realize that the economy is built on confidence. Look at the investigation into Lehman Bros, it centers around who started the rumors that they were insolvent, which apparently drove them to insolvency. Our economy is a con game. Once you realize that is the game they are playing, realize that what a CEO says about his books becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Also, once you have a tool like mentioned in the article, the first people to buy it will be lying CEOs who want to tune their speeches to pass.
- idoh 16y ago
  It's not a con game, it is just a weakness of the fractional reserve banking system.
  - fleitz 16y ago
    A con game is a confidence game. There is no reserve in our current system, what asset is backed against the dollar? The answer, the confidence that a future generation will pay the interest on the current debt.
    - idoh 16y ago
      Your answer makes no sense and isn't responsive at all to the issue. We are talking about the need for confidence in banks and the banking system. This isn't something new, all banks face this issue. Addressing your irrelevant tangents: - even when money was backed by gold there were still bank runs - there is a reserve, the cash deposits are backed by cash reserves - I don't even know how you managed to bring the national debt into the picture.
    - lupatus 16y ago
      The US Dollar is backed by F-16s.
      - fleitz 16y ago
        touche.
lanstein 16y ago
see also: http://www.biadvisors.com/ http://www.biadvisors.com/
lkrubner 16y ago
Not mentioned, but for me a huge red flag is when anyone in a leadership position tries to stifle criticism on the basis that it might lower morale. For years I dealt with an entrepreneur who did this constantly. We'd have discussions like this: Me: there is no way we can match Pandora's functionality, especially given such a short deadline. Him: I want to know why you are so negative. Do you realize how much your words are hurting the team? Tim told me yesterday he's feeling really bummed out by your negativity. Me: Cool, but there is no way we can match Pandora's functionality, especially given such a short deadline. Him: I think you need to get back to work, and also rethink why you are so negative.
- mgkimsal 16y ago
  I've been in situations like that before too. In some situations I really was 'negative', and got myself out of those situations. In other situations, I would couple the observations like "we can't get this done on this deadline" with practical options... "but if we do ABC in the next 3 weeks we can deliver XYZ." I was trying to get real options to be discussed, rather than just deathmarching. In some cases, that was met with - well, not positivity - but an understanding that I (we, in some cases) was trying to be reasonable, and generally something was worked out. In other cases, I got what you got back "you're being negative". In those situations, it really wasn't me - "negative" was just a code word for "not on board with a magical mindset of someone who's not in touch with reality". Anyone that didn't deliver or hit deadlines inevitably had a real reason, but giving the reason was just "making excuses" or "being negative". Once I realized, I got out of those situations (been in a few over the past 15 years). A big issue in being in situations like that - you're given impossible deadlines - when you point them out, you're being 'negative'. Then suddenly, when you miss the deadline, you're accused of purposefully not hitting the deadline, trying to 'prove your point' or playing some 'power game'. I've bee in those situations too, and it sucks (advice to anyone in those situations - get the hell out yesterday).
  - Dylanlacey 16y ago
    I think there's a large number of rules of thumb like this that can help detect that people you're working with suck. I certainly found the same thing when I would bring honest assessments of timeframes and suggestions about them: "You need to be less negative."
spitfire 16y ago
Sounds like a good use for bayesian statistics+options. Prime your database with liars/truth-tellers. Then Search through press releases for CEO's that repeatedly "lie" then buy cheap options on their companies.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]

26 points by tortilla 16y ago

rbanffy 16y ago

Whenever his lips move.

bravura 16y ago
That's actually the punchline to the more accurate joke: "How do you know when a CEO is pitching?"

pavel_lishin 16y ago

In other words, Kumar was asked, "Can your books be trusted?" And he replied by saying, "We hire the very best auditors." Larcker says that can be a big warning sign. "You basically are not answering the question. You're basically making reference to somebody else, and those are the kinds of things in psychology you look for," he says. I'm glad someone went out and did the research necessary to prove that when someone doesn't answer your question, they don't want to answer your question.

smokinn 16y ago
I don't understand why the media lets them get away with it. Politicians do this constantly. In the last US VP debates Palin didn't even bother answering something related. She'd say: I'm happy you asked me that but I just want to mention [cue pre-prepared talking point that doesn't have anything to do with the question]. Why do interviewers allow them to get away with such obvious tricks? One of the reasons Andrew Warner is such a good interviewer is because he doesn't put up with that kind of weasely response, he'll just repeat his question until it gets answered or he gets a response that directly addresses the fact that the interviewee doesn't want to answer it.
- ZachPruckowski 16y ago
  >I don't understand why the media lets them get away with it. Because those CEOs/politicians/officials are key news suppliers. And if you abuse your suppliers too much, you get hosed.

fleitz 16y ago

CEOs are the ones that realize that the economy is built on confidence. Look at the investigation into Lehman Bros, it centers around who started the rumors that they were insolvent, which apparently drove them to insolvency. Our economy is a con game. Once you realize that is the game they are playing, realize that what a CEO says about his books becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Also, once you have a tool like mentioned in the article, the first people to buy it will be lying CEOs who want to tune their speeches to pass.

idoh 16y ago
It's not a con game, it is just a weakness of the fractional reserve banking system.
- fleitz 16y ago
  A con game is a confidence game. There is no reserve in our current system, what asset is backed against the dollar? The answer, the confidence that a future generation will pay the interest on the current debt.
  - idoh 16y ago
    Your answer makes no sense and isn't responsive at all to the issue. We are talking about the need for confidence in banks and the banking system. This isn't something new, all banks face this issue. Addressing your irrelevant tangents: - even when money was backed by gold there were still bank runs - there is a reserve, the cash deposits are backed by cash reserves - I don't even know how you managed to bring the national debt into the picture.
  - lupatus 16y ago
    The US Dollar is backed by F-16s.
    - fleitz 16y ago
      touche.

lanstein 16y ago

see also: http://www.biadvisors.com/ http://www.biadvisors.com/

lkrubner 16y ago

Not mentioned, but for me a huge red flag is when anyone in a leadership position tries to stifle criticism on the basis that it might lower morale. For years I dealt with an entrepreneur who did this constantly. We'd have discussions like this: Me: there is no way we can match Pandora's functionality, especially given such a short deadline. Him: I want to know why you are so negative. Do you realize how much your words are hurting the team? Tim told me yesterday he's feeling really bummed out by your negativity. Me: Cool, but there is no way we can match Pandora's functionality, especially given such a short deadline. Him: I think you need to get back to work, and also rethink why you are so negative.

mgkimsal 16y ago
I've been in situations like that before too. In some situations I really was 'negative', and got myself out of those situations. In other situations, I would couple the observations like "we can't get this done on this deadline" with practical options... "but if we do ABC in the next 3 weeks we can deliver XYZ." I was trying to get real options to be discussed, rather than just deathmarching. In some cases, that was met with - well, not positivity - but an understanding that I (we, in some cases) was trying to be reasonable, and generally something was worked out. In other cases, I got what you got back "you're being negative". In those situations, it really wasn't me - "negative" was just a code word for "not on board with a magical mindset of someone who's not in touch with reality". Anyone that didn't deliver or hit deadlines inevitably had a real reason, but giving the reason was just "making excuses" or "being negative". Once I realized, I got out of those situations (been in a few over the past 15 years). A big issue in being in situations like that - you're given impossible deadlines - when you point them out, you're being 'negative'. Then suddenly, when you miss the deadline, you're accused of purposefully not hitting the deadline, trying to 'prove your point' or playing some 'power game'. I've bee in those situations too, and it sucks (advice to anyone in those situations - get the hell out yesterday).
- Dylanlacey 16y ago
  I think there's a large number of rules of thumb like this that can help detect that people you're working with suck. I certainly found the same thing when I would bring honest assessments of timeframes and suggestions about them: "You need to be less negative."

spitfire 16y ago

Sounds like a good use for bayesian statistics+options. Prime your database with liars/truth-tellers. Then Search through press releases for CEO's that repeatedly "lie" then buy cheap options on their companies.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]