3 ms·
Like said, that's about one of the biggest companies in the world and one of the most successful. There are many examples where the CEO doesn't manage this (IBM
by tluyben2 6y ago
Like said, that's about one of the biggest companies in the world and one of the most successful. There are many examples where the CEO doesn't manage this (IBM, Boeing and many more for instance), the company doesn't languish and yet the CEO gets rewarded. Makes no sense then right? In your example, if you don't manage growth like Steve Jobs, how are you worth heckuva lot of money? You managed to not go broke? That's not worth so much... It's worth more than the top employees, but not 100x.
I'm talking about a lot smaller. Most mid-sized companies (nor the larger ones, but I specifically am not talking about those) are not this binary; they are just steady growth, not hockeysticks and for years/decades.
- robertlagrant 6y agoThe CEO generally is the top employee. Jobs was worth more because he also had a significant ownership percentage.