4 ms·
I'm curious how you would distinguish that from her presence having zero effect, positive or negative, on a company. I don't see how you can possibly know that
by drunkpotato 6y ago
I'm curious how you would distinguish that from her presence having zero effect, positive or negative, on a company. I don't see how you can possibly know that she made eBay much bigger than it would have been without her. It seems to me just as likely that it would have been the same, and that HPE and Quibi were both doomed no matter what. On what basis is she brilliant, a good manager, and makes a successful business more successful?
The good CEOs I've worked under, had a clear vision for the company and were good at selling that vision both to investors (private and public/stock market) and to the rank and file during monthly or quarterly all-hands. Did she do that?
- jedberg 6y agoI'll agree it's hard to say one way or another since there is no opposite case to test against. But she was good at setting a vision, expressing that vision, and making sure it was being followed and getting her direct reports to move things in the direction she wanted. As far as brilliant, I'm referring to raw intelligence. You could tell her new information and she would instantly digest it and apply that to new areas. Also, if you were in a meeting with her once, she'd remember you and what you talked about. If you mentioned that you had kids for example, the next time she saw you months later she'd ask how your kids are, for example.
- drunkpotato 6y agoThank you for clarifying. I agree that makes it sound like she was a good manager. I'm curious, why did she take positions at companies unsuited to her strengths?
- mixmastamyk 6y agoLet me guess, the hundred-million dollar signing bonus and golden handcuffs. :D
- pm90 6y agoAmbition?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]