> but it's actually impossible for them but what is "them" in this case. You are talking about the corporation, but does this mean CEOs, managers, or some comb

> but it's actually impossible for them but what is "them" in this case. You are talking about the corporation, but does this mean CEOs, managers, or some combination of the two? I'm not sure I'm arguing along those lines at all. What I'm saying is most CEOs are far removed from anything direct, but I'm not sure how that translates to "and therefore no one is". > They should be ultimately responsible for the entire organization I disagree. You don't really argue why, and I argue, at least, that it's not at all practically. Best case it leads to scapegoating the CEO for things they aren't best positioned to control, and/or executive-levels micromanaging lower levels for fear of liability.