I agree everybody has some accountability, but the CEO's job is to be accountable for everything that happens in the company. It's part of his job to get the i

I agree everybody has some accountability, but the CEO's job is to be accountable for everything that happens in the company. It's part of his job to get the information from the VP, and if he can't do that then he can't do his job. He also has the ability to fire the VP, something the VP cannot do in return. > Also, when profits aren't made, it's not the CEO who suffers. They already got their salary. Its shareholders who suffer. The CEO shouldn't have a golden parachute. And honestly, if the CEO's job is only to make money, he should be paid directly proportionally to how much money he made for the company! This isn't like an engineer where it's difficult to measure their value. You can just look at the stock price (assuming the company is public, it's slightly fuzzier for private companies) and pay based on hitting predetermined metrics or proportional to stock price. What I hear from these complaints is that no good CEO would agree to something like that. As far as I'm concerned this is a fundamental cultural problem similar to how the police reject body cams. If we pay them, they should agree to our terms. And if they don't, let's find replacements who actually want to work with us.