4 ms·
I always thought the CEO should be responsible for what their company did even if they were carefully screened from direct knowledge of stupid things. But obvio
by coldcode 5y ago
I always thought the CEO should be responsible for what their company did even if they were carefully screened from direct knowledge of stupid things. But obviously that rarely happens.
- vimacs2 5y agoMaybe we should introduce a tradition similar to how a captain should go down with his ship, except in this case, have the CEO remain in his high rise office and then demolish the building from the bottom up. Of course I'm joking. I would never wish such an abhorent thing on the cleanup squad as to have to deal with Wenig's remains.
- tartoran 5y agoCaptain going down with the ship analogy for CEOs would be to personally pay from their own pockets or their future compensation any misdeeds on their watch. If this were to happen I bet we’d see companies immediately start behaving
- vimacs2 5y agoMy idea is more fun though :( On a serious note, I unfortunately don't think that would make companies behave because the problem with corporations is not specifically bad leadership but a more systematic one. Hierarchies just naturally cause communications to breakdown between different levels of an organisation with sufficient scaling and this will lead to inevitable conflict between workers and management which will further expand to conflicts between the company and their own userbase.
- blackboxlogic 5y agoI think we have that for Sarbanes-Oxley compliance. I wonder why CEOs are responsible for some crimes, but not others.