3 ms·

From its history since the MD merger you could argue Boeing should be on this list. It's the inevitable result of prioritizing profit rather than prioritizing

From its history since the MD merger you could argue Boeing should be on this list. It's the inevitable result of prioritizing profit rather than prioritizing the creation of quality products that the people working at a company can be proud of. That's why you see companies fall apart when the founders leave. They're replaced by people who prioritize profit for the company and wealth for themselves rather than product quality so the company ends up rudderless.

rl3 5y ago
>That's why you see companies fall apart when the founders leave. They're replaced by people who prioritize profit for the company and wealth for themselves rather than product quality so the company ends up rudderless. Which ironically fucks over profit anyways, just about every time. I think it's more of a personal greed thing combined with incompetence, on top of perverse incentives that come with being a publicly traded company. The quarterly profit model all but ensures a societal-scale myopia in the end.
Aloha 5y ago
Unless the founder of the company builds a culture that is designed to survive without them at the center, the company will eventually fail without them there. One of my former employers was like this - the founder was a brilliant engineer, who installed good financial controls, and was himself decent at the business end. But, he was a micromanger, and he never sought to create replacements for himself inside the company, he tended to penalize people who stepped out of line too. So once he was out of the picture (he sold out), we didnt really have the right person to run the company, or the right culture to just install a generic manager with industry expertise, it instead was a company that had been formed for the founders personal needs. That company was purchased by a multinational, and is now being systemically dismantled.

rl3 5y ago

>That's why you see companies fall apart when the founders leave. They're replaced by people who prioritize profit for the company and wealth for themselves rather than product quality so the company ends up rudderless. Which ironically fucks over profit anyways, just about every time. I think it's more of a personal greed thing combined with incompetence, on top of perverse incentives that come with being a publicly traded company. The quarterly profit model all but ensures a societal-scale myopia in the end.

Aloha 5y ago

Unless the founder of the company builds a culture that is designed to survive without them at the center, the company will eventually fail without them there. One of my former employers was like this - the founder was a brilliant engineer, who installed good financial controls, and was himself decent at the business end. But, he was a micromanger, and he never sought to create replacements for himself inside the company, he tended to penalize people who stepped out of line too. So once he was out of the picture (he sold out), we didnt really have the right person to run the company, or the right culture to just install a generic manager with industry expertise, it instead was a company that had been formed for the founders personal needs. That company was purchased by a multinational, and is now being systemically dismantled.