3 ms·
It’s a grift. The execs are not incentivized to act in the best interests of the company they work for. So most of them try to optimize for their own gains. Fo
by darth_avocado 4y ago
It’s a grift. The execs are not incentivized to act in the best interests of the company they work for. So most of them try to optimize for their own gains.
For example, execs who are incentivized to “improve operational efficiency” can fire a bunch of people, make the others work longer and collect their bonuses. Eventually when the burnout hits, the morale drops and people leave, a different exec (and in a lot of cases the same one) will be tasked with “meeting growth targets”. They will hire more people, collect their checks and the grift goes on.
- ska 4y agoIn this particular case, it the sentiment in the tweet is true it’s arguable the board screwed up. I’m assuming of course the sale plan was approved there (otherwise deeper problems).
- enahs-sf 4y agoWhile I think there is a certain moral bankruptcy in the individuals for looking out for themselves over the employees writ large, I think in this particular case the board is certainly culpable for allowing these types of shenanigans to take place.