4 ms·
The fact that the CTO was replaced so quickly is not just a sign of scapegoating (which I am sure it is), but also the truth is that so many of these C-level te
by rexreed 4y ago
The fact that the CTO was replaced so quickly is not just a sign of scapegoating (which I am sure it is), but also the truth is that so many of these C-level tech executives are utterly incompetent at their jobs, and it takes a crisis for many to realize it. The C-levels at so many large companies are akin to high-level political appointments at government agencies. It's a good thing the lower levels know what's going on. In any crisis, the know-nothing C-levels are first to be ejected, where they can go look for their next appointment.
- cameldrv 4y agoAt the level of CTO of a major telecom, I don't his firing as scapegoating, it's accountability. The buck has to stop with someone, and the CTO is responsible for the technical infrastructure of the company.
- ethbr0 4y agoI think parent's point was that absent a crisis the same (incompent) CTO would still be in his job. So if that's what it takes to boot a CTO, who will then land in another executive position, then it's a poor metric for ensuring technology orgs (in old companies) are well-run.
- cameldrv 4y agoIf the current CTO is fired, the next CTO will pay more attention to reliability. This was clearly an organizational failure. Blame free retrospectives have a purpose, but if there is no accountability at the top level, there can simply be repeated failures regardless of the "lessons learned."