5 ms·
There is a another side to that though: you do actually see a lot of CEO's who made the right call without having "perfect" information making less and less eff
by rickmb 15y ago
There is a another side to that though: you do actually see a lot of CEO's who made the right call without having "perfect" information making less and less effort to gather any information with every new decision on the mistaken believe that they have great "vision". They're no longer taking "calculated" risks, just risks based on their own illusion of infallibility.
At some point in that process, the question "are they stupid or something" becomes justified. And not just as a form of armchair criticism. A company's survival can depend on it.
- einhverfr 15y agoAlso even if the CEO isn't stupid and makes an effort to get accurate information, the middle managers might just give him inaccurate information putting politics ahead of company loyalty. Do not underestimate the magnitude of this problem. BTW, one thing corporations can greatly improve with modern technology is the ability of the floor-level positions to talk with the CEO and share information as to what is actually going on.
- coob 15y ago> Also even if the CEO isn't stupid and makes an effort to get accurate information, the middle managers might just give him inaccurate information putting politics ahead of company loyalty. Do not underestimate the magnitude of this problem. The isn't it the CEO's fault for hiring bozos?
- sunahsuh 15y agoI think this was on the front page not too long ago: http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-the-office-according-to-the-office/ http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-o... When an org gets to a certain size, it tends to self-organize into a dysfunctional hierarchy...