3 ms·
Not that I'm denying your claim, but if there's that little oversight on the allocation of funds, I fail to see how any of these orgs not get looted before the
by jszymborski 4y ago
Not that I'm denying your claim, but if there's that little oversight on the allocation of funds, I fail to see how any of these orgs not get looted before the opening bell rings.
If any exec could just cut (likely many) six-figure cheques for what really amounts to personal expenses while overseeing a project that is allocated too few funds, is way over budget, and over time, then what keeps these orgs afloat?
To reiterate, I'm not saying I don't believe you, I just don't really understand it.
- philwelch 4y agoThe expense is at least prima facie legitimate. On paper you’re just paying a fee to a contractor in exchange for a NDA protecting the company from liability. If you cover things up well enough, it won’t raise suspicions and nobody is going to go out of their way to investigate their boss. At a certain point this sort of thing does become unsustainable, but most execs stop short of that point. Also, this sort of thing becomes illegal at some point as well; you can learn about cases where people didn’t get away with it, and then maybe extrapolate from there to see how other people might get away with it.
- jszymborski 4y ago> Also, this sort of thing becomes illegal at some point as well; you can learn about cases where people didn’t get away with it, and then maybe extrapolate from there to see how other people might get away with it. Thanks, this is good advice