5 ms·
One key difference is that the Coinbase message said "accountability rests with me as the CEO". If you claim to take accountability, but there are no actual con
by jsnell 4y ago
One key difference is that the Coinbase message said "accountability rests with me as the CEO". If you claim to take accountability, but there are no actual consequences, it's just the CEO grandstanding. Doesn't seem surprising that this specific bit would get called out.
This message did not make such obviously false claims of accountability. Is that enough of a difference to make up the entire difference in the entire tenor of the conversation? I don't know. But it is at least the reason for your specific example.
- rchaud 4y agoThe CEO is accountable. But they are not going to fire themselves, are they? The board decides that.
- thegginthesky 4y agoNo, but a CEO can slash his own pay to reflect the current situation. For example, when the WiiU was a flop, Nintendo's CEO personally decided to take a paycut of about 50%[0] I believe this should be the standard for any CEO who wants to say they take accountability. [0] https://www.bbc.com/news/business-25941070 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-25941070
- wilg 4y agoWhat would you say these "consequences" are that you expect to happen? Just because someone is responsible for something doesn't mean they need to be punished.
- bjornsing 4y agoSure. But if you won’t take any pain don’t go around with that holier than thou attitude talking about how you take full responsibility.
- wilg 4y agoIt sounds like a definitional issue of what responsibility is. What "pain" should they "take"? And why?
- bjornsing 4y agoMy point is not that they should take “pain”. My point is that they shouldn’t go around talking about “taking full responsibility” when there is no negative consequence for them. I guess it’s just an emotional / cultural norm. E.g. if somebody is committed of a crime and says “I take full responsibility for my actions” to the judge just before being sentenced, then that is a very strong signal of character for me. But if somebody says “I take full responsibility for my actions” just before jumping in an Uber to go to a luxury dinner with the board of directors, then that does not impress me and I perceive it as a cheap attempt to reap the social benefits of saying that phrase with none of the potential costs.
- wilg 4y agoWhat I'm trying to drive at is whether there is any satisfactory way for a CEO in this position to "take responsibility for their actions" without raising your ire. What would they have to do? Then we can look at whether that's a reasonable thing to expect of someone in such a position. My initial instinct is that this line of argument is more like venting than it is any kind of real suggestion for behavior change.
- jsnell 4y agoOf course they aren't going to actually suffer any consequences. We all know that's not how this works, which is exactly why it's so risible. But something reasonable and totally under their own control is to not brag about holding themselves accountable when they know nothing will happen. It's basically making the layoff about themselves, rather than the poor sods who just lost their jobs. (There's some other common patterns in that vein too, e.g. "this is the hardest decision I've ever had to do".) If you want to acknowledge being at fault, that's totally fine. Just write the facts. The over-hiring was a mistake, and you're the one who made that decision. Don't dress it up into a personal journey of failure and redemption.