You make a fair point I seem to remember when studying economics that someone analyzed management behavior and found senior executives were typically decent at

You make a fair point I seem to remember when studying economics that someone analyzed management behavior and found senior executives were typically decent at their jobs and more or less had incentives to make decent decisions. Middle management was completely risk averse, had no skin in the game and made decisions only insofar as they wouldn't be fired. I wish I could find a link, but I read it years ago, though this more informal discussion cites similar work (they use family-owned businesses as a proxy for middle managers who do have skin in the game)[0] I do think that a CEO showing accountability sets a standard for the rest of mgmt and the organization, which is perhaps more accurate; though I'd hope that organizations find ways to hold middle management accountable for failures [0] https://www.wealthmanagement.com/equities/why-management-needs-have-skin-game https://www.wealthmanagement.com/equities/why-management-nee...