3 ms·
And it's especially not good if they use company resources for their personal pet projects. Good grief. I guess if you are a CFO, or finance guy, sure. But a
by b112 4y ago
And it's especially not good if they use company resources for their personal pet projects.
Good grief.
I guess if you are a CFO, or finance guy, sure.
But a "pet project" is conjoined with passion. And R&D, and testing the waters in other markets, is what causes true motivation.
People often complain that big corps can only innovate via acquisition. Yet, this comment is complaining that big corps are innovating by... startup methods!
For what does a startup do, other than live as the pet project of its founders?
We should encourage CEOs of large corps to go out on a limb, to R&D, to bring change to the market, to explore new growth streams.
- achenet 4y agostartups, while they can have funding, do not have near unlimited piles of cash allowing them to keep building something no one wants. At some point, they have to start being profitable, and this constraint is what forces them to be adaptable and listen to users. Billionaire pet projects do not have this constraint, and as such can become endless money sinks.
- mschuster91 4y ago> And R&D, and testing the waters in other markets, is what causes true motivation. There's a difference between legitimate R&D and pulling Tesla engineers to put out fires at Twitter. The latter is a blatant abuse of Tesla's resources and to be honest it's a miracle how Musk has not gotten under serious fire from at the very least the Tesla board or a lawsuit by shareholders.
- b112 4y agoDid you ever think, maybe he hired Tesla talent, on contract, via Twitter? Are you privy to contracts between these two companies? Did you ever think, this may be why there is no issue?