3 ms·
> If he's lying about this, how are shareholders supposed to trust the rest of the SEC filings he signs off on as CEO? I'm not sure how I feel about statements
by csallen 15y ago
> If he's lying about this, how are shareholders supposed to trust the rest of the SEC filings he signs off on as CEO?
I'm not sure how I feel about statements like this. On the one hand, yes, you probably do not want such a brazen liar leading your company. But on the other hand, we as a society tend to believe in a dangerously inaccurate theory of character. Namely, that people are either inherently moral or they aren't. Liars or truth-tellers. Good or evil.
In reality, life isn't so simple. Studies have shown that when people are faced with moral dilemmas, situational factors play a larger role than "character". Obviously we all know people who are relatively upstanding. But when it comes down to it, it's not that difficult to put them into a situation where they'll be willing to lie, cheat, or steal. You just need the right combination environmental factors, and they don't even have to be that extreme. It's basic stuff like incentives (which in the CEO world includes million dollar bonuses), chances of getting caught, harshness of punishment, etc.
Long-story short, if we really care about improving behavior, we should stop looking for signals of "trustworthiness". Instead, we should just assume that everyone is capable of lying, whether they've been caught lying before or not. And we should engineer a system that removes incentives for cheating + makes it more difficult to do so.
- AJ007 15y agoMost good leaders are liars. Some are blatant, like this guy. Others are on hazier "grey area" things, things that will be true if the leader and those below him are indeed successful. That said, lying on something this simple should be a fire-able offense. It is a misrepresentation of the facts of what investors are paying for. It isn't an promise that was not kept or an area that is grey and up for interpretation. Perhaps if no one in the history of Yahoo has been fired for lying about credentials, then he could get a pass. Does that sound like a likely reality? I find this whole thing personally interesting, because I had my own in and out experience with owning some Yahoo shares. I thought long and hard about their CEOs. It was clear to me that Carol Bartz was incompetent. When she left and there was no instant replacement, I realized the board had no idea what they were doing either and I sold all of my shares. At the same time I thought, what type of person would agree to become the CEO of Yahoo? Certainly, all the deep talent capable of working there are smart enough to have a job at Google, Facebook, or any number of very promising start ups. Now I have my answer: a blatant lair.
- scott_s 15y agoExactly that subject was a topic of a recent Planet Money: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/04/17/150815268/why-people-do-bad-things http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/04/17/150815268/why-peop...
- tomkarlo 15y agoI think you're reading more into this than I meant. I don't think this necessarily means he lies perpetually in life, etc, or has poor moral character. But it's hard to ague that it doesn't raise the issue of "you know he was willing to lie on this document that you're trying to use to make investment decisions -- which calls into question the entire document since he's to some degree its 'author'". There is, a system that removes incentives for lying - as CEO he has to certify the contents of these documents, with specific penalties. Obviously, those penalties aren't sufficient motivation for him, so you can't expect they were more effective elsewhere in the doc in spots that that have even more incentive for him to lie than his college degree.
- csallen 15y agoI agree with you mostly. I'm not saying that we should trust him regardless of his lie, only that we shouldn't blindly trust others just because we haven't caught them lying yet.
- im3w1l 15y agoIf liars are fired, isn't that a pretty strong incentive?