3 ms·
>You seem to assume a good CEO equals a successful company the only assumption i see is the counter to that - a bad CEO equals an unsuccessful company. and i
by notatoad 2y ago
>You seem to assume a good CEO equals a successful company
the only assumption i see is the counter to that - a bad CEO equals an unsuccessful company. and i don't think that's a very controversial assumption.
- dubcanada 2y ago> And the new CEO (David Limp) used to be in charge of Kindles. Seems to imply there is an issue with a CEO of a space company previously working on Kindles. > Bezos had the former Honeywell CEO in charge of Blue Origin, which to me was such an odd choice Also seems to imply the CEO is bad because their previously only worked at Honeywell on thermostats. In my mind none of the above has anything to do with how good or bad a CEO is. Perhaps I am misreading it. In which case ignore me.
- resolutebat 2y agoAll things being equal, you'd want a CEO who understands the business, either by coming up through the ranks or a long career at another company in the same business.
- AtlasBarfed 2y agoWhich is basically Gwynne Shotwell, if I read her bio correctly.
- bigjimmyk3 2y agoHoneywell is also an aerospace company: https://aerospace.honeywell.com/ https://aerospace.honeywell.com/
- gibolt 2y agoA bad CEO can look great on paper and in the stock price. The product however will likely not keep pace, charging more for a product providing less value. Long term value, employee satisfaction, and customer satisfaction are all intertwined. New management is more likely than not to harm at least one of those 3 .