Quote:
Originally Posted by theotherguy
A good CEO does not blame others for mistakes he/she makes, but does hold them responsible for their actions as the relate to the duties assigned to him/her.
|
And now confront the term 'perspective'. A relation between you and the CEO, you are responsible for your responsibilities. A good CEO does little work. He defines a strategic objective and delegates the tasks - sometimes to you.
But to the rest of the world, that CEO is responsible for your screwups. After all, HE provided the necessary knowledge - ie the good mentor. He defined the strategic objective. His job is to make sure you have everything necessary so that you don't screw up. Why? Because his ass is on the line if you do screw up - and he cannot and must not be doing the work. Well that is what happens when a company is responsible and productive.
Notice the different perspectives of a same relationship between your and your boss.
The man who was responsible for everyone else - must provide the attitude and knowledge - must confirm that everyone has what is needed to perform the tasks - must define a strategic objective that can be accomplished (Deming's famous bead experiment); that top man is the CEO. So we once gave him 10 and 20 times more money for doing almost no work while providing direction - attitude and knowledge.
Having lost market share, diminishing stock price, and paid one of the highest salaries in the nation; what did Home Depot do to Nardelli? They gave him a $145million bonus. His starting salary was $123 in 2000. In those seven years, he did nothing to empower innovation; to improve the stores. But he did concentrate power in Atlanta. He lost significant market share to Lowes. The stock dropped from an average $60 per share to $32 per share. Company value dropped to half under Nardelli's rein. So what do we do? We give him a massive bonus? Well we (the stockholders) don't do that. We have no say.
Companies no longer have top management accountable to the owners. It has become a neat little club of Presidents also operating as Directors for other companies. A wink and a smile; and they run up each other's salaries. He destroyed half the value of Home Depot. So they gave him a $145million bonus. And some even here say that is good.
The boss is responsible for all while doing almost no work. The people who make that possible are the little people. Once that top man got 14 times more money than the average employee. The average employee made all that possible. All the boss had to do is make sure everyone knew their job. Now many top executives cannot even do that - and make 365 times more money?
The top man at GM could not even drive a car? Top men in the airlines had no grasp of what happened inside airliners or those support functions. Top executives at American steel companies never worked where the work gets done. Top executive at First Energy who created the NE blackout knew nothing about utilities, electricity, or company operations. In each case, they took record salaries and drove their companies down. Why are some of the highest top executive salaries in some of the poorest growth companies? Why do some here just know this is good? Even Greenspan is cautioning; this as one of the two greatest threats to the American economy.