• jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    That’s a really good point. That’s a good test of an executive, if they can’t do what the board needs… They aren’t a good fit either

    • FutileRecipe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      if they can’t do what the board needs… They aren’t a good fit either

      But does the board need it, or just want it to maximize profits, like boards usually do in their typical chase of infinite growth that isn’t sustainable?

      And if the person won’t stick up for what they think is best for the company and the people (which they’ve deemed firing 50 people is that), maybe they’re not a good fit that way. But hey, they are sticking up for said company and 50 people, so maybe they are.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s a good point, and that’s what a long-term CEO could fight for. But this executive before they became CEO was given a test, could they do this difficult executive thing, and they didn’t. If you’re the board of directors, is this the person you promote to CEO? They’re already giving you friction before they become the CEO

        • bean@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Come on be fair though. HE JUST got back from medical leave:

          On the day Teixeira returned to his job, it’s claimed, he was instructed to lead a company-wide layoff of 50 people, 40 of whom were in his MozProd organization.

          Pulling this shit on him the second he gets back reeks of retaliation or a desire to throw him under the bus.