> do you seriously think that it's easy to become > the CEO of a major corporation?� These guys are (in > general) like Major League Baseball players. > Obviously there are exceptions, but most of the time, > even the worst one is so much better at what he does > than the average person that it's barely possible to > even understand it.� That's true of almost any > competitive system.� Professional athletes are so much > more physically capable than you or I that they might > as well be a different species.One reason GE has so > convincingly outperformed other companies is its > tradition of superb management.� Jack Welch and Jeff > Immelt weren't chosen by accident, and their > performance echoes it. > > This isn't to say that all CEOs are competent - > although I bet there isn't one in a Fortune 500 > company who couldn't do a better job than any person > on this list (myself very much included) by a very > large margin.� But the performance level involved is > astonishingly high. >
I'm sorry, but this is just not possibly true. There is some skill involved in being a CEO along with a lot of experience. And there is no doubt some such thing as managerial talent, although I doubt it can be measured by any objective standard the way one can measure the speed of a fastball or time a wide receiver in a 40 yard dash. But it's just not the same thing Too much about a CEO's performance has to be inferred (stock price, etc.), and the fact that so much of their compensation is set by committees that are often hand-picked by the CEO, and that they often serve on each other's boards - there's just too much asskissing in business, that it practically becomes a tautology: how do you know he's a good CEO? Because his company is successful. GE is a very rare example of a company that is clearly successful because of its CEO - although you would not have wanted to work for RCA Astrospace when GE bought it, because they damn near ruined the company (remember the Mars Observer disaster?) Most CEOs get their job because they were successful timeservers who rose through the ranks. They may be intelligent, know their business, be good managers, etc., but few of them show any real spark of brilliance - because few of anyone shows any real spark of brilliance. The difference between, say, Norm Augustine (who ruined Martin Marietta Astrospace after Lockheed bought it out) and Michael Jordan is, there's really only one Michael Jordan. There's quite a few people who could approximate Norm Augustine. True talent is very very rare. There are plenty of business leaders who are good at what they do but are not truly talented in the sense that Baryshnikov or Stephen King or Mary-Chapin Carpenter or Joe Montana is. Let's not confuse the issue. They get overpaid because they control to a large extent the system that sets their pay. And they vote Republican because they figure that's the best way for them to continue to receive and retain their undeserved largesse. They're selfishly voting in their own personal interest. If they want to do that, fine, but let's not dignify it by calling it some great principle. Tom Beck www.prydonians.org www.mercerjewishsingles.org "I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed I'd see the last." - Dr Jerry Pournelle _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
