So why do corporate culture tolerate the superstar treatment of certain executives eg 300-400x compensation as the average worker? That is not even in the same range as the apparent improvement (if anything really improved) on revenues or net income. Some idiots actually plunge the company in debt then tries to cover the mistake with lays off or other kinds of reduction. Why do investment firms or analysts do not write enough about this? If an earnings event is on the horizon (good or bad), financial talking heads says a lot. Shouldn’t firms that historically can create synergistic workforce be praised and rated BUY more loudly ?
Yes, more should be said about that and companies with a more evenly skilled workforce should be praised more. But we live in a world of superstar athletes and superstar business men. there is the legend that a genius entrepreneur can revolutionize the world. That makes for a nice story but is not true in practice. On the other hand, a good manager working in the background isn't sexy for the media and doesn't create enough clicks. so they are not talked about. Just think of the thousands of German Mittelstand companies that are world market leaders in some esoteric niche market in machinery or electric equipment. Most people have never heard of these companies because they are run by boring people with a team of very competent but flashy engineers, accountants, and sales people. But in terms of media attention, they cannot compete against the likes of JAck Welch at General Electric, even though he effectively bankrupted the company during his tenure (the only thing that kept GE alive during Welch's tenure was its bank which provided massively lower financing to the company than it could have received anywhere else).
'Brazilian national team with Neymar' lost by one goal to the Argentinian team with Messi for the CapoAmerican cup. IMHO, not much difference in the conceptual makeup of the two teams, relative to your argument. Always enjoy your columns.
Just one exception: Diego Maradona (Napoli, Argentina and other teams)
So why do corporate culture tolerate the superstar treatment of certain executives eg 300-400x compensation as the average worker? That is not even in the same range as the apparent improvement (if anything really improved) on revenues or net income. Some idiots actually plunge the company in debt then tries to cover the mistake with lays off or other kinds of reduction. Why do investment firms or analysts do not write enough about this? If an earnings event is on the horizon (good or bad), financial talking heads says a lot. Shouldn’t firms that historically can create synergistic workforce be praised and rated BUY more loudly ?
Yes, more should be said about that and companies with a more evenly skilled workforce should be praised more. But we live in a world of superstar athletes and superstar business men. there is the legend that a genius entrepreneur can revolutionize the world. That makes for a nice story but is not true in practice. On the other hand, a good manager working in the background isn't sexy for the media and doesn't create enough clicks. so they are not talked about. Just think of the thousands of German Mittelstand companies that are world market leaders in some esoteric niche market in machinery or electric equipment. Most people have never heard of these companies because they are run by boring people with a team of very competent but flashy engineers, accountants, and sales people. But in terms of media attention, they cannot compete against the likes of JAck Welch at General Electric, even though he effectively bankrupted the company during his tenure (the only thing that kept GE alive during Welch's tenure was its bank which provided massively lower financing to the company than it could have received anywhere else).
'Brazilian national team with Neymar' lost by one goal to the Argentinian team with Messi for the CapoAmerican cup. IMHO, not much difference in the conceptual makeup of the two teams, relative to your argument. Always enjoy your columns.