We recently had a new CEO come on board, and within 60 days they cut 3 product lines and all the people associated with them. We were making a profit, albeit less than usual due to "market conditions", but not anything that wasn't predicted to turn around in the foreseeable future. These were leading-edge products in our market, fulfilling a niche that our competitors weren't looking at in any meaningful way, and of great importance and interest to our biggest customers - and somehow this one person could predict the future and adapt to that better than legions of decision-makers in the organisation?
Maybe it's just me, but I don't think someone can reasonably come in and in such a short time make such sweeping decisions in an informed manner. I simply think it's impossible to do more than guesswork in that time frame. They're gambling with people's lives to make themselves look impactful, nothing more. These products were maybe 2 or 3 years in development too. I honestly feel like most CEOs spend a couple of days looking at a balance sheet for the next quarter, and make it all up from there. It's insane.
I think it could simply be that CEOs and business leaders in general are often just uncreative, and constantly looking at their peers in other companies and things like Harvard Business review for clues and hints about what to do next. They read somewhere that we are in “bad market conditions” and their Wharton buddies at other companies also say they heard about these “market conditions” and there we go: that’s their justification to take action. What action do they take? They call their Wharton buddies back and ask them what they are doing. Oh, you’re laying off and canceling projects? Then that’s what we will do too.
Same thing happens when the meme is “good market conditions.” What are all my Stanford CEO buddies doing? They’re hiring?? Then, we must hire, too!
This is a common theme throughout life. It seems like people are wildly uncreative and just follow the crowd at every possible venture. I’ll point to the Stanley cup craze as a prime example.
> We recently had a new CEO come on board, and within 60 days they cut 3 product lines and all the people associated with them.
Too bad you didn’t have Lou Gerstner, recruited from Nabisco (a biscuit company) to turn around IBM in the 80s. He was definitely a celebrity CEO. Famously he spent a couple of months traveling around talking to people throughout IBM and at the end announced his grand strategy: “people basically know what needs to be done and we should let them get on with it.”
Mr Market, and the employees, approved and IBM survived its malaise.
Perhaps if you are not as famous as Gerstner you can’t pull that off.
Sounds like the Hertz CEO and his Tesla fleet. I'm an EV proponent but that was a huge strategic shift and in a short time it became obvious it wasn't well thought through or prepared for at all.
EVs just don't seem a good fit for short term rentals. Maybe ultra short term, less than a day, where there is no expectation that the renter will need to charge it.
My EV(model Y) is the only car I ever had where I need to give a tutorial to someone who wants to borrow it. Hell, most passengers need a lesson on how to open and close the doors.
> Hell, most passengers need a lesson on how to open and close the doors.
Everything I read about Tesla's doors make them sound like a deathtrap. Call me old fashioned, but I want doors and hood/trunk latches to work even if the vehicle is unpowered.
They do - there is a physical latch you can pull (at least in the Model Y) that opens the door even when the car is totally unpowered.
I never actually knew about them, but I had passengers find them because people don't think of pushing a button to open a door. And when the latch is used, the car beeps at you and says something along the lines of "Your windows might be broken now when you do that".
This is true too but removing the recharge hassle would’ve gone along way. Drivability is a valid concern as well. I always have some trouble in most rentals beyond the common interface controls (steering wheel etc..)
Eh. Tech people are usually financially self-sufficient enough to bounce back, but I've definitely heard of people being laid off very shortly after a difficult and expensive relocation. And it always incurs further costs on the individual to get back into the job market. It can be extremely stressful. That misery is real and should be weighed on the other side of the scale of these decisions.
This is one reason high income/wealth disparity is corrosive to society. I suspect many executives have "let them eat cake" thoughts even if they don't voice them when it comes to layoffs. Being laid off when you have millions in the bank would just mean free time to perfect your short game and it's hard to understand the stress layoffs cause people who depend on regular paycheques for food and shelter.
With the exception of people living right at the poverty line (which is hopefully not that many people), saving up an emergency buffer is within the realm of possibility for just about everyone. It’s not only prudent, it’s practically required.
To pretend it’s the employer’s fault that someone in a skilled trade is living paycheck to paycheck is to misattribute responsibility.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't think someone can reasonably come in and in such a short time make such sweeping decisions in an informed manner. I simply think it's impossible to do more than guesswork in that time frame. They're gambling with people's lives to make themselves look impactful, nothing more. These products were maybe 2 or 3 years in development too. I honestly feel like most CEOs spend a couple of days looking at a balance sheet for the next quarter, and make it all up from there. It's insane.