I agree. Board of directors or no, roles like CEOs and CFOs and such exist for a reason. I think Spross might be conflating the two terms, which is understandable. A lot of high profile billionaires either are or were at one time CEOs at their respected companies.This is nonsense. Committees are not efficient or effective forms of leadership for many types of organizations. Armies have generals, states have governors, companies have CEOs, etc for good reason. In many critical cases, someone needs to be able to be able to make swift decisions, resolve or override disagreements, and set strategy.
Also, why is the position of CEO even in question here? I don't think Tim Cook has a billion dollars. Maybe Spross is confusing founders with CEOs.
Yeah. Spross is bordering on facetious here. CEO's and CFO's are paid as they are because shareholders and boards of directors see that they need these folks to keep the profits flowing and make the tough decisions that "design by committee" will jack up so many times before getting it right. This system just works. If it didn't, they wouldn't receive the pay they do. I expect that he's poking around at the fact that Joe Blow assembling widgets for Mr. Fat Cat CEO is working his 50 hours a week and can barely keep his family of four fed. This issue is not likely at the top of any shareholder, board, or CEO concerns.I agree. Board of directors or no, roles like CEOs and CFOs and such exist for a reason.
Hmm. In general I'm pretty wary of the argument that because a system exists, that means it exists on its merits. Just look at American land based broadband internet or our healthcare system for example. They exist, sure, but boy howdy I'd doubt many people would say they exist on their own merits.This system just works. If it didn't, they wouldn't receive the pay they do.