I found the discussion in Box 7.10 on page 196 to be extremely interesting. When it comes down to it business can be ugly, and some of the most successful CEO's have had to do some horrible things to keep the company profitable. As the text mentions, some leaders are hired solely to downsize companies, which can lead to thousands of people being laid off. This is certainly not heroic! I would think that no one would classify them in the same category as Gandhi, King, etc. I agree with the text in that these leaders do transform organizations and often eventually lead it to success, but the focus is always on money and profits. I think this is what makes corporate leaders different from some of the greatest leaders ever.
3 comments:
I read a joke in a MAD comic book where a bunch of people are discussing with apparent joy around a table, and one person makes a toast and says, "I'm glad I have your unanimous support for the proposal. Who knew laying off 20,000 people could make everyone happy?"
That was a dark joke, not a bad joke. It was funny in a way where we could laugh, but be fully aware of the harsh realities for some that comes from losing a job that feeds a large family. A person who loses a job is like a casualty for the "greater good" of the free market.
There is now a $700 Billion bailout for the big corporate giants in Wall Street. Whether or not this will trickle down to the "comman man" who is really hurting is hard to say.
There is one example that was recently discussed in one of other classes about leaders hired with one of main purposes being downsizing. Nissan a Japanese company which was running in loses made Carlos Ghosn a non Japanese as their CEO. The main reason lot of people think for doing this was as it was against Japanese culture to layoff people they wanted an outsider who can make the tough decisions for them and be the villain that helps turn around the company.
Even though layoffs are not heroic sometimes they are necessary. The CEO's have to take care of themselves, the stock holders and the employees and I think most of them do it in that order. So when they have to make tough decisions especially in US the decision is layoffs.
Corporate leaders are the same as political leaders.They work for the best interests of their people but it also has a darker side to it. CEO's have to look after the interests of their employees as well as their own economic interest. If employees are not given the lay-off and companies are not down-sized during an economic depression, it will not only result in huge losses for the company but also affect all the employees....but it is the survival of the fittest. Some go to make way for the others while some are just let off to secure the jobs of others. I believe that it must be hard for someone to fire an employee< but then again the CEO's have other things to consider than the economic difficulties of a family or two. Sounds harsh but it is the way it is.they have to work for what's best for their company, after all, their survival depends on it.
Post a Comment