Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


#Actualsamoth

Posted 07 February 2014 - 01:45 PM

 

 

The people with the most information are going to be the executives at Zynga, but even they don't have ALL the information. They make choices based on the information they have. The management is experienced enough to know the costs both of hiring and of firing, and it is quite likely they took those costs into account in their confidential business plans.  They didn't invite you (or me) to review their confidential business plans, so I'm going to reserve judgement on its wisdom.

 

I have worked with and for too many companies (large and small, successful and not) to assume competence at the executive level at Zynga or pretty much any company.

 

Meh. Lots of people think their boss is incompetent. Most think their boss' boss is incompetent. Virtually everyone thinks the top level execs are incompetent... just as virtually everyone thinks they can make better calls than the coach/manager of their favourite sports team, or the politicians running the company.

 

Sometimes people at lower levels work their way through the tech-ceiling and end up as execs. Then they get to be regarded as incompetent too. 

Not assuming competence (or intelligence) at executive level is not far fetched.

 

Not only is the mere existence of an "executive summary" (read as: abstract for totally unaware dummies) tell-tale, but I can confirm that the vast majority of executives aren't precisely the most competent or intelligent people both from my own experience and from what I get to hear from my wife (who happens to be an executive) every day.

 

As in, there's that customer who doesn't want to pay the 75k bill because <insert lame excuse>, but they promise to sign a 2.5 million contract, I guess we should just waive these 75k. Right, like they're going to pay that, or as if one would want to have a customer like this.

Meet with 5 people, and waste 4 hours on discussing nonsense like this with these assholes, solely because their gigantic egos can't admit that they've made a bad deal. Come out of that meeting with nothing you didn't know before. But hey, we're the greatest guys in the world. In the universe, says I.

 

I know executives who don't know how to do a phone call without help, and who don't know the difference between replying to the sender of an email and replying to all recipients. The same people will refuse to hire an extra hand when their team can't cope with the workload because the company needs to economize. But they're not considering travelling business class or taking the train (which is +/- 30 minutes) on a 600km trip. Which they do just for having lunch with another executive.

But hey, travelling business class is disgraceful. Business class is for, like, you know... monkeys and the like.

 

Of course you could teach a monkey to use a phone, other than an executive...


#1samoth

Posted 07 February 2014 - 01:44 PM

 

 

The people with the most information are going to be the executives at Zynga, but even they don't have ALL the information. They make choices based on the information they have. The management is experienced enough to know the costs both of hiring and of firing, and it is quite likely they took those costs into account in their confidential business plans.  They didn't invite you (or me) to review their confidential business plans, so I'm going to reserve judgement on its wisdom.

 

I have worked with and for too many companies (large and small, successful and not) to assume competence at the executive level at Zynga or pretty much any company.

 

Meh. Lots of people think their boss is incompetent. Most think their boss' boss is incompetent. Virtually everyone thinks the top level execs are incompetent... just as virtually everyone thinks they can make better calls than the coach/manager of their favourite sports team, or the politicians running the company.

 

Sometimes people at lower levels work their way through the tech-ceiling and end up as execs. Then they get to be regarded as incompetent too. 

Not assuming competence (or intelligence) at executive level is not far fetched.

 

Not only is the mere existence of an "executive summary" (read as: abstract for totally unaware dummies) tell-tale, but I can confirm that the vast majority of executives aren't precisely the most competent or intelligent people both from my own experience and from what I get to hear from my wife (who happens to be an executive) every day.

 

As in, there's that customer who doesn't want to pay the 75k bill because <insert lame excuse>, but they promise to sign a 2.5 million contract, I guess we should just waive these 75k. Right, like they're going to pay that, or as if one would want to have a customer like this.

Meet with 5 people, and waste 4 hours on discussing nonsense like this with these assholes, solely because their gigantic egos can't admit that they've made a bad deal. Come out of that meeting with nothing you didn't know before. But hey, we're the greatest guys in the world. In the universe, says I.

 

I know executives who don't know how to do a phone call without help, and who don't know the difference between replying to the sender of an email and replying to all recipients. The same people will refuse to hire an extra hand when their team can't cope with the workload because the company needs to economize. But they're not considering travelling business class or taking the train (which is +/- 30 minutes) on a 600km trip. Which they do just for having lunch with another executive.

But hey, travelling business class is disgraceful. Business class is for, like, you know... monkeys and the like.

 

Of course you could teach a monkey to use a phone, other than an executive...


PARTNERS