Subject:
|
Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 26 Jan 2000 09:27:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2344 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> Now in many cases, the employee will be able to be held fully responsible,
> and there won't be much for the CEO to worry about.
Just to clarify - I'm assuming that responsibility goes up the management tree
in a serious case? Ie, the employee, his boss, his bosses boss.. the CEO.
In a lot of cases, managers would claim that sub-managers hadn't informed them
of a problem, especially if they claimed the duty of the layer below was to
inform them of any problems.
This seems similar to what happens adhoc now, but if legislation was created to
make management more responsible, it would be followed by managers delegating
responsibility all the way back down to an employee or lowly manager, in a much
more apparent, job-description, fashion. Thereby creating a nice blanket layer
of irresponsibility.
In an example - how is the CEO of McDuffles, North America, supposed to keep
check on the hiring practices of each of the 10,000 burger chain outlets? They
would have to delegate responsibility for this monitoring to the layer below.
Is it the CEOs fault for having good managers that hire okay managers that
occasionally hire bad managers?
Maybe the focus is wrong.. it isn't exactly the people at fault - it's the
structure that moulds the people. So even if you fired an entire branch of the
management tree, the people who returned would face the same structural
problem.
Hmm, maybe you could argue that it's the CEO's responsibility to maintain a
good corperate structure. Ie a company where an employee can't report a problem
without fear of reprisal is a BAD structure. So maybe getting in a new CEO,
whose responsibility was to create a new organisational structure would work?
Who enforces all of this? Does government have the power to fire a CEO and tell
them to get a new one in to create a better structure?
Richard
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
| James Brown wrote in message ... (...) are (...) Boiled (...) contrary, (...) in (...) direction - (...) First off, the CEO is only responsible for the activities of his employees which are reasonably related to their job. If one of your employees (...) (25 years ago, 26-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
