I'm often wondering why we value the opinions of CEOs so high in the first place.
I mean, it's a demanding and complicated role, being responsible for everything and anything. But especially in the larger enterprises they are not involved in the bulk of the business. They're just the ones standing closest to the mic.
Why credit (or blame) them for every utterance? Wouldn't ignoring them — or at least taking the pub talk with a grain of salt — be the better default approach?
I mean, it's a demanding and complicated role, being responsible for everything and anything. But especially in the larger enterprises they are not involved in the bulk of the business. They're just the ones standing closest to the mic.
Why credit (or blame) them for every utterance? Wouldn't ignoring them — or at least taking the pub talk with a grain of salt — be the better default approach?