Slashdot Mirror
CEOs Who Invite Email From All Employees
Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "Cinergy Corp. CEO James E. Rogers, who at 11 one evening was reading email from employees at home while nursing a vodka, is the norm, not the exception at major U.S. companies, the Wall Street Journal reports. 'Advocates say such a policy is a powerful leadership tool that can nip crises in the bud, boost morale, uncover new ideas, and cut through corporate red tape. In the post-Enron era of CEO accountability, reading employee email helps the boss appear hands-on and accessible. But reading and replying to dozens of employee messages each day takes time that could be spent doing something else. Skeptics say the practice distracts CEOs from more-pressing work -- and extends already long workdays.' Of course, portable email devices have made it easier to sift through dozens or hundreds of employee messages each day. While being driven to meetings, Pfizer's CEO says, 'I don't look out the window. I use my BlackBerry and answer my email.'"
"and extends already long workdays"
Oh, cry me a river. So a guy making hundreds of millions has to extend his workday. Isn't that the price you pay for having that job? You want an easier job, just be some other senior executive, make 20-25% as much money, and have an easier life.
Yes, and I'd be glad to hear that my CEO was returning email instead of (or at least while) taking place in the latest pro-am or attending other "promotional" company-paid vacations.
Again, I would expect nothing less from a competent CEO. I work 10-12 hour days, and at 50-100 times my salary, I would expect the same from them.
While being driven to meetings, Pfizer's CEO says, 'I don't look out the window. I use my BlackBerry and answer my email.'"
:)
And that reason alone, is why I will never feel sorry for CEOs long work days. Besides, everybody knows that CEOs are figureheads and the real work is done by the managers looking for promotions into more cushy jobs and getting the little guys to work their asses off to deliver the given product/service on a deadline that means THEIR job.
Yea.. fuck CEOs. Until I am one -- and then I will look back at this post and think how delusional I was while I bathe myself in hundred dollar bills while telling my driver to take me to my job where I do little work and -- oh wait, I am still a peon. Long way to go yet
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
I always thought a CEO should know as much as possible about what is going on in his/her firm. Sounds like this guy thinks that way too. And he does it HIMSELF, not via his admin assistant. Some CEOs couldn't even turn on a Blackberry, and others don't give a rat's ass what is going on as long as they get thier way and thier bonuses.
The downside of actually reading his email is that he can't say "I didn't know" if the Feds come asking questions about his company's actions or financial statements.
Employees shouldn't be dropping him emails when the towels are out in the restroom. Only really imporant issues/crises should be sent to him.
I think that if I was in a CEO position, I would have my email sifted through by a secretary and then only the real meat forwarded to me; giving me more time to do other things. A CEO who spends large amounts of time reading email feels like a micromanager and would give me less confidence in the leadership of the company.
I miss the Karma Whores.
Sometimes CEOs have to fire people. And yeah, it's pretty unfortunate. But would you rather he hadn't answered your emails?
And here's what it comes down to...appearances. Yes, I understand that it can have some effect, but how useful is putting on the appearance of being hands-on and accessible when they're really not?
1) have a whitelist of senders you always read
2) have a spam-filter to filter out non-humans
3) everything else goes to the "let my assistants handle it."
Of #3, read:
a) everything your assistants mark for your attention
b) a RANDOM selection of everything else, so you can get a feel for what people are sending you. Don't spend too much time on these, maybe 15-60 minutes a day. Since your assistants are already doing the replies you don't even need to compose replies.
3b is very important in the life of a CEO - it helps keep you informed of what your suborninates - at least those who are bold enough to email you - are thinking.
If the George W. Bush did this, he'd have a better idea of what people are thinking. Damn thing is he probably IS reading a sample of letters/faxes/emails but not a RANDOM sample.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
whoever modded him offtopic didn't see the joke...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
There's post-Enron CEO accountability?
In what alternate universe?
For some reason, everytime I email a C*O it turns out to be a "Resume Generating Event" - Nobody likes being upstaged, especially clueless "Leadership". If it is a good idea, those above you will torpedo you because they are threatened. If it's a bad idea, you just broadcasted it to the top dog.
Let the retards drive the company into a mess, or do the right thing? It's all about the ethics though. I've always used the "Nuclear Bomb" theory myself when dealing with these situations. Sure, you can only do it once. However, take as many of the bastards with you as you can.
Pessimists.net - as if life wasn't depressing enough.
Hey, we have a policy (quite and off the record) of reading employee email where I work as well--of course in our case I guess they didn't REALLY intend for us to read it.
What exactly is it that CEOs do that they /shouldn't/ be reading email from their employees? Maybe I'm just uninformed, but don't CEOs merely preside over the company, while setting a direction and tone? It's not as if they spend all day coding or conducting experiments. What mission-critical function does the CEO serve such that reading employee email is a waste of time?
I guess I'm asking what, exactly, a CEO should be doing instead of reading employee email?
Skeptics say the practice distracts CEOs from more-pressing work -- and extends already long workdays
But it's ok for the employees that get stuff out the door to be required to stay up until the wee hours of the morning to participate in a conference call with some people across the globe? Or for employees to spend all day answering emails and then start actually working round about 5? Don't expect me to cry a river for CEO's any time soon.
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
Would it be OK if he was nursing a joint? Just wondering if only addictive, toxic drugs are acceptable for CEOs.
Good CEO's dont care about day to day, or even quarter to quarter fluctuations in their stock price, provided its not ridiculously drastic.
Good CEO's look long term. So should you.
If the hours spent on getting the job done were the only metric, then just about everyone at a corporation these days should get CxO salaries.
CEOs probably need to worry if morale is going in the shitters.
In the military, good leaders have a feel for how their E-2s and E-3's are doing. They don't go "into the trenches" every day, but they also realize that they sometimes need to see the world with their own eyes, instead of through the beer glasses of the people below them. These are the same leaders that seem to engender a sense of wanting to go the extra mile in their subordinates, instead of needing to do it out of basic fear and survival.
Some leaders you will willingly eat glass for. Others you do it for simply out of fear, if you cannot avoid having to do it.
I dont know about you but i would like my CEO to be sober while he reads my genuine ideas ... otherwise he will end up thinking that these ideas are good (because i was drunk while i wrote the e-mail to him too :p) and i will have to make these ideas into projects and make profits ... from ideas like a flying coffee cup and freezing microwave ... (this means i would have to get the clients drunk to make them buy this stuff...)
:)
On the other hand, i know dudes who would answer to e-mails politely 24/7 if they get free vodka, a driver with a car and a blackberry for it
I'd tell you the chances of this story being a dupe, but you wouldn't like it.
I think it's a good idea to have an open channel to the top, and I've worked with many principals that really do listen. However from what I've seen, most employees should think long and hard before clicking on 'send'.
From what I've seen in quite small companies with principals open to direct communication, the majority of the employees do themselves more harm than good simply because they have no real perspective as to where they fit in the business.
An example. Recently at a company 'meet and greet' dinner so that the local engineers can meet each other and find out what skillsets are there, a co-worker completely confused his place and what was to be gained with the meeting. The CEO, COO, and CTO were present along with a bunch of co-workers from local client sites.
The co-worker babbled on and on about petty nonsense that was specific to our one particular site. Nothing to do with the other engineers' situations. Nothing having to do with company business at all, just petty political issues and generally self-serving complaints. Basically the co-worker saw what he did as "I showed them, I'm nobody's fool and they will see how powerful and valuable I am". The net result was that the CEO referred to the co-worker as 'a cancer on the company that should be removed at all costs'. The co-worker just doesn't have a clue about what it means to own and run a business and what his place is as an asset to the company.
This isn't uncommon from what I've seen. People have this weird utopian view of how things should be, without any reality in the mix. Though ultimately it is only the fault of the employee, a direct channel to the top is only the express to unemployment for many confused people.
If you can't clearly see the role of your CEO, you'd better think carefully before you click 'send'.