Slashdot Mirror
Yahoo CEO Wrongly Claimed To Have Degree In Computer Science
jmcbain writes "Scott Thompson, Yahoo!'s CEO who was hired on January 4 of this year, was found to have lied about his CS degree from Stone Hill College. Investigation from an activist shareholder revealed that his degree was actually in accounting, and apparently Thompson had been going with this lie since the time he served as president of PayPal's payments unit."
Was he able to do the job well? Does it REALLY matter? If he got away with it that long I say good for him, if his employers aren't smart enough or care enough to verify they weren't really that concerned about his credentials.
"Investigation from an activist shareholder revealed that his degree was actually in accounting" Back when I worked for Disney we called Eisner that guy from accounting, it's actually a Berke Breathed quote we borrowed. It's amazing how many of these supposed CEOs are glorified accountants. Kind of explains the whole lack of imagination in big business.
If you can get to the top ranks of a tech company without a CS degree, it's almost like a big FU to all of us that do hold CS degrees. I've always was kind of awed by people I work with that understand everything I do about technology and even CS concepts but don't have a degree. It's humbling and enlightening. Despite being 10x harder, a BSCS is kind of treated like a liberal arts degree these days. It's something to be personally proud of, but it seems to hold no real weight on ones resume. At least, that's how it seems.
So, IMO that makes it an even bigger red flag when someone claims to have such a degree when they don't. It speaks to me of true cluelessness.
If he were labor, HR would have sent security to escort him out of the building before this even got to press.
That must be one hell of a golden parachute he's packing.
An accounting and liar CEO - that's gonna work.
-- --
Why do CEO's in this country think they are above everyone else, demanding excessive compensation and feel they can prevaricate with impunity when it suits their purposes?
Because people continue to give them excessive compensation, and they keep getting away with the lies... In other words, they believe that because it is true.
Oh fer crissake...
The man lied. Nothing more to it than that
"wrongly claimed"... give me a break.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Well no really because of course that ruthless and efficient leader is all about ruthless and efficient salary, bonuses and of course golden parachute.
Ruthless and efficient thinking ie psychopathic thinking demands that those with the greatest resources make the most profitable victims, in this case it is the investors.
The pattern should be pretty obvious by now. Fudge the books to create the false illusion of high profits, ramp up salary and bonuses, make it look like you are doing something through acquisitions, mergers and, mass sackings. Make it all last as long as possible and try to avoid jail when you bail with your golden parachute just before the company goes belly up.
Modern CEO no qualifications required beyond excellence in PR=B$ (lies for profit).
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
I say fire him immediately. Having someone at the top who egregiously lied for so long sets the tone for the whole company. That's not how you want to do business, so that's not who you want as your leader.
Hmm. And there in lies the problem.
An IT department may be viewed as stocking multiple redundancies, such RAID, backup servers, and let's be honest, a large inventory of computers parts that are not currently being used. Management, classically trained, will look at all those DVI and HDMI cables, and wonder why IT needs to many of them. So what do they do? Play the fools game by trying to measure the 'real' needs of IT, by cutting their budget, and making the manager of said vision beg for parts. They are not aware that those extra parts are kept on hand because it's more efficient, in the 'we are paying our employees an impressive hourly wage / salary, and it does us no good for them to continue to be paid for twiddling their thumbs while we wait a day or two for the parts they need to come in.' Someone will then offer to pick up said items from a local supplier who will, of course, noticing their immediate need, have the company paying good money for shite product. And when you factor in shipping costs, as well as the (very often) lower costs of ordering from an online supplier, it makes sense to order in bulk.
I am John Hurt.
Failure for Yahoo's board to terminate his employment with cause for fraud would be a clear indication of corruption at the highest levels in the organization.
I would not be surprised if he were to stay. That's just how those people think. It's basically the good 'ol boy system in the modern day.
Interestingly enough, what you describe is a case of shitty cost accounting.
Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
Sadly, there are few people who have the luxury of completing two master's level degrees and optionally a doctorate.
What, no, that's just plain silly. In order for advanced degrees to have value, you have to work in the field, then either get the degree while working, or take time off work. Not right out of undergrad.
Your hypothetical monster combo is going to be 40 years old at a minimum in order to be of any value. You can get the degrees quickly, and then spend 5 years working before you really understand how it works.
Only your last line makes sense. Get the IT based degree, and partner with someone who has the business sense. The difference is, you are equal partners. Not the IT guy in the dungeon being told what to do. That is a powerful combination, two people who can complement each other. Not a single monstrosity who thinks he knows everything and has to consult no one.