Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Would You Fire Your CEO? (cio.com)
As America celebrates a national holiday honoring organized labor, long-time Slashdot reader itwbennett shares this story about the modern workplace:
Three years ago, talent management and human resources company Haufe U.S. created a workplace democracy in which C-level leadership is elected by the employees for a one-year term. In an interview with CIO, Kelly Max, who is currently serving as Haufe's CEO, explains how the company got to this point and what they've learned from the experience.
"If you're going to talk about how your employees 'own' the company, if you're going to tout how they all have a voice, why not go all the way and see what happens? Because why not? You already have people working for and with you who elect you every day, who either agree or disagree with you and follow you, so we wanted to make it very transparent," says Max.
This raises an inevitable question for Slashdot readers: would your own organization work as a democracy? So leave your answers here in the comments. Would your company's employees fire your CEO?
"If you're going to talk about how your employees 'own' the company, if you're going to tout how they all have a voice, why not go all the way and see what happens? Because why not? You already have people working for and with you who elect you every day, who either agree or disagree with you and follow you, so we wanted to make it very transparent," says Max.
This raises an inevitable question for Slashdot readers: would your own organization work as a democracy? So leave your answers here in the comments. Would your company's employees fire your CEO?
I was immensely pleased to see the phrase "raises an inevitable question" in the summary, instead of yet another instance of "begs the question." Thank you, Slashdot. -PCP
There is one element of socialism in here. Not all elements, though, so you Americans can start breathing again.
I'm actually all for the democratic control of companies. If nothing else, stupid voters/employees might end up learning that voting for incompetent or corrupt leaders will actually make you end up without a place to work.
Lemon curry???
Security and its cost is part of risk assessment. And yes, there is a point where security costs more than it's worth. If the possible damage that could happen is 1000 bucks a month and it costs me more than 1000 bucks a month to secure it, then even certain impact realization would not warrant the security expense because it is actually cheaper to simply accept the damage.
Security needn't generate revenue but it has to lower the assessed risk by as much as it costs. Simple as that. This is, by the way, another reason why the whole TSA security theater is completely bogus.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.