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?

Comments

What's the point?

[SpaghettiPattern]

I am not pleased with our CEO. We all aren't. It's a way of life.

I'd settle for one that understands business strategy well and who knows how to keep the company profitable in the mid and in the long term. But those are few and far between.

The employee's choice will inevitably be the most popular one. Which most of the time isn't one bit better than the status quo.

Re:What's the point?

[mattwarden]

Your quote does not apply. I did not say that you can't discuss strategy unless you're a CEO. I mocked the ridiculous attitude that many technical people have about how CEOs have no idea what they are doing and the software developer has it all figured out. It is the lack of humility I am mocking, plus the ignorance of the very real fact that people lower in the org only have partial visibility on one or two silos of business operations, and have no access to financial statements. There is a reason for financial reporting, and people without this data will make conclusions based on things they see (eg, the premium coffee service being canceled) and generally end up making the wrong conclusions. So why would your first assumption be that the people who have all this information and do have experience with strategy are idiots and have it all wrong?

That's what I am mocking. And the magnitude of this egotistical silliness is unique to tech.

Benign dictatorship

[JasterBobaMereel]

The best form of leadership is a Benign/Benovolent dictatorship, this means they are reasonably popular but can get things done and can make the unpopular decisions when needed

The reasons this works for a company, are the same ones that work for a country... ... but if a company stops being profitable they go bust and disappear, whereas when a country does the equivilent you just get a classical dictator

Democracy is a terrible system of government, but it is the least bad system in the long term ....

Requires a knowledge of the job

[petes_PoV]

C-level leadership is elected by the employees for a one-year term.

So how to "ordinary" employees (even ones from a recruitment company) know what qualities to look for in a C-level? Do they understand the legal obligations that C-levelship brings. Do they know what is possible or within scope for a particular "C"?

Or do they simply engage in a beauty contest and vote for people they like, or who make the biggest promises: "vote for me as your CEO and I'll give everyone a pay rise and annual bonus"

It all sounds lovely and group-huggy. But does it actually make the company more successful or a better place to work?

Re:Under one condition

[Niggle]

Surely the irony factor would be highest with an iron parachute?