So it's fair that CEO is not going to know how an org does its hiring on a day to day basis. It is too much detail. But leadership is a lot about vision (point to where you want to go - with input of course), setting the culture (how do you wanna behave in getting there - ie be a dick? Don't be dicks?), rewarding the right behaviors (promo cultures, rubriks, leadership principles, bonuses etc). Yes they do it through their generals but you get the point.
When I was at Google, I noticed a very large emphasis on process and "homogeneity". Group think was absurdly high - down to the kind of language you were "encouraged" to use at different settings. Amazon in comparison felt like a more direct (albeit brutal) place. You could see the knife coming at you.
This culture may not have been initiated by Sundar but was highly tolerated by him. And he tolerated it because the cash cow wasn't under threat and they kept hoarding decent talent (and keeping them under utilized just so competition doesn't get them) despite not being the highest paying employer.
Yes the coasters and resters and vesters had fun but allowing them to do so is all leadership.
So CEO's are supposed to be magical super-rare humans who do nothing but are worth 1000s of regular workers and take all credit for good returns...
Until things go bad and then it's all the worker's fault! The ship was too big to steer!
If CEOs are worth as much as they think they are then they should have no problems taking all of their comp in stock, and bonuses (if any!) should be handcuffed to hard goals.
I did not argue that CEO's are deserving of their absurd pay, I argued to look into the overall Team results and the players before simply blaming the Coach.
