Let's say that you had been the CEO of a large company for a number of years, let's say 8 or so. During your time in leadership you had been pretty popular even though your results weren't so great. You created very strong loyalty from those in the organization.

So it comes time for you to step down and in the years thereafter the new CEO constantly points out the things you did wrong. It escalates to the point where he is blatantly calling you out for having acted unethically, and perhaps even illegally, during your time at the helm.

What would you do? How do you feel most people would react to having their ethics and legality of their actions called in to question? If you would remain silent and ignore it, why would that be your chosen course?

In all likelihood I would be on a beach somewhere far away from where I worked if I was a retired CEO, so I would not give a rip. The people who were loyal,and knew me back then would know the new CEO is full of crap, and would react accordingly.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(06-12-2019 11:16 PM)banker Wrote:  Let's say that you had been the CEO of a large company for a number of years, let's say 8 or so. During your time in leadership you had been pretty popular even though your results weren't so great. You created very strong loyalty from those in the organization.

So it comes time for you to step down and in the years thereafter the new CEO constantly points out the things you did wrong. It escalates to the point where he is blatantly calling you out for having acted unethically, and perhaps even illegally, during your time at the helm.

What would you do? How do you feel most people would react to having their ethics and legality of their actions called in to question? If you would remain silent and ignore it, why would that be your chosen course?

Part of that goes with the territory. It reminds me of the "three letters" story that circulated for years. A new CEO takes over and on his desk are 3 letters from the old CEO that instructs him to open the appropriate letter upon the occasion of his first three crises. After a year the new CEO has a crisis and opens the letter marked First Crisis. It simply says blame your predecessor. So he does and the crisis over his leadership is averted. Two years later he has another crisis over his leadership so he opens the letter marked Second Crisis. It simply says accept responsibility and promise change. So he does and a couple of years after that his leadership is again called into question. He quickly opens the letter marked Third Crisis and finds there the instruction to write 3 letters.

Unfortunately this kind of leadership can lead to a couple of decades of stagnation for corporations and businesses.

I say this to note that a little blame is easy to shoulder when everyone you worked with knew you well. So a bit of this is standard. But if the CEO had done nothing criminal, untoward, or unethical, and the new leadership claims that he did, then they are probably covering their own unethical or illegal behavior and an attorney may be in line. After all your reputation is really all you or any of us have that is worth fighting to preserve. And if you feel any old loyalties to those you served while in that position perhaps focusing their attention upon the tactics of the new regime is in order.

(06-12-2019 11:16 PM)banker Wrote:  Let's say that you had been the CEO of a large company for a number of years, let's say 8 or so. During your time in leadership you had been pretty popular even though your results weren't so great. You created very strong loyalty from those in the organization.

So it comes time for you to step down and in the years thereafter the new CEO constantly points out the things you did wrong. It escalates to the point where he is blatantly calling you out for having acted unethically, and perhaps even illegally, during your time at the helm.

What would you do? How do you feel most people would react to having their ethics and legality of their actions called in to question? If you would remain silent and ignore it, why would that be your chosen course?

Since you're obviously referring to Obama.....

The Presidency is an awesome responsibility. Most of us can't even begin to comprehend the pressure of sitting in the Oval Office.

This is why past Presidents typically don't criticize current Presidents. They care about the country and they know that a stressed out executive will make bad decisions for the country. They don't want to add to the current President's stress.

The only exceptions in my lifetime: Carter (repeatedly), Obama (repeatedly), and arguably W Bush (once in a veiled attack on Trump's immigration rhetoric). Read into that what you will.

(06-13-2019 07:18 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(06-12-2019 11:16 PM)banker Wrote:  Let's say that you had been the CEO of a large company for a number of years, let's say 8 or so. During your time in leadership you had been pretty popular even though your results weren't so great. You created very strong loyalty from those in the organization.

So it comes time for you to step down and in the years thereafter the new CEO constantly points out the things you did wrong. It escalates to the point where he is blatantly calling you out for having acted unethically, and perhaps even illegally, during your time at the helm.

What would you do? How do you feel most people would react to having their ethics and legality of their actions called in to question? If you would remain silent and ignore it, why would that be your chosen course?

Since you're obviously referring to Obama.....

The Presidency is an awesome responsibility. Most of us can't even begin to comprehend the pressure of sitting in the Oval Office.

This is why past Presidents typically don't criticize current Presidents. They care about the country and they know that a stressed out executive will make bad decisions for the country. They don't want to add to the current President's stress.

The only exceptions in my lifetime: Carter (repeatedly), Obama (repeatedly), and arguably W Bush (once in a veiled attack on Trump's immigration rhetoric). Read into that what you will.

So the two worst presidents criticize those who follow.

(06-13-2019 07:18 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  Since you're obviously referring to Obama.....

The Presidency is an awesome responsibility. Most of us can't even begin to comprehend the pressure of sitting in the Oval Office.

This is why past Presidents typically don't criticize current Presidents. They care about the country and they know that a stressed out executive will make bad decisions for the country. They don't want to add to the current President's stress.

The only exceptions in my lifetime: Carter (repeatedly), Obama (repeatedly), and arguably W Bush (once in a veiled attack on Trump's immigration rhetoric). Read into that what you will.

Wait till Trump leaves.....

(06-13-2019 08:09 AM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-13-2019 07:18 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(06-12-2019 11:16 PM)banker Wrote:  Let's say that you had been the CEO of a large company for a number of years, let's say 8 or so. During your time in leadership you had been pretty popular even though your results weren't so great. You created very strong loyalty from those in the organization.
So it comes time for you to step down and in the years thereafter the new CEO constantly points out the things you did wrong. It escalates to the point where he is blatantly calling you out for having acted unethically, and perhaps even illegally, during your time at the helm.
What would you do? How do you feel most people would react to having their ethics and legality of their actions called in to question? If you would remain silent and ignore it, why would that be your chosen course?

Since you're obviously referring to Obama.....
The Presidency is an awesome responsibility. Most of us can't even begin to comprehend the pressure of sitting in the Oval Office.
This is why past Presidents typically don't criticize current Presidents. They care about the country and they know that a stressed out executive will make bad decisions for the country. They don't want to add to the current President's stress.
The only exceptions in my lifetime: Carter (repeatedly), Obama (repeatedly), and arguably W Bush (once in a veiled attack on Trump's immigration rhetoric). Read into that what you will.

So the two worst presidents criticize those who follow.

I'd say three, not two.