←back to thread

157 points milgrim | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
milgrim ◴[] No.41904412[source]
For some context:

The same Boeing satellite bus already experienced a major issue some years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19658800

replies(3): >>41904538 #>>41904815 #>>41904848 #
api ◴[] No.41904538[source]
The complete collapse of Boeing needs to be studied.
replies(1): >>41904590 #
SteveNuts ◴[] No.41904590[source]
They should teach it in every MBA program in the country /s.
replies(2): >>41904667 #>>41905244 #
psunavy03 ◴[] No.41905244[source]
If you gave a company over to only engineers, it would also fail, just in a different way. Same with only HR, or any other field. MBAs are not the problem. Shitty MBAs and shitty leadership are the problem. MBAs aren't there to screw people over; they're there to sustainably run a company. Sure, the bad ones screw people over in the name of nickel-and-diming. But still.

And no, I'm not an MBA . . .

replies(3): >>41905410 #>>41905502 #>>41906270 #
1. fuzzfactor ◴[] No.41905502[source]
No doubt about it, the widespread problem is having non-leaders in leadership positions.

The underlying defect is a system which allows absolutely poor performers to advance based on an overwhelming focus on greed and ambition for power.

When it has become more popularly acceptable to allow it to become so.

The most unsuitable candidates for leading people are what the mainstream finds acceptable or even desirable once the culture shift swings this far.

With either a reduced number of key positions that can afford to be occupied by a dud (or worse), or an increased number of limited-ability competitors prevailing on the basis of their dedication to leveraging greed and even treachery, the kind of leader that's really needed is less likely to advance from entry-level at all.

What would really help would be a culture that inhibits those unsuitable individuals from arising toward those limited number of key positions to begin with.