What does it take to run the show?

Reading Bob Lutz's Car Guys vs Bean Counters last night. He argues that the downfall of GM started when the MBA Finance guys replaced Engineers and Designers in the company. He believes that CEOs and the top management should not be bean counters but rather should be a "product guys." When I started my first job as a legal intern in ITC group, my boss Mr R would spend hours training me to evaluate all aspects of their business legally.  So much so that, it became a natural extension of my personality to research precedence, cause and effect, analyse and then categorize. I realised the value of my extenusive personality modulation through my first entrepreneurial venture. I realised my training had made me so detail oriented that the semantics of execution were sometimes lost in translation. 
I had to retrain myself to be a master of no trade and a generalist manager who could look at a situation and know the best manner to execute it. I  owe a lot of that remodelling to the software education I had embarked upon to complement my business education through university. System Analysis and Design changed my Life. So a lot of what I became was education and experience and sometimes I am grateful for the diversity I undertook since it made me more trained than what a specialist could ever be.   BUT Lou Gerstner did not know anything about computers when he brought IBM back from the near dead and Allan Mulally had no background in automobiles when he took over Ford. So is it more than education and experience that makes a person a successful executioner? How should CEO's be selected in that case?

Popular posts from this blog

Still a long road ahead for smart cities

What do your biases say about you ?

How to Speak Up at Work