Submitted by guybehindawall t3_ywy8ut in WorcesterMA
MassInsider t1_ixjz6uh wrote
Reply to comment by your_city_councilor in Eric Batista Hired As New Worcester City Manager by guybehindawall
Again, they ALL. Interview. Other. People. All of them. The only scenarios is in instances where a position is created for a specific person. And even then, depending on corp policy, they may still interview someone. Because decisions made in a vacuum are bad.
To your point, the fix may be in. But they do it because its due diligence.
If you are ok with elected officials doing just whatever the hell they want, that is your right. That they are ok with it looking that way is rather frightening
your_city_councilor t1_ixk5gho wrote
>Again, they ALL. Interview. Other. People. All of them.
That is simply not true. They might consider who is the best person and have some discussion in the board, but no, they simply do not all, or even generally, interview other people. Where do you get this from?
>If you are ok with elected officials doing just whatever the hell they want, that is your right. That they are ok with it looking that way is rather frightening
George Russell was right. Batista should have been hired on way back without any silly national search, which progressives glommed onto just because the schools were doing, which was because the schools have long been in disarray and someone outside was necessary to change directions.
MassInsider t1_ixonhmg wrote
Yea I was looking into this more today, specifically your example of CEO of IBM.First, I was a tech recruiter for a decade on the company side. I learned a few things. You never just take the next person up. Ever. You always challenge that person with what the market will present so you are always making analytical decisions based on the quality of the talent you can access. The only difference is in hard to find engineering talent. You typically need a group of whatever discipline you are looking for. That can be based more on opportunity. You are always looking and engage when you can develop someone interested.
As to your example of CEO at IBM. Yes, Arvind Krishna was internal. Ginni Rometty was internal. They know whose next, more than likely. If they haven't decided they know it is one of a few people. Because they have a leadership development program and are nurturing leaders. They don't have a next person or they don't know what they will do. Apples and oranges. And even they hired externally in 1993 when the business was in a bad place. Another example is Intel, whose current CEO left the company for 10 years and ran EMC and VMWare before they hired him as CEO last year. And we aren't even talking about the right level here. IBM has nearly 300k employees, Intel has over 100k. Worcester has a few thousand.
And I am personally fine with Batista. Much more than his predecessor. They did him no favors doing this the way they did. One councilor even addressed accusations of back room deals during the last meeting. I don't have any info about anything like that , but they shouldn't be surprised about the accusations. They did it to themselves. Now they are going to put him in front of community meetings? This idea that they couldn't wait to let him do these meetings before appointing him is absolutely absurd. They have hundreds of openings is the reason? Almost all those hires will be levels away from the CM and who the CM is has no effect on their lives. People take jobs for money, benefits, and their immediate report. Not their manager's manager's manager's manager. Especially in a govt job. Its all absurd.
When Eric chose to speak up in support of a search, when he could have chosen silence, that was him saying he was confident. Just play it out and look like you did your job. Not like Augustus chose his successor.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments