No, they define the process for decision making (ie: the values) and then enforce that it is followed. That includes finding those who don't follow it and either providing guidance or ultimately firing them. Of course, the people you're trying to find may be actively trying to hide.
There is a difference between not making direct business decisions and doing nothing.
It've very very minimal what they do. The overall performance of the executive is determined by his selection of right hand men. The executives main skill is managing the board and selecting the right people to do things for them.
The executive is not talented at creating, building or running a company. His main talent is selecting the people who do it for him. Also honestly, all this "value setting" stuff is trivial. Ultimately the people underneath him adapt to what works regardless of values.
A contrarian example is Steve Jobs. A man who dipped his fingers into every aspect of the company.
My phone is different from an iphone in literally millions of ways, some thousands of which Jobs could conceivably have perceived, but very, very few of them are better for his attention to them, and in many of them my phone is objectively better.
Then Steve Jobs came roaring back and turned the entire company around.
The anecdotes you describe. I'm sure it's true. But it's not the full story.
But it matters whether they are true.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2018/12/13/how-did-steve-...
That's because that is their experience in the workplace.
An executive only has to make a few decisions a year, but any one of them could make or break the company.
Selecting people and value setting may seem trivial, but that's because you only see the results, and not the process. Start from a blank slate and try to select the right people and choose the right values to make a company, and see how easy it really is.
Also believe it or not, if the executive wanted to, he could delegate those few decisions as well. The key choice is he has to find the right people to delegate to, that's it...
If the executive has any type of special skill AT ALL. All it usually is, is having the ability to get to his position. That involves navigating politics, convincing people to give him money, making the seed money himself. These are the only things that make him standout if he isn't a founder or worked any other unrelated job.
The even deeper reality is that people aren't even paid by supply and demand but they are paid on the perception of supply and demand.
(Most) executives are paid not by supply and demand but by perception.
But even if we adopt your point of view, is the civil defining rules for safety of nuclear powerplants paid even 1% of the damage Fukushima has caused?