Hacker News Reader

Comment by indymike | Hacker News Reader

One of the best and hardest things to do for anything with a board of directors is to establish that EVERY BOARD MEETING starts with a vote on one simple question: "Shall the CEO/Executive Director be retained?" Every company, not for profit or even tiny club that makes this the big question performs it's mission well. Those that don't, well, you get a lot more politics.

View on HN

I love that idea, it formalizes the board taking responsibility for the continued performance of the CEO, and it may also warn a CEO that the board that hired them is about to flip before it is too late.

Accountability is underrated, and I've been in more than one meeting where there was a surprise no vote from a couple of board members. The result was that problems got fixed quickly.

Imagine if, every quarter, a committee voted on whether you keep your job.

Does this make you more or less willing to take risks? More or less focused? Does this decrease or increase the amount of attention you give to "optics" and politics?

Perhaps if you can't deal with that small pressure you shouldn't be a CEO. When things get bad it's going to be a lot more pressure than that.

This doesn't bother me in the least. A CEO's boss is the board of directors, period. Every board meeting is a review on the performance of the organization, and therefore the CEO. Most employees do not roll up to a committee, and their review is usually with a supervisor. The board meeting is no different.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com