Survey Summary: How Managers and Execs Rate Their CEOs

•  
  msteryis11/06/07 Report as spam
  1

  Bigwig Biased

  I wonder how much differently this survey might have turned out if 75% of the respondents were the rank-and-file.

•  
  jauniaux11/07/07 Report as spam
  2

  RE: Survey Summary: How Managers and Execs Rate Their CEOs

  "truth be told"

•  
  dthomson.ohe11/07/07 Report as spam
  3

  RE: Survey Summary: How Managers and Execs Rate Their CEOs

  Surprising? Hardly?. A mismatch between the grade a CEO gives him/herself as opposed to the rank and file? I am shocked!!!
  
  In reality the chasm in beliefs between leaders and those being led is human nature. Any time you get bright people working together in an organization, you will have differences of opinion. Each person wants to be seen and appreciated for their ideas and talents. When you have organizations structured in a hierarchical way, there is fighting for attention. Only those who are in alignment with and connected "politically" seem to receive the attention. Those who are bright and don?t receive the attentions blame it on many things, one being a lack of leadership from the CEO. I know ? I was there?. Either these people stay frustrated until there is a change in CEO or they leave.
  
  The article mentions the fact that world events can not be controlled by the CEO?duh! As the saying goes, "Sometimes bad things happen to good people." This is normal and in our society today where everything is instantaneous, any bad news is communicating immediately, thus degrading the CEO's reputation. But the good efforts and deeds go unreported and unrecognized.
  
  Anytime you have individuals who have not been a CEO grading a CEO, you will get a significant mismatch in performance ratings. Why? Because until you have stood in the shoes of someone else, you can not truly know the issues and concerns that person faces day to day.
  
  While the piece was entertaining, it obviously is too shallow and lacks the true understanding of the issues behind the issue it tries to explore and hype. Just my opnion?.

•  
  msaifudin11/08/07 Report as spam
  4

  my thoughts

  Some good points. There will always be some amongst the rank and file and in management who will always seek to transfer or project their issues on the shoulders of an organizations leadership. So, no matter what a leader does that is beneficial for the employees will either not be noticed, minimized or just rejected.
  On the other hand, it is natural for individuals to view themselves in the most positive light, whether it's true or not. This is evident by the disparity in CEO's opinions of their work and those of their managers. This is normal behavior; denial is a part of the human experience and is a protective mechanism but can become problematic when the wall of denial cannot be penetrated.

•  
  julielowrie11/07/07 Report as spam
  5

  Are the results really that surprising?

  I think that such a large gap in perception between a CEO and the rank and file reflects serious and significant issues percolating beneath the surface that have not been addressed. I found it interesting that the biggest gap lies in the perception of human qualities, which can actually contribute or detract from a quality work environment. So, while others may not think these attributes are important, they actually will form the basis for the nature and type of management conduct exhibited in the overall office environment. Rank and file employees don't just want a warm and fuzzy CEO, they want someone whom they can perceive as a reasonable human being, mirroring what they think about themselves. If they can't see themselves in the leader of their organization, then how a CEO effectively lead the organization to achieve its vision?

•  
  olanike.israel11/09/07 Report as spam
  6

  RE: Survey Summary: How Managers and Execs Rate Their CEOs

  Without doubt, very few CEOs have the time to consider the importance of establishing good relationships between them and their staff. This will form the basis for employees' trust and desire to get carried along with the 'happenings' in the organisation. From my experience with most of the Executives I have worked with, CEOs often (knowingly or unknowingly) build an 'edifice' around themselves and most employees, finding them impenetrable can think of them as 'anything' but nice, compassionate or having their interest in mind.

•  
  patmoscarelli@...11/12/07 Report as spam
  7

  Response to CEO Ethics

  Much of what is stated in regard to ratings is probably accurate on average, but the data needs to be segmented by company size. I firmly believe, after being on the executive staff of several companies the ethics rating has as much to do with visibility and perception as it does with fact. The richer the pot (particularly stock in small companies with growth potential) the more easily tempted a CEO can become. Also depends on the way the operating model of the business - ex: NOP (Net Operating Profit) driven companies tend to be more cut throat than others. All in all seems like a reasonable result. I can't think of any CEO in my recent history that has motivated me to do much. As a senior leader I'm motivated by the success of my team, and my customers not by my CEO. Just another opinion.

•  
  catherinemaesan11/18/07 Report as spam
  8

  RE: Survey Summary: How Managers and Execs Rate Their CEOs

  This is really true. CEOs don't really interact with their employees. This is because all things inside their minds are business matters. They concentrate more on how to make their business well and running. If you take a look on the Asian TV series presented to us here in the Philippines, you would notice that CEOs are not that socially inclined with their employees. All they do to them is give them a call, discuss and give their task and evaluate whether it's a job well done or a lousy output.

•  
  krishand11/20/07 Report as spam
  9

  RE: Survey Summary: How Managers and Execs Rate Their CEOs

  This is definitely the best evaluation of the CEO/
  's Work and duties. But seems like the surveys have been conducted from the employee point of view and hence those really concerned about CEOs are like Investors, shareholders and the other important top positions in the company. Might be its a good idea for now .

•  
  SumantSood11/27/07 Report as spam
  10

  RE: Survey Summary: How Managers and Execs Rate Their CEOs

  it depends on where the CEO spends most of his time. If he spends less time with employees then this feedback is expected. Also can the survey feedback be segmented as per industry. I am not sure CEOs of retail industry would score as such.
  
  Sumant

•  
  Results@...11/29/07 Report as spam
  11

  RE: Survey Summary: How Managers and Execs Rate Their CEOs

  ceo's need to realize the cost to their businesses. wow, if they started counting the wasted productivity on negativity alone, they would be astounded. perception is real when it comes to the bottom line.

•  
  rajievmalhotra01/18/08 Report as spam
  12

  perception of a ceo

  isnt it the job of a CEO to keep the company afloat in crisis and non crisis situations? well if that is the case then i assume a CEO would be someone with micro focus and always exercising control. This could lead to JUDGEMENT on his image from his peers and collegues that could be detramental on the negative then on the positive side.But i truly believe irrespective of whatever the person exudes, as long as he is committed to the company goal is all that matters.

•  
  CTZNKNE01/18/08 Report as spam
  13

  The "we"ness of organizations

  In large part, the focus of this article is on the "I"; a singular entity. That's a typically Amerocentric perspective. The perspective is primarily driven by culture and values. However, even more disturbing to me is that no one makes tangible the idea that all organizations are "we" entities.
  
  The old saw, "there is no "I" in TEAM" is more than appropriate because while there is a single entity at the head of an organization, the CEO's perspective is siloed . She or he may have an "idea" about how change is to be implemented. A more realistic goal, mined from the contributory ideas of all interested parties (rank and file and managers) may provide the necessarily observed depth. In this case, the interested party, especially in a troubled organization, is everyone. Good ideas do bubble up from below, and it's usually the grunts or the rank and file who occupy and operate in the trenches who see where the disconnect with the customer occurs. They may not be able to articulate in so many words, what changes have to be made or how they can help to turn things around. However, a well trained (either formally or non-traditionally) management class is able to cull raw ideas and mine them into valuable suggestions for top management.
  
  Another perspective in the corporate environment that has lost favor in recent decades is the importance of inclusion of different types of intelligences to a constructive and successful dialogue for change. We, the lettered, have forgotten that intelligence, in most instances, can't be taught. It is innate. A college degree is not a stamp of intellect. Our educational values have drummed out of us the acceptance of, importance in, and urgency for ideas from "non-traditional" sources.
  
  We have trained whole cloth, generations of young people to only believe in the worth of sanctioned, or official sources for genuine creativity. We have forgotten once again, that all knowledge is interconnected. Every perspective, no matter how shallow, enriches the source of innovation.
  
  Finally, because of this focus on the "I", and the tradition of a materialist approach to our educational process, we have forgotten that all knowledge is interconnected. An educational experience which continues to create single dimensional managers ? managers with no background in a tradition of the humanities, or that does not demand a enriched and rounded intellectual rigor , and keeps the focus of the relationship between employers and employees as an issue for the bottom line, will always experience the disconnect between what is experienced and what is perceived.

•  
  scragin01/22/08 Report as spam
  14

  Grammar check?

  As with student papers, a single grammatical error can cast a negative light on the entire thing: "CEOs were almost twice as likely as employees to ?strongly agree with the statement: ?Most CEOs and company presidents do a good job leading there organizations.?" Should be "their".