"I plan to—no, I will—take this company from good to great..." So said the CEO of a huge manufacturer/conglomerate only seconds after the maître'd ushered us to his private regular table in the executive dining room on the thirtieth floor of Headquarters Building, an impressive monument to more than a century of modest prosperity.
"...and I want your help," he continued. "I need you to help me communicate my vision, my mission, if you will, to all our stakeholders, including and especially our one-hundred twenty thousand employees, millions of stockholders and customers, and of course our thousands of suppliers. I want all of them on my side, to be on board."
"OK," I said, "let's start by defining your concepts of good and great."
"Good is what we are now," he replied, "great is what we'll be in two, three years."
"And the differences are?" I asked.
"Hmm... the big difference is the price-earnings ratio of our stock is considerably lower than the price-earnings ratio of our largest competitor, and I want it to be equal or higher. I want investors to recognize our value."
And so the conversation went, with his ideals of 'great' to be outstanding financial results. He never mentioned other factors such as investments in R & D, expansions into new territories or technologies, or opportunities for employees to expand their expertise and move to more rewarding jobs within the company. In other words, he never mentioned benefits to anyone but himself and his cronies.
I squirmed. His 'great' was not mine. He focused on money, while I focused on people and their happiness and security, and on long-term viability.
The seeds of my future were planted at that moment.
.webp)
