CEOs get blamed for layoffs after board meetings, but investors aren't malicious. Rapid macro-economic shifts, especially in US banking policy, force drastic decisions. Most leaders react to market changes rather than act from malice, yet the market still labels them as bad people.
And then you're judged after each board meeting, and the CRO is the most judged of all.
Yeah, it just is. Yeah. And your investors are not the bad guys who, you know, invested too much money intentionally and forced this company to take this path. There's so much blaming in the market of, oh, the CEO is a bad person because they had to do a layoff. The CEO, the macro conditions changed faster than ever in the history of banking policy in the US. So a CEO is just reacting to the game on the field, and that doesn't make them a bad, bad meanie.
No, there's elements of truth in it, right? There's always hints of truth, like maybe the VC's overfunded you, maybe the CEO shouldn't have done it, but mostly it was done for not the wrong reasons, right? And then almost, and then no one cares. It wasn't done out of malice.