McKinsey, technocratic management, and structural inequality

Re:McKinsey, technocratic management, and structural inequality by ekianjo on Tuesday February 04, 2020 @02:21AM (#22233208)

> But that's besides the point. What on earth do they need to get paid that much for?

Companies decide. It is their prerogative. If you dont like it nothing prevents you from having your own billion dollar company where everyone earns the same.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:McKinsey, technocratic management, and structural inequality by pytester on Tuesday February 04, 2020 @05:25AM (#22234086)

There have been a number of shareholder fights over executive pay (it is their money, after all, so it's only natural they should try to claim it). They often end up losing thanks to the trend of passive investors and fund managers (principal/agent problem) with unhealthily close relationships with executives.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:McKinsey, technocratic management, and structural inequality by FabHK on Tuesday February 04, 2020 @11:11AM (#22237213)

> Companies decide. It is their prerogative.

Yet it is also a legitimate target for outside regulation, if there are indicators of market failure (monopoly, externalities, asymmetric information, etc.).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:McKinsey, technocratic management, and structural inequality by ekianjo on Tuesday February 04, 2020 @06:21PM (#22242256)

Asymmetric information is in the nature of business. This is where value emerges.

[ Parent | on HN ]