The powerful really love rigging stuff in their favor huh
???
You say that like there's anybody that doesn't. The powerful just have more scope to actually do so.
What seems to happen often is blurried lines: the ceo founder is majority shareholder, the board is his family, friends and paid lawyers, the shareholders are asleep at the wheel as long as some profits rain in, the regulator finds no law broken (because they re so monitored they dont even try playing games at the board).
Tesla is a model of bad governance, to the point the harshest sanction a regulator could levy against their chairman/ceo for manipulating the stock price, a capital sin, is to make him only CEO, while not removing his family members from the board... a systemic european bank is the model of good governance: you can see epic ceo vs board fights, shareholder revolutions etc etc.
You mention Europe but for instance in France it has been a corporate tradition too have both merged and separation has statistically lead to a significant underperformance.
FYI it is called the agency vs stewardship theories and currently it seems like a academically the stewardship is slightly favored.
Such structures should ultimately be up to the shareholders.
I like the structure of bee colonies.
The queen controls the temperament, the workers control the queen and adjust the rate of growth or contraction. Periodically workers replace her with one her of daughters (via regicide).
I'm not sure what the takeaway here is though, as I don't like the idea of a monarchy or of communism.
Let’s dig into this.
- Queen stops producing workers and is replaced by workers (regicide) or replaced by beekeepers (ie. shareholders)
- Bees due to disease or other calamity don’t provide enough honey for their shareholders and they lose their hive and possibly life more than likely
I’d prefer not to lose my life if I don’t produce at work if workers or shareholders aren’t happy
I think there might actually be some interesting things to consider if a hive-like approach was used for a business, but I'm not sure your assessment really gets to the heart of it.
In some ways, it's kind of like a co-op.
Certainly a fun idea to play with
First, its not like bees get to negotiate their salaries and seek employment elsewhere.
Secondly, at scale you have to consider large beekeeping operations or even small ones which all have…shareholders.
So either the co-op needs to take into consideration societal and personal needs (ie. crime, health, housing) or your comparison needs to be rooted in basic economics (ie. supply, demand, labor markets).
Which is what the OP meant by “monarchy or communism” because fundamentally bee societies are more akin to government than business.
BUT, lets ask the bees what they think. I’m sure they’d prefer modern Westernized human employment over a labor camp like existence ;)
They switch hives by accident, the beekeeper can cause it (to beef up a weak colony or by accident) and sometimes they do it intentionally, the males in particular.
I'm not sure why you jump to this extreme. Being removed from your job sounds about right.