My point is that anyone competent would refuse to take the job. BY doing the opposite (taking the job) , the prospect hire is demonstrating that he/she (a) lacked the expertise to detect the dumpster fire, or (b) lacked the expertise to understand it was not salvageable (c) lacked the work-rate to do their due diligence (particularly for RISK management).
That doesn’t mean I’m incompetent; just that people you should hire on those terms are hard to find.
Anyway, I don’t have idea what happened here. The long time to fill the position also could have been because they were looking for a CRO that was better suited for a mushroom farm (kept in the dark + fed bullshit).
The resume of the new CRO suggests it was the former, not the latter.
If that's not correct, I'd love to be enlightened.
Not a lawyer, but various CxO’s specialize in jumping in and trying to repair failing companies. I’m sure they’ve figured out how to shield themselves from personal liability if their new employer ends up laying of 100,000 people and crashing the global economy.
I’ll probably fail spectacularly. But I will still have money in the bank.
Just not that bank.
As for future employment. At least the current one tried to right the boat instead of jumping ship.