Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
There is a difference between HR and CHRO, senior marketing expert and CMO, senior developer and CTO.
There is a work ethic stance of always staying in your scope and saying "that's not my job" to any extra stuff someone asks you to do. This is acceptable and perfectly normal. Any team member has a contract, and you owe your company nothing beyond that.
That stance is however only acceptable from regular workers, not a chief board members. For any acronym position that starts with a capital letter C, that stance is not acceptable anymore. That's the difference.
Board members should have a share. Board members should have the right to dictate how a company is, at least proportional to their share or more.
Only those who display T-shaped skills, ownership and interest in the whole business model, not just their scope, are eligible to graduate up to a chief position. If you're not a chief officer, but you want to get there, this is what you do. Analyze the business as a whole and come up with measurable and provable ways of making it better, because this can't be formalized, and thus can't be a part of your contract. This is the surest way to the top.
I am of course speaking of the companies where the main priority is the business and its ethics and not the founder's ego. The latter can't be saved.
random