“ They will each feel like your special confidant. They will also see the other board members reacting calmly to the news and start to think that perhaps you actually have it under control. This will calm them down in the future.”
This seems like obviously good advice. But also begins bordering on what feels like manipulation. And that makes me uncomfortable.
In fact, this whole thing feels like manipulation. If nothing happens in a board meeting because it’s scripted, why do they exist? It seems like the solution to not getting fired as CEO is to control the whole thing and manipulate everyone.
>If nothing happens in a board meeting because it’s scripted, why do they exist?
He actually answers that later on.
>Of course, you have already told them all this on the phone, one by one, so you know how they will react. They will want to talk anyway, because part of the meeting is them performing for each other, but, again, no surprises.
Except instead of only "part of the meeting", perhaps it might even be more fitting to say "most of the meeting".
Edit: and also this "Board members show up at meetings to monitor their investment and decide if they still want you to be CEO."
For anyone not aware, this method of discussing individually with stakeholders ahead of time before any decision or approval meetings is a common way to make the meetings go smoothly. Stakeholders won't be surprised by any items you bring up, you won't be surprised by anything they bring up and can address issues ahead of time, nobody will be embarrassed at the meeting (you really don't want to surprise a VP with some fact which might be construed as his team not performing well, especially in front of other VPs), and everyone will be able to see that everyone else agrees with the conclusions of the meeting.
For the stakeholders I talk to, I schedule meetings since their schedules are usually packed, but I can see situations where just pinging them informally would do.
Being somewhat manipulative, secretive, carefully managing flows of information and keeping an iron fist on the levers of control are table stakes for running a public corporation. If you don't have those skills, you will be replaced by someone who does.
When people describe upper management as a snakepit of politics, backstabbing, and backroom deals, this is why.
I’m not sure why you’d feel bad for knowingly manipulating a bunch of people who, if you don’t, could decide to replace you in your job. These aren’t your parents, or your priest.
Put it another way: replacing “manipulating” with “managing” — this is just about managing up as the CEO, and it’s pretty basic advice at that.
This seems like obviously good advice. But also begins bordering on what feels like manipulation. And that makes me uncomfortable.
In fact, this whole thing feels like manipulation. If nothing happens in a board meeting because it’s scripted, why do they exist? It seems like the solution to not getting fired as CEO is to control the whole thing and manipulate everyone.