Another way to look at your story is that the CEO is just doing their job. Perhaps they had a specific talent, perhaps they had a stroke of insight, or perhaps they just randomly made the right decision. But at the end a cynic could say they were just being at the right place at the right time.
On the other hand, you can also say that the board should be paid 100x because they somehow picked the right CEO.
But why stop there? Shouldn't the CEO's parents get a bonus for the upbringing of such a brilliant person? Or should the CEO's teachers get paid as well? The possibilities are endless... why attribute success to one single person?
PS: I'm not seriously saying this is what we should do. I'm just trying to illustrate how the concept of fairness looks a bit funny if you think hard about it.
> The possibilities are endless... why attribute success to one single person?
I don't disagree, but this same critique can be applied to anyone, yet it disproportionately gets applied to CEOs. How can a SWE justify their $300k compensation? After all, the fact they hold that job can all be explained by circumstance, parenting, genes, being born in the right country, etc.
Indeed. That's kind of my gut reaction to highly paid big tech employees asking for "fair" pay. Seems a bit "hypocritical"(?) to only consider fairness within the industry and not society as a whole.
On the other hand, you can also say that the board should be paid 100x because they somehow picked the right CEO.
But why stop there? Shouldn't the CEO's parents get a bonus for the upbringing of such a brilliant person? Or should the CEO's teachers get paid as well? The possibilities are endless... why attribute success to one single person?
PS: I'm not seriously saying this is what we should do. I'm just trying to illustrate how the concept of fairness looks a bit funny if you think hard about it.