Why do companies need people in charge of the entire company? I get that certain parts of the company (i.e. production, shipping, marketing, etc) need a leader / someone who keeps an overview. But why do they need someone at the top of the company, who’s just there to.. be someone to represent the company? In most cases I’ve heard of, the CEO is in charge of pretty much everything, but barely knows anything about every individual thing the company does. So why not have no CEO, and instead just leaders of individual groups? Why does someone have to be on top of everyone?
In: 0
Chief executives in any setting (political, business, military, etc.) are responsible for selecting overall goals and being “the final word” on any decision. Individual departments could potentially operate independently for a bit, but there would be no coordination as circumstances evolved.
Consider a company that sells potato chips. Sales have been declining, and the company is running out of money. Something must be done. The head of manufacturing says they should use cheaper potatoes. The head of sales says they should lower the price. The head of finance says they should *raise* the price. The head of R&D says they should develop a new flavor. The head of marketing says they should redesign the bag. Not all of these things can be done at once. At the very least, the heads of all the departments have to meet and come to a decision. Many companies go a step further and designate a chief executive who would run that meeting and make the ultimate decision about what to do.
Latest Answers