Who has never been confronted with a CEO’s inconsistencies in investments and expenses? In our experience, few have.
Most CEOs have only a vague idea of the financial consequences of their logistical investment and expense choices when they can put their stamp on the company.
These CEOs refuse to listen to the arguments of practitioners and reply that it is their choice, that the investment is made over time. The king’s decision, so to speak, in the mode of “I choose, and you deal with it! “.
However, these “emotional” choices are often catastrophic in terms of financial and/or operational costs in the long term:
• The use of “too” noble materials requires special maintenance and is therefore more expensive to use.
• These same noble materials must be protected at the risk of no longer reflecting their quality in the event of intensive use.
• The quality/price ratio is often not balanced: only trained eyes can detect the use of noble materials.
However, durability and functionality - which are often proportional to the level of investment - should not be confused with ‘luxury for luxury’s sake’. Materials and facilities must be chosen that will last, without going overboard.
So, who benefits from the crime? There are many according to our knowledge of the subject, but we do not want to offend anyone…
On a more serious note, CEOs should also learn to choose a directional line: one cannot invest crazy amounts of money in “trivialities” and refuse small investments that are useful to employees daily, for example.
However, iniquitous choices are often made without any ethical sense. Business is what it is, but it is likely that the new generations will no longer be fooled by certain shortcomings.
It is to be hoped that the health crisis experienced in 2020 and 2021 will have repositioned the debate with more pragmatic approaches and that CEOs will have learned to differentiate between the useful and the superfluous for the good of their companies and their employees.
Good luck, and good reading.