Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Winston O Boogie jr
What do you expect would be the concerns of the network president? Of course she wants to keep her network #1. That's the goal of all the networks. And of course she would take the blame if they slipped in the ratings. That's her responsibility.
And why do you feel that the network was reluctant to deal with Williams? They suspended him for six months without pay. That sounds like they've dealt with him. Or maybe you think that he should just be fired. That may happen, in the future, but I would say that they've taken a first step.
|
Of course I know the content of the 1st paragraph. My mind set is from the perspective of the position of remaining number one is not a valid consideration when dealing with wrong doing and damage to the network's credibility.
I feel they were reluctant only because for me what he did was "cause" for dismissal. It is not worth tip toeing around the "cause" as it sends the wrong message to every other executive and employee in the organization. As difficult as it may be it is the responsibility of senior management to replace even a super star when they screw up and do what ever it takes to assure the performance is unaffected.
Almost any executive or star performer removed for "cause" would or could win a popularity contest....which has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
There are always varying opinions regarding removal of somebody for doing wrong. The above is my opinion and past experience.