Quote Originally Posted by Vindec View Post
I'm surprised a Chief Executive gets involved in the degree of detail highlighted by the Inquiry. Normally a Chief Executive of a large Corporation would leave it to one of the specialist Directors to deal with the nitty gritty leaving it to the CEO to sign off what was agreed. Instead Vennells got involved in the day to day stuff and implicated herself totally as a result. Dare I say in some large organisations staff below that level often don't bother the CEO with the detail and keep things away from the CEO but Vennells to her detriment not only involved herself to a high degree but also can't avoid the fact that as CEO she is ultimately responsible for everything that has happened

Given the fact that she has faced some very detailed questioning I don't think she has done that badly but the very fact she was so involved in the detail of everything that went on her level of culpability is such that anyone would struggle to put on a better performance.
So, what does your typical CEO do exactly to merit these vast sums so many of them earn?