Less glib, this past year has taught me that a lot of companies are led by genuinely unintelligent people. The number of short sighted, self destructive, and downright childish behavior coming from the C suite of even some big companies has been nearly endless. The idea that Blizzard is led by someone so impulsive that he basically goaded the state into suing him is unsurprising.
> We also found that leaders with psychopathic tendencies were slightly less effective at their jobs in terms of fostering productivity.
Usually the argument is that sociopaths rise to this level of power and eventually flame out. I’ve never seen any argument that sociopathy tends to make you a good CEO, but rather than it makes you more likely to rise to that level.
Even if they are found guilty on all charges, it wouldn't affect their bottom line too much.
But there may be other factors. Companies that sacrificed employees for the public mob did get into problems with their employees.
If they are found guilty, which I think is very likely, their statement is indeed not too smart though.
There's a reason that "meritocracy" was invented as a term to mock the state of things. It's a myth. It was always a myth. A joke.
The people selling the notion that the way things are is the result of a meritocracy is the secular Western equivalent of people using caste as a justification for shabby treatment of have-nots.