I wonder how he rates his own perfomance.
I wonder how he rates his own perfomance.
Twitter on the other hand, is a company dealing with sociological/societal challenges, being that it's a social network. That takes an entirely different kind of skill set to do well as a CEO for.
Either way, he's essentially abdicated his CEO role at both companies, and his chaotic management style is on full display now, which confirms the Tesla and SpaceX reports. But why did Tesla and SpaceX thrive where Twitter is failing? Because the former companies grew up to create processes that contain Musk; whereas Twitter was bought outright, so his blast radius is unlimited there. Twitter has no Musk immune response.
At SpaceX when Musk suggests X, where X is... I dunno, an really dumb idea that no one would ever want, the people at SpaceX know how to redirect Musk until he drops it, or they know how to shape it into a good idea. At Twitter, they have no idea how to do this, and so Musk always gets his way, every time. All the people with the skills to turn bad ideas into good ones have left, all the people who tried to manage Musk were fired, so now he's left to his whims. And it shows.
If anything, Musk has proven how ceremonial the CEO role is. He has the title CEO of at least 4 companies, and claims 80 hours per week is a full time role. So at best CEO is a part time job.
Also, he can't be effective at 3 of the companies since he's not physically in the office at each. It's impossible to do a good job while remote, as we all know.
I think the thing about CEO is that you can delegate not just the things you probably shouldn't personally be doing, but also the things you should.
I'd believe that some CEOs have a real job, but it's pretty clear that a lot have delegated it away to nearly nothing.