Ilya is a guy who is on the board and supported the board decision until it was clear that the mood of the company meant that the entire project was hosed as a result, then argues that the board he himself is 1/6th of, is incompetent.
This is less Ides of March, more Leopards Ate My Face.
The romans, pre-Caesar, had been extremely wary of concentrated power and had therefore ruled the empire by committee - the senate. There was no emperor before Caesar. They would give individuals short-term grants of specific powers necessary to do an assigned job such as managing a province or to a general fighting a war. One such grant of temporary power being "dictator" (where we get the modern word from).
Caesar was really out for himself at the expense of the empire, had enriched himself via military campaigns in gaul, then literally crossed the line by "crossing the [river] rubicon" and bringing his army into the city of Rome, and declared himself dictator for life. This was all too much for Brutus et al who were defending traditional roman values in plotting the murder of this egomaniac.
So, in the Ilya=Brutus analogy, is he the disloyal friend or is he the one defending the empire by getting rid of an egomaniac (Ilya: "ego is the enemy of growth") ?