Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="CharlesRyan" data-source="post: 4686813" data-attributes="member: 5265">Jeff, you may be right, but I'll counter with a couple of my perceptions:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">First, the suits are almost always invoked in a context of bitterness.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">Second, it may seem charitable to deflect blame, but as I've posted already, doing so can seem tantamount to saying the individuals have no actual power or responsibility. I can't speak for anyone else, but when I was in the Big Chair, I found that subtext a bit insulting.</li>
</ul>This is exactly my point: You're taking a perfectly reasonable statement and turning it into &quot;proof&quot; of an imagined corporate structure you actually know nothing about.The GSL is a contract. Of course the legal department has to buy into it--what sane entity would enter into a binding contract without the support of their legal advisors? Certainly, when I ran my own business, my lawyer wrote or at least reviewed every contract. That didn't change the fact that I was responsible for those contracts and the business and strategy they represented.It's also a major strategic decision. Of course there are people--peers and up the chain of command--who have a vested interest in the strategy and who's buy-in is important. That's true in any business or organization with more than three people.So from where I'm sitting, the mere fact that you equate &quot;waiting on Legal&quot; with &quot;Scott can't actually be responsible&quot; reveals what looks like a cynical predisposition.I think this cynicism is so widespread that people don't even recognize it. Maybe I'm overreacting, but it's a long-time pet peeve of mine.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="CharlesRyan, post: 4686813, member: 5265"] Jeff, you may be right, but I'll counter with a couple of my perceptions: [LIST] [*]First, the suits are almost always invoked in a context of bitterness. [*]Second, it may seem charitable to deflect blame, but as I've posted already, doing so can seem tantamount to saying the [i]individuals[/i] have no actual power or responsibility. I can't speak for anyone else, but when I was in the Big Chair, I found that subtext a bit insulting. [/LIST] This is exactly my point: You're taking a perfectly reasonable statement and turning it into "proof" of an imagined corporate structure you actually know nothing about. The GSL is a contract. [I]Of course[/I] the legal department has to buy into it--what sane entity would enter into a binding contract without the support of their legal advisors? Certainly, when I ran my own business, my lawyer wrote or at least reviewed every contract. That didn't change the fact that I was responsible for those contracts and the business and strategy they represented. It's also a major strategic decision. [I]Of course[/I] there are people--peers and up the chain of command--who have a vested interest in the strategy and who's buy-in is important. That's true in any business or organization with more than three people. So from where I'm sitting, the mere fact that you equate "waiting on Legal" with "Scott can't [I]actually[/I] be responsible" reveals what looks like a cynical predisposition. I think this cynicism is so widespread that people don't even recognize it. Maybe I'm overreacting, but it's a long-time pet peeve of mine. [/QUOTE]

Verification