Really makes it clear just how useful these CEOs are day to day
I want to point out again that on a very basic, definitional level, every single person in the comments of this post are more qualified to be CEO of Starbucks than Brian Niccol
Brian Niccol was the CEO of Chipotle, a position he no longer holds because he was bad at it
Seeing as none of us have yet proven to be bad at being CEOs, we are by definition more qualified to be CEO of any company than someone who has already proven he’s bad at the job
If you’ve ever worked as a barista, especially if it was at Starbucks, you’re far more capable of doing this job than Brian Niccol. To me this is the obvious solution to get a much cheaper, better pick: Literally don’t even bother interviewing, just do a random lottery of baristas. Are there better methods? Probably, but it’s still a significant improvement than finding one of ~15 dudes in the country as specifically unqualified for this job as this man is.
He was a union buster, that’s why they brought him in. He’s qualified to either break the unionization or destroy the company trying, and they are perfectly willing to destroy the company to stop the union. Why should they care? If they can’t bust the union, sell off Starbucks to some private equity firm and liquidate the whole thing.
