Most CEOs are incompetent and those that get it 'right' is through sheer luck. Folk like Tim Cook and Zuckerburg are not successful because they're even right. They just were in the right place at the right time.
Not sure why you put Tim Cook and Zuckerberg in the same sentence there, one is a founder the other is a climber. Building a big functional company like Zuckerberg did isn't something just anyone can do, Tim Cook just took over a big functional company and made it continue do what it did before. I think it will be a while until AI can build companies from scratch, but I think just running a company and keeping it do what it currently does wont take nearly as much.
The common narrative is that Tim Cook was the organizer and glue behind Steve Jobs's vision for years, and "just took over a big functional company and made it continue do what it did before" is a funny way to describe the tear Apple has been on for the last ~15 years.
That is a narrative that is borne out by the record but it is a vast oversimplification. If we’re talking about Tim Cook specifically, he was a wonderful choice because of his SCM acumen. He was one of the original architects of the supply chain system Apple uses to this day. Product OEMs that follow a philosophy like Apple’s are in a sense logistics and SCM firms as much as they are software firms.
Particularly in that regard (speaking to SCM) Apple is a place of constant change and that it all works as well as it does is a bit of a miracle brought forth by a bunch of talented people.
That applies equally to other massive, heavily integrated manufacturers, like Toyota for example.
100% I'm aware of Tim Cook's achievements in SCM (although not in detail). I'd simply argue that if Apple were only succeeding at SCM, they would today be a very well run $500B company, instead of defining high-end technology in multiple fields and vying for most valuable company on the planet.
> "just took over a big functional company and made it continue do what it did before" is a funny way to describe the tear Apple has been on for the last ~15 years.
Compared to Facebook, yes Apple just continued doing what they did under Steve while Facebook went from being a small private site for Harvard students to being a global tech giant. I don't see why you would equate those two.
Why did you write that response to me and not to the person above me? I didn't say Tim Cook didn't do anything, keeping the company on course isn't doing nothing. The person above me said he did nothing of value, not me.
But note that keeping the company on course isn't the same thing as building the company and setting the course.
Edit: Also there are a lot of people who can keep a company on course, there are much much fewer who can build a company.
