Rewarding Questionable Behavior: The Google Method

January 11, 2019

I read the Bloomberg write up “Google Board Sued for Hushing Claims of Executive Misconduct.” I do recall that Bloomberg created a stir with its really factual write up about mystery components, but this is about humans and their propensity to behave in interesting ways. I assume, therefore, that most of the information is sort of accurate.

The write up informs me amidst green ads and yellow banners of semi information unrelated to the actual news item that:

Alphabet Inc.’s directors were sued by shareholders for approving a $90 million exit payment to Andy Rubin, the creator of the Android mobile software, while helping cover up his alleged misconduct and similar misbehavior by other executives. The investors claimed the board failed in its duties by allowing harassment to occur, approving big payouts and keeping the details private.

Let’s assume that the assertion, the behavior, and the litigation are factualities.

On the surface, it is possible to formulate these hypotheses:

  1. What happens in the high school science club environment stays in the science club until it doesn’t
  2. The high school science club approach to handling “issues” is to make life pretty good for well liked science club members. (One assumes that birds of a feather flock together may want the flock and the errant bird to thrive.)
  3. The high school science club method can be misunderstood by the lowly beings who purchase shares in an enterprise. Litigation is sour grapes.

From my vantage point in the anti Silicon Valley in Harrod’s Creek, Kentucky, it sure looks like some hanky panky has been practiced.

Revenue growth? Whatever it takes I assume. If Amanda Rosenberg lived in the muddy hollow, I would ask her. I wonder if the real news outfit  Bloomberg might consider such an interview a way to collect useful information?

Stephen E Arnold, January 11, 2019


Got something to say?

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta