It’s all have to do with resource management here.
It’s obvious that laying off people that were working hard at making more robust the flagship product of the non-profit wasn’t going to result in a an increase of security in this product. Could the whole lay-off have been prevented? That would require some number analysis here, and insights I lake.
Could at least some termination have been avoided? Freezing the income of the CEO until some agreed metrics improve, and use the amount thus spare to save some employ salary was certainly an option here, wasn’t it?
Claiming "think of my family, look how much more some other people earn elsewhere" while almost simultaneously (at organization level at least) putting so many people in a jobless position, that’s a rather bold cognitive dissonance to throw at the world to my mind.
If pointing out "odd financial priorities" of a non-profit is flame bait, one might wonder how humanity is supposed to mend all organizational dysfunctions it can ever fall into.
It’s obvious that laying off people that were working hard at making more robust the flagship product of the non-profit wasn’t going to result in a an increase of security in this product. Could the whole lay-off have been prevented? That would require some number analysis here, and insights I lake.
Could at least some termination have been avoided? Freezing the income of the CEO until some agreed metrics improve, and use the amount thus spare to save some employ salary was certainly an option here, wasn’t it?
Claiming "think of my family, look how much more some other people earn elsewhere" while almost simultaneously (at organization level at least) putting so many people in a jobless position, that’s a rather bold cognitive dissonance to throw at the world to my mind.
If pointing out "odd financial priorities" of a non-profit is flame bait, one might wonder how humanity is supposed to mend all organizational dysfunctions it can ever fall into.