So-Called C-level Executives do So-Called C-level work, which doesn't relate to anything in reality that founders are used to. A lot of C-level hires is about looking the part and talking the talk, but not actually doing much work. The most egregious and useless C-level hires are usually CIOs, CMOs, CDOs, CTOs, and often COOs. The CFO sometimes carries their own weight, especially in going-public or already-public companies.
The sad part is that it's usually the investors that demand the C-levels, and often when a new CEO is brought in by the investors, they bring their C-level friends. Look at the chaos caused by all those new hires (and culture) at companies like DataRobot. A perfect example of why C-levels are hard to hire by the founders, and usually is the "new team" brought in.
As a CIO/CTO, I am very hands-on, but I don't feel offended by this statement; I do agree that there are many companies where the CIO/CTO are often vendor management, and more administrative than technical.
I'm not sure I agree about COOs though. My experience with COOs is that they typically have the pulse of the company and are actually quite close to the ground.
Didn't even mention "Chief Customer Officers". We hired a CCO out of a friendly F500 with absolutely no experience. The unscalable support costs alone have him as a top contender for why we're at risk of running the whole company into the ground. Conveniently, everything in the org is the problem except him.
There are so many nonsense C-levels. I agree on CCO. I've seen "Chief Innovation Officers" "Chief AI Officers" and more and I couldn't tell you what they are actually accomplishing, and why there needs to be a separate C-level from the CIO, CTO, etc. It seems like it's about padding at the top and getting the friends of the CEO in levels of management.
Putting him in that position was absolutely about external connections and nothing else. Just pure idiocracy that the hire comes with power and they actually let him use it. Meanwhile there's a half dozen under him with decades of relevant experience who are completely stone-walled.
Someone actually has the title of "Chief Go-To-Market Officer" separate from the Chief Customer Officer, Chief Strategy Officer, Chief Product Officer, and a bunch more. What is this all about really?
The sad part is that it's usually the investors that demand the C-levels, and often when a new CEO is brought in by the investors, they bring their C-level friends. Look at the chaos caused by all those new hires (and culture) at companies like DataRobot. A perfect example of why C-levels are hard to hire by the founders, and usually is the "new team" brought in.