Comparisons to how the concept could technically be defined in a dry academic context are a bit irrelevant, since the whole point is to trigger a flash of intuition. It's important to understand how the referenced concepts are understood and experienced by the audience if it's going to be an effective analogy. The purpose of an analogy is to short-circuit a long explanation by appealing to an already deeply understood concept. When you are enslaved, you have zero power. With power, naturally, comes a lot of responsibility and that can feel heavy. Even if others have the knowledge (in the case where the CEO operates with a rare level of extreme transparency) - they don't have the choices.
#Iterm alternative full
They have the full picture, access to all the financial knowledge, the conversations with the investors, the data from the customers - everything.
They have all the knowledge they need about the venture on which to base those choices. If they don't want to walk away, they get the strongest voice in decisions about what paths to take. The CEO gets to make the choice: they can walk away any time, they can quit and they can shut things down. They have the most knowledge of anyone and are the ultimate decision maker about the future of the venture. You're missing a lot with that analogy - which is that of everyone involved in the veature, the CEO has the most power.
0 kommentar(er)
