Yea I was looking into this more today, specifically your example of CEO of IBM.First, I was a tech recruiter for a decade on the company side. I learned a few things. You never just take the next person up. Ever. You always challenge that person with what the market will present so you are always making analytical decisions based on the quality of the talent you can access. The only difference is in hard to find engineering talent. You typically need a group of whatever discipline you are looking for. That can be based more on opportunity. You are always looking and engage when you can develop someone interested.

As to your example of CEO at IBM. Yes, Arvind Krishna was internal. Ginni Rometty was internal. They know whose next, more than likely. If they haven't decided they know it is one of a few people. Because they have a leadership development program and are nurturing leaders. They don't have a next person or they don't know what they will do. Apples and oranges. And even they hired externally in 1993 when the business was in a bad place. Another example is Intel, whose current CEO left the company for 10 years and ran EMC and VMWare before they hired him as CEO last year. And we aren't even talking about the right level here. IBM has nearly 300k employees, Intel has over 100k. Worcester has a few thousand.

And I am personally fine with Batista. Much more than his predecessor. They did him no favors doing this the way they did. One councilor even addressed accusations of back room deals during the last meeting. I don't have any info about anything like that , but they shouldn't be surprised about the accusations. They did it to themselves. Now they are going to put him in front of community meetings? This idea that they couldn't wait to let him do these meetings before appointing him is absolutely absurd. They have hundreds of openings is the reason? Almost all those hires will be levels away from the CM and who the CM is has no effect on their lives. People take jobs for money, benefits, and their immediate report. Not their manager's manager's manager's manager. Especially in a govt job. Its all absurd.

When Eric chose to speak up in support of a search, when he could have chosen silence, that was him saying he was confident. Just play it out and look like you did your job. Not like Augustus chose his successor.

Again, they ALL. Interview. Other. People. All of them. The only scenarios is in instances where a position is created for a specific person. And even then, depending on corp policy, they may still interview someone. Because decisions made in a vacuum are bad.

To your point, the fix may be in. But they do it because its due diligence.

If you are ok with elected officials doing just whatever the hell they want, that is your right. That they are ok with it looking that way is rather frightening

It is almost certainly internal policy, to start with. On top of that, investors don't give a single shit how long she's been there, if someone better was able to be acquired that's who they want.

I've seen places with an internal candidate in a hard to find discipline (data scientists types 10 years ago, for ex. ) not be able to promote someone because they can't find someone else to interview and company policy was all roles are competitive and in;lude non-current employees. While that's a little extreme, in the end its just bad practice to always promote from within. You want to consistently bring in talent with new experiences, especially at competitors. If all your lead or middle management roles are all internal promotions, you start to become a bubble. Thats VERY bad, especially in a high tech situation.

Back to the CM thing, in this case, they didn't even let anyone apply. He didnt' technically apply, never mind interview. There was just no process. Petty had an order last night asking for Batista's resume. They already appointed him and they never asked for the resume on the record? Yes, some of it may have been performative if they had more process, because they had the votes, but its government ffs. Some of it is performative.

Now it just looks like Augustus ordained his successor. I have a problem with that.

Edited to clarify talent from competitors and not the illiterate thing i actually wrote.

That may be. I guarantee you that she wasn't the only one interviewed. And that they actually interviewed her. I'm fine with him. They were irresponsible in not actually doing anything but want him and that's it

Outside of family owned companies, very few companies would do this. It completely lacks even the appearance of due diligence.

LOVE this lol.

This has a bunch about why the CEO says he's done, their finances post-covid, etc. He's 83, and his kids all pursued other things is part of it. He was positioning to sell it, but seems like he didn't find a buyer.

https://thisweekinworcester.com/rotmans-going-out-business-sale-friday/

Def not going to happen.

FBI provided population estimates. I wasn't about to reconfigure the data they provided. I don't know why they provided pre-census number, but they did. It is noted in the piece before the stats begin.

For reference, the FBI considers violent crime as homicide, rape, robbery and aggravated assault. Those individual occurrences are in the stats for all Worcester County towns at the very bottom of the piece.

if you want to see last year's, it is available in archive: https://web.archive.org/web/20211128144916/https://thisweekinworcester.com/fbi-data-dangerous-cities-2020/

I'm about to forward to the new piece for SEO reasons.

Yea, exactly. The idea is how likely you are to be a victim in said location. Its still a statistic, so certainly not a perfect measure.

Same story, some different info.
https://thisweekinworcester.com/cosenza-awarded-16-million-worcester-pd/

Hazzelhurst made $161k, Doherty $149k in 2021. Not the first multi-million settlement Doherty has been involved in. He was named in the Truong case, a 16-year-old girl's coerced confession, that settled for $2.1 million.