In my column last week, we asked, "Do you think Financial Analysts should hold CEOs accountable for maintenance?"
A majority, 63.6 percent, responded "Always," 18.2 percent said "Often," 9.1 percent responded "Sometimes," and 9.1 percent responded "Rarely." No one responded "Never."
We also asked, "What should be done to hold CEOs accountable for maintenance?"
Here are some of the responses:
>Tie bonuses to % Uptime.
>I'm the lucky guy who works in a still family owned papermill, and the MT is already here for years, so they have no use in skipping maintenance because the place will fall down on there own head. Maintenance is done, always and all the way. In bigger company's with a CEO, I think it would be wise to keep the CEO's also responsible for uptime of the factory's, and the mill managers should be clear in showing the amount of money spend on maintenance (perhaps as % of depreciation).
>Their annual bonuses should be linked to the maintenance level of the plant and machinery.
>Tie their compensation to profitability.
>More insightful research by securities analysts.
>Jim's suggestion is excellent.
You may take this week's quiz here.
|
