Pros
Adversity has created one of the most united teams I have worked with and also seen some of the most united teams formed in this environment.
Cons
Having a "C" in your title does not imbue you with the qualities of leadership. The perks and recognition of being a leader also imply you take responsibility for failure, tough times, and progress. Unfortunately, the former was highly welcomed while they ignored the latter. In my time, it felt like only one of the five C-suite had aspirations of growing a company instead of gunning for a big payday. Massive Egos were a very defining quality. Massive egos allowed product and tech development to be slow and unclear to others in the company. Constantly citing "strong" previous experience in a huge overseas counterpart to the business, making it impossible for anyone to contest or have their input in the decision-making process. Massive ego made it difficult to admit to poor hiring choices, allowing the one severely underqualified employee to maintain control and cause downstream chaos to all other functions. Thus, crippling the entire brand's user acquisition efforts. Massive ego allowed one particular member of leadership to get away with being rude, uncooperative and being a general nightmare to work with. Hiding behind "not technically possible", the progress of work you needed from him depended on if you upset him the last 3-4 weeks. Massive ego created an inability to listen to the market, their team members, feedback from merchants, consumers, other functions. Fueling the misunderstanding and unhappiness between functions. Massive egos meant many, MANY free-loaders getting away with doing no work because they were from big brands or were eloquent. Watching incompetence go by unanswered was the quickest way hard-workers lost respect and motivation. Massive ego made it difficult to understand that they were not the smartest in the domain. It prevented them from listening to the very people they hired who were supposedly good at their jobs.
