Donald Kendall started as a worker in a Pepsi-Cola bottling plant, but he swiftly climbed the corporate ladder, becoming head of the company’s international division by 1957 when he was only in his mid-30s.
I wonder if that career path is still possible today?
Be a standout employee in a rapidly growing and transforming company, stepping into increasingly significant roles as opportunies expand?
Of course. Countless people on this very forum have taken that road and countless so are still doing so today.
But not everyone is able to make their mark as a standout employee, not everyone commits to one organization long enough to see it through (passing up on other opportities), and and not every organization grows or even survives well enough to open those doors to them.
It's common, but neither universal nor guaranteed -- and always has been. While the culture of loyalty (in both directions) has certainly changed over time and likely represents changes in how common, it's a misperception to not notice it still happening every day.
Of course, that career path is absolutely viable for any sufficiently motivated and driven child of a CEO
A similar but more recent career trajectory: Elliot Hill, the incoming Nike CEO started at Nike as a store sales intern and was already head of Nike EMEA retail by around age 34 (in the year 2000)
Yes it's possible. You need really good social and political skills, and a somewhat ruthless approach. Sociopathic tendencies, in other words.
Must require excellent golf skills too.
That career path is still possible today, but it never was commonplace as the example makes one think.
IMO most companies under $1B in top 5 population countries treat head of international division just the same with their head of regional.
So 35-40 years old leaders are common.
I think there are areas today, where you can rapidly grow and in 60 years we will look back and think to ourselves how that was possible.
art is clearly generated but model gets no credit. I think that's pretty outrageous
What art are you referring to? I only see photographs that are credited (on mobile)
Do you mean the navy cap with the Pepsi logo? It's credited as an illustration. In 2021 the Text-to-image models also weren't that good yet, or did I miss something?
yep navy cap was "illustrated" but not by the "artist". afaics, although it would be so much more tragic if the artist actually created the image. just can't win
> 7 submarines would have tied with India for possessing the seventh-largest fleet of attack submarines.
> Yet in any real sense the story is false. What PepsiCo acquired were small, old, obsolete, unseaworthy vessels.
Or perhaps compare it to junk Ukrainian army got! Old tanks, fighter jets salvaged from junkyard (Kazakshan) or just before decommission...
Weapons that would give it a fighting chance (F35 and nuclear warheads) were never even mentioned!
How would giving Ukraine nuclear warheads solve anything?
A sizeable part of the soviet nuclear arsenal and most of their front line Tu-160 strategic bombers were in Ukraine when the union collapsed. Ukraine was persuaded to give up their nuclear capability. and sold the Tu-160's back to Russia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-160
Not that this has anything to do with your question, I just thought it a fun fact.
It could solve life on earth
Has a nuclear power ever been on the receiving end of a war?
Yes. Pakistan started the Kargil War with India in 1999 which was shortly after India had tested their first nuclear weapon.
MAD has a pretty good track record so far.