Topic: Do you think that visionary leaders make great CEOs? (Read 459 times)

A lot of reasons make a good CEO, being supportive of subordinates, knowing what their strengths and weaknesses are and having a vision. Just having one of these will not make them a good CEO though.

This is what many leaders distribute the responsibilities. It shows that nobody is perfect and that such leaders who are maximally qualified are rare in number. But that one person can make or break a company and the rest will lead a lavish life from what he/she has created provided the next group maintains it.

Is the OP going through a bad time with their CEO? Just making a guess.

I am not sure if I recall this correctly, but it was said that Steve Jobs had planned a different sequence for his products and I think his plan was to first develop and unveil the iPad, but then someone from his main development and design team came and said that they have to prioritize the iPhone over the iPad. It was said that Jobs found that compelling and stopped the iPad because one of his employees told him to do so.

I think there was more collaboration and teamwork than you can imagine if you only believe these stories about Steve Jobs and how demanding he was. Employee turnover is of course an indicator for some things, but not for everything. Apple back at the time really set new standards. If it wasn't for some unique characteristics, why would these CEOs all stand out otherwise? And do they really stand out or are they the chosen ones because brands, like politics, are often connected to one main character. Steve Jobs said something like: you don't have to be the smartest in the room for everything, but you have to be the smartest in finding and employing the smartest for everything. Jobs was charismatic and smart and knew how to present Apple in a disruptive and convincing way and how to spread the message that working for Apple is a privilege. The same counts for Musk, Bezos, Gates, Mateschitz (RedBull), Zuckerberg, etc. They all have certain characteristics in common. Likable characteristics? Well, nobody said that, but characteristics that are positively correlated with sustainable success.

Nobody is perfect. That's what we have to understand.
Even though he is a leader with unique strengths and charisma and has almost all the abilities that other leaders don't have, he definitely has weaknesses or something that makes him disliked by many people.
That is normal because that is the reality.
A company will be successful if there is cooperation from all parties, from company leaders to employees, so that they can build a company that can develop its business better.
That is what will make the company achieve success, and when the company achieves success, it must share it with everyone who works in the company so that there is a sense of ownership among everyone.

No one has it all that even an elementary scholar can argue with a professor at some diverse of points.
Even the AI is limited to certain determinations about the future so what about human?
Leadership can be of anyone but takes series of possessions to make a quality leader.
Even at the best of a leader yet he needs a personal adviser (PA) as either his confider or an error troubleshooter who contributes to make suggestions or has the qualities of soluable opinions after the leader brings about some burdens topics or presentations towards his governance.

A monopoly or autocratic leader/CEO who runs a government/Organizations of being unquestionable to his decision and ignorant to considering the suggestions of his subjects (teams/followers) in considerations is an equation approaching to a crambling system.

Basically the team offers significant values of knowledges in diversifications to attaining greater height of expectations in collaborations with different apparatus opinions than an isolated individuals who perceives only his personal abilities as the best and contented enough to reach proefficient public or organizational goals of burden ness or tasks.

Both of you made reasonable points, which I see differently. If a visionary works in a company, his departure depends on many factors. A company that acknowledges his visions and ideas won't hesitate to increase his pay rates and give him offers that will help him grow. That's making him feel like a part of the company. On the contrary, most visionaries like you said, RockBell, don't share their ideas, hence they'll soon stop working for their boss if he doesn't treat them fine or allow them enough time for a vacation. Most visionaries working for other people are bothered with time, how much time they've spent working for the company, and how it has contributed to their lives. I mean what has been achieved from the job? So, in addition to the qualities listed by Latviand, a visionary should be focused on achieving his goals. Being a visionary doesn't zero down to making lots of money. These people must have a goal that pushes them to work every day. They're problem solvers.

That's why when they unleash their skills in a cooperate world, they easily climb the ladder to management level. Similar to the entrepreneur niche, when they begin to follow such a route. A visionary is expected to perform well in any field he finds himself. And when they get to the CEO level, their ideas are unique and may sound scary. It's the only way people get confused about them. They make too many mistakes, but don't stop at it until the goal is achieved. Read the story of Steve Jobs you'll understand better, what a visionary is all about. Their goal is to make the world a better place. Not money. Steve Jobs had a dispute with the boards of directors for not believing in his vision, hence he left the company he built. He came back later and made a bigger picture of the Apple company we hear today. In a nutshell, only a few people get along with visionaries in terms of ideas, and when your team doesn't like your ideas, you'd seem like an incompetent CEO to them.

Being a visionary not only make CEOs but now since they have insight and vision majority of them want to be on their own and start something for themselves self that is what people with vision do they don’t want to share their idea and only people without vision will finish school and they start looking for people to employ them instead of them to use their head to employ their self and instead of waiting to be paid for their time, and that is why if any company should get hold of such people they always want to keep them at ball cost so that they won’t want to go to the extent of opening their own company. People with vision are like a package full of many gifts such as fortune. And aside from that everyone knows what it takes to be a CEO you have to possess a lot of qualities, especially in leadership, the competition is always high in the market so the CEO has to always stand amidst other companies in the same market, weet job but very tasking.
 

I think that visionary leaders are what make companies strong and big. Even though they sometimes lack communication, their quick movements, charisma and consistent vision are the reasons why many visionary leaders become the company's most important assets. Especially in terms of getting investors, usually visionary leaders will easily get the attention of investors because they have charisma and strength which can realize investors' expectations for their company, and this is what a company needs to be big in the market.

I think I can't say because I've not seen a study that shows how successful or unsuccessful a visionary leader is as a CEO. So I'm speaking based on my view of things without any data to back me up.

I believe you don't need to have all the qualities of a leader to be a good CEO. If you are good at what you do and you're above average when it comes to interpersonal relationships I think you're good. What matters is being able to communicate your ideas, vision, and thoughts of the company to those who work with you and you'll be good.
I think the same applies to great CEOs to be visionary leaders. The fact that you're a great CEO doesn't mean you'll be a great leader.
Elon Musk is a great CEO, but I doubt he has the qualities to be a great leader.

The economic and financial side of things is mostly all you care about as a CEO. Your major personal objective is how to keep the company growing. While as a leader there's a slight difference. You care about the economy of the country, but you care about other things like security (foreign and domestic).

One thing that I learned from my personal experience is being lenient and friendly will cause a fall in the results of a company so for a company to be successful it should be producing effective results which may need commanding leadership unless the employees are really dedicated and work for the future of the company not for their monthly pay slip.

Yes, the presence of visionary team members is crucial, and it should be there. Additionally, in a team, there should be at least two people with high leadership qualities to maintain balance and understanding of differences. It's essential to gather opinions from different perspectives. Therefore, it would be challenging if there is only one visionary leader. At some point, they may feel confused, and there's no one to convince the team to take the next step.

And should a CEO also have visionary qualities? Yes, it is highly necessary, and I believe it is a mandatory trait for a CEO to possess.

I’ve got a different opinion. A visionary leader would make an awesome CEO. A visionary leader, considering unforeseen issues that may arise in the future always almost have plans for everything.

Admittedly, visionary leaders who are human and aren’t perfect, may not always be collaborative or think it necessary to seek the opinions of his subordinates when making decisions. But no matter how hard headed that leader is, there would be some executives amongst the board he would value their opinions.

Asides all that, a leader with a vision very knows he has to listen to everyone around him for opinions and comparing these opinions to his own for formulating strategies on how best to grow the company.

thats good argument, I think all of those pretty much sums up what a great CEO is required to be, but also one more thing is that the ability to talk to their underlings in a good way like basically being so good at social skills they could people into doing thing for him is what I think also a good skill a great CEO should have, i've seen many CEO nowadays always having a good social skill to build around a good reputation so that the entire company is trusting him and would do something that he told in unison to keep the company productive and innovative enough.
there are most certainly many traits that can make a great CEO but often time finding one CEO that just good at all those are kinda difficult if i've seen from many of the recent companies fiasco.
its no wonder some company even got at certain length to hire people from oversea if they sees fit because maybe only very few people have that quality that can keep company from facing its lowest point.

Common-minded people are not the best thing to put together, to be honest. What I mean by this is, that you should never put together visionary people to do the same work. What you need is one visionary guy and others who can make that vision come true.  I know it has its own advantages too. But we often see challenges. Such as both visionaries having conflicting ideas or struggling to compromise. That will lead to problems. If you want to bring out the best from both of them, you should put them to do different tasks.

Visionary leaders can make great CEOs but you need people who can compromise or can adjust to the surroundings depending on the situation.

Great CEOs are visionary leaders, which is the result of the people around them. Nothing is great without great minds working together, which is where the work lies. It is very uncommon for two intelligent people to collaborate, but when great minds do, success results because both of them are visionary leaders who make great CEOs.

To answer your question if visionaries make a great CEO, I do think they do but they're an incomplete trait because a great CEO is someone that embodies that vision and cares for the people under him/her, and most of all, a great CEO is someone that also possesses altruistic ideas and always looks out for the greater good even if nobody sees it that way. Vision, altruism, empathy and intelligence are some of the traits that I believe a CEO must possess because I feel like if they don't have any one of the mentioned traits, they're probably a bad one that either exploits their workers, lobbies to dodge taxes and destroy competition, doesn't care if their product or service harms the public or the worst of them all, someone that drives the company into a downward spiral.

That's the issue, because if you want a huge huge company then you need a very visionary leader, or at least founder and they will have to take it until some point. After that they are going to just end up with retiring, being rich, and doing whatever they want and some decent CEO person will continue growing the company. Look at Apple, look at Amazon, they are all doing fine.

Surely there are some companies who are still with their visionary leaders, and there are some who did fine with the founders and some who eventually went lower. That's an important thing and should be considered as a good profit without a doubt. I understand it's a trouble but that should not be an issue for anyone, it's still a decent idea to do that.

You are right. There needs to be a balance between being a visionary leader and a team player.  Most visionary leaders are too strict in their modes of operation.Visionary leaders usually have lots of great ideas in their head and would make sure these ideas come to reality at all cost. In trying to achieve this, they may step on toes, yield to little or no advice from their team members and in the process they even frustrate their employees and make the work environment tensed up. This is not a good sign.

Most employees/team members have better ideas than the visionary leader himself but most times, these ideas from the subordinates might not be appealing to the leader because the ideas do not tally with the big picture he (the leader) has already painted in his head.

No one person knows it all. A good leader should be democratic in nature. Every member of the team should be allowed to make inputs but the final decision still rests on the leader. Giving the team members this right makes them feel valued and it is a big motivation to work.

I will have to agree wit the op, visionary leaders don't completely make great CEOs as most people assume, it is commonly said that a single tree does and will never make an island, every big and successfully company we see today was not built by one man alone, even though people tend to attribute the success a company to the CEO of that company alone, this is a big mistake if I am asked, because, the CEO alone can not run a company, he needs subordinates, boards members, workers, even family and friends who can step in and advice on what to do when on a cross road.

So, the success of a company is often a result of collective efforts, not the effort of one man alone, so, that statement that, a visionary leader makes great CEOs, is a wrong statement.

Of course, naturally people don't like to put in the works but they want to earn. Most people won't mind asking to be paid even when they nap all through in the office or put in less work. To such people, Steve Jobs would be a pain in the ass. Again, Mr Jobs was able to attain should an enviable height by dint of brain work and sleepless nights. It's indeed very sad he didn't live long to reap all he laboured for.

Being a visionary doesn't mean one will be great at business. There's a difference between leadership and business. It's the same way we've great leaders who fail at home as fathers.

When people get the vision of a profitable or beneficial business idea, recruit workers to help them achieve the aim of the business. Before employment, the employer would have to unveil the goals and aspirations of the business and the diverse means to achieve them. It is now the responsibility of the visionary leader to lead and guide these workers to enable them to help him in achieving these goals. Sometimes they might push the workers too hard which might make the workplace terrible, I don't blame them sometimes because predicted goals could intoxicate these visionaries.

Many visionary leaders have proved to be good leaders or business executives, while others might have treated workers inhumanely. Humans have individual differences so for me the actions of these CEOs might be based on their behavior or character. Visionary leaders can make great CEOs if they abide by the labour laws of the nations and treat workers as humans and not machines. Visionary leaders should be allowed to run their businesses because some hired executives might derail from the goals of the company.

but isn't it what steve jobs did that made apple what it is today?

it's true that visionary people tend to demand a lot of things because they have big ambitions to realize the vision and mission of their company and make it in line with what they think. but on average, large companies do not become what they are today by leaders who can communicate well or who are gentle with their employees, but by someone who is charismatic and visionary who can see future changes and can respond to challenges.

people who are charismatic and visionary tend to be more aggressive towards their employees because they have a more advanced view of the future with limited time, different from employees who only see things in front of their screen. even though sometimes they are hated by their employees because of their fast, stressful and annoying work ethic, but it is people like them who make many companies big.

Having a mission and vision leader, CEO, Boss, etc, makes a good path towards giving a good and bright future to the business, or economy because they have a goal and of course, if they care under them they value each person with their strengths and weaknesses this lead to making efficient way to work, at all cost because they know they are part and important of the company, so if those leaders don't care at all to the people and just the money sooner or later the economy will suffer with the crisis of their business or country due to mishandling of leadership. A leader who keeps guiding under him and a Boss who just tells what they do without proper training so they are different.

For most companies or industries I’ve seen, there may be a CEO but he alone doesn’t make the rules. There’s normally a board (even though they are hired, they do their job of making calculated decisions for the company). Most times, the deductions we see aren’t from CEOs. Just like kings have personal advisers, so do CEOs. Visionary leaders can make great CEO too. You should say “not all”. In fact I think it’s even more interesting when the CEO is the leader; someone you can relate with and work with. Someone that respects you and your opinion.

I think that at the end of the day it's the quality of output that comes out from the teamwork that really counts, there might be flaws to reach perfection, but it's the end that justifies the means. So the leadership approach of an organization might not be very cordial, but if their renumeration and output are very competitively high compared to their competitors in the same industry, then some personal temperament of management or CEO can be overlooked. But abuse of power should not be condoned.

Employees should be value driven, because management can be strict in order to get the best output, a work friendly atmosphere is important, but it's not the ultimate goal, job security and well paid is the most important. A rumpled $100, is better and more valuable than a newly minted $1 note.

The path to success is rarely a solitary endeavor. It is often paved with the collective efforts of individuals working together towards a common goal, each contributing their unique skills and perspectives. While visionary leaders can undoubtedly play a pivotal role in shaping a company's direction and inspiring innovation, their effectiveness is significantly enhanced when they recognize and harness the power of teamwork.

A successful company is not merely a collection of individuals; it is a cohesive unit where every member feels valued, respected, and empowered to contribute their best. Visionary leaders who can foster a supportive and collaborative environment, where employees feel heard and appreciated, are more likely to lead their teams to achieve remarkable results.

It is a highly debateable topic. Unfortunately there is no straight answer to it. Historically visionary leaders are a different species of human race. They are not easy to understand by commoners like us.

You have given an example of Steve jobs. I would like to present an example of Elon Musk. There is no doubt that Elon mask is a visionary leader. But if you ask about his behaviour while in the office, it is extremely toxic. People who have worked for him had said, Elon is extremely demanding and he wants everybody around him to think as fast as he can.

Now CEOs thrive in a collaborative environment. My example of a good CEO is Jack Ma. This fellow is not a visionary leader. She could not invent something new. But he is good at collaboration. He knows how to make smart people work for him.

So visionary leaders are not good CEOs. Leaders cannot be created, they are born. CEOs are created in business schools. Hope this explanation helps!

That's because CEOs shouldnt only be visionary alone. Steve Jobs was a genius with Apple, but let's be real that thats note enough and no CEO is perfect. His business had to work on this and the employees had the option to leave. A visionary leader is okay but if they can't communicate, adapt or play nice with the team it's not getting the business very far. Let's not put all our eggs in one charismatic basket.

Well, not all visionary leaders tend to be bossy and demanding. There are a lot I know that are actually expert in team building and collaboration, that they value their staff and appreciate their contribution. Maybe, you are saying this from a sole visionary leader point of view, so I can't also blame you for that.

However, what I say is also from my own experience. Visionary leaders can be assets in the company, as long as they also practice putting their shoes on their low positioned staffs and deal with them with equality to higher positions. But if you mean those visionary leaders do not make good CEOs, well if they don't have other positive traits other than having brilliant visions and ideas, then they can never be good and effective CEOs.

agree with your opinion, not everyone can be a CEO, people must be truly competent - disciplined - hardworking - able to solve problems under any pressure - have a good leadership spirit to be able to become a CEO.  look at how CEOs of large companies lead their companies, of course their charisma is different from ordinary employees and Experience is also one of the which for a good leader, there is a wise person who says, a knife will not be sharp if it is not sharpened.

Thanks for spelling it out, sir franky1. From the OP's judgment, I think it's wrong. A company with a visionary CEO can thrive when there are serious-minded employees who are ready to do the job that they were employed for(by the CEO) , but a boss in some cases can just become overly familiar with some employees, and it can even cause some bad situations in the company.

---

---

OP, just as was said above, a visionary can actually make a good CEO because they will know how, when, and what to invest or build that will make the company thrive. They know how to push their employees to get serious about their jobs, and they can quickly study and know the work force they need to execute a certain project. Even though they themselves don't like teamwork, when they require it, they still know people (class of employees) they can select from among their employees to get the job done as a team. In conclusion, visionaries have more vision than just a boss.

Depends, if they are visionary and capable of making that vision into reality then yeah they can be, but if they are visionary and they can't make it work and will fail and just ruin everything for trying to achieve something they can't  then they are not good at all. I have personally seen both, people who built amazing things by spending insane amount of money, and people who fail.

I can give Elon Musk as example for both of them, Elon Musk took over Tesla, did not build it, did not created it, was not the owner, was not even shareholder, he had nothing to do with it, and yet the old owners focused way too much on building an amazing car, and didn't care about selling, they just raised funds, eventually bankrupted themselves and Elon swooped in, bought the company, started to sell whatever functioning car they had, build more whatever they can build that is working, and that small but sure income was used to build more cars, and made him rich.

In the starting point of the journey, appointing a different CEO won't be achievable. This can only be done after they've achieved the initial goal of the company, and team mates have seen or trusted the visions of their boss. At that point, most people would still want him as the leader, because he's now more valid. Those who argued his decisions, confirms him. And are filled with more loyalty. Handing over immediately, his office, during the argument stage can derail the growth or prepared achievement of the company. Continuing with his team, when the main goals has been achieved, helps a solid decision, business growth and vision. The next person can become a CEO after many years of running the business with the visionary leader. Once, he's proven to understand the basic structures of the company; people management, critical thinking and financial economy of the business. He can take over the company, while under the supervision of the visionary leader, then push further without facing much dispute. As he's had the experience. We've noticed companies hand over like I illustrated. And this would take years before it happens. Changing administrator immediately and substituting the visionary to become only a foresight man could lead to an argument between the leader and the newly appointed CEO.

I will rather say Visionary leaders do not always make great CEO's because since not all visionary leaders have the opportunity of heading a company, it is not a sure statement. There could actually be visionary leaders who would have made great CEO's, but because they never had the chance, we will never know. Visionary leader who actually understand people management can make great CEO's because that is also required. With a proper understanding of people management skills, your staffs will be kept happy, and happy staffs are productive staffs.

Some people want to be this and that in life but yet they lack the understanding that they are incapacitated for doing or becoming such, i understand that there's this way we can get determined of building ourselves and positioning well enough to fit in some certain portfolios, but that doesn't always equally means we shouldn't know our boundaries or how limited we are in some certain conditions like this.

To invent, don't visionaries need great attention and drive? Their communication style may hinder teamwork. However, isn't their ability to see ahead and lead the organization into unexplored territory significant? What about their unmatched ability to predict market trends and make bold, strategic decisions? We often hear about their human management issues. In an innovative, fast-paced market, aren't these traits essential?

You emphasize teamwork and inclusive decision-making, and I agree. Perhaps we're creating a false dichotomy? Must visionary leadership or collaboration be chosen? But what if the ideal CEO is less charismatic and visionary but excellent at combining both? They combined the visionary's zeal with sensitivity and teamwork. What's the true problem for firms to blend visionary audacity with inclusive leadership pragmatism?

I believe that a leader should be able to find the balance between being a visionary and a team player at the same time

I really believe that a leader is a good member as well they should be able to listen well and take others’ opinions in consideration because not at all times, leaders would have the best ideas and this is something they should accept if they want to succeed as leaders

It's important to have a visionary to build something fresh and strong, and initially a visionary can in practice be a CEO. But a visionary may or may not have strong management skills, abilities to make people feel welcome and valued in the company, and even focus on the business goals (because perhaps this person cares about doing the best possible thing and isn't being realistic). So, depending on a particular case, it can be wise to appoint a professional CEO, so to speak, to take the practical side of things into their hands, while the visionary can remain an inspiration and representation of the company.

Visionary leaders can make great CEOs. Visionary leaders have a clear long term vision & the ability to inspire others to work towards it. They possess a strategic mindset & can identify opportunities for growth & innovation. They can effectively communicate their vision to stakeholders & align the organisation's goals with it. It’s important for visionary leaders to have strong operational & managerial skills to translate their vision into actionable plans & lead the organisation towards success. A combination of vision, strategic thinking & execution abilities can make a visionary leader an exceptional CEO.

Not necessarily because it goes back to the person's ability to manage the company, because the initial capital he has is only leadership, to be able to advance the company may be ok, because he has visionary thoughts to keep going forward. But guaranteeing that someone can develop the wings of the company, it seems to be a difficult thing, because not necessarily someone has skills that are qualified enough to be able to develop the wings of the company.

And in my opinion, the leadership style that is suitable for a CEO to have is a transformational leadership style, where someone who has this leadership style will be very passionate in making changes in his group, and generally people who have this leadership style have an energetic, intelligent and consistent eagle in encouraging each team member. This leadership style is very necessary in the corporate world, because teamwork is needed.

I think this is a little flexible. On the one hand, visionary leaders are also really needed because they are very reliable and usually following them is need hard work. Because usually they have much more forward thinking. or what is usually called having thoughts that are one step ahead of other people. But sometimes their overly demanding characteristics also make subordinates uncomfortable. But if you get used to it then I think it will be fine. In the context of general thinking, in the technology industry and the like, it is these visionary leaders who can answer all the desires of technology consumers. But sometimes their thoughts are a little difficult for some people to understand. But I still like leaders like that.

That is not really a good example, since both Jobs and Wozniak created Apple and once they were out Apple suffered, and it was not until Jobs comeback when Apple became the brand that it is today, so you can have a CEO that knows every single trick when it comes to how to manage a company, but without the ability to produce new products people actually want to buy then the company will eventually suffer, Jobs was the driving force behind Apple and that is undeniable, and without him I doubt Apple will regain its former glory.

IMO, the greatness here is the recognition of those who are using the product of the person who brought it to life. I like the way Steven Job is mentioned, to me, he is a monument in the industry, I once read somewhere about the process of him spending full time at work.

Looking at it from a user perspective, I can feel the enthusiasm about the product, and the value it brings to our lives. Not every product offered is immediately accepted until people accept and believe in it, which is when I think in a new field that many people will focus on innovativeness, which is the way I think to evaluate something about what successful people bring to see them in a great light.

Definitely, I think if someone has a good vision then he would knows how to grow the company which will be the main goal for a CEO, though they would also need other skills to execute his vision, just a good vision won't make it but it would help a lot. At least when a CEO has a vision they know what they need to do, then they can ask for help to make their idea into reality.

Visionary leaders are expected to be good CEOs, but not all would become one, due to individual differences. A leaders works with his team to build a company and doesn't stop easily on an idea because of his thoughts and visions. Working with such a person is tiring, as they hardly succumb to new ideas from team members or co workers. Like in the example of Steve Jobs stated on the thread. He has the ideas and sees before hand what the outcome of the project would be, and workers always try to chime into what they don't understand, in form of correcting the CEO. Don't know if you've managed people, one of the hardest duty in any business. Therefore, in the process of being ignored by the visionary, they tend not to work peacefully, but keep up stressing themselves, convincing the leader to do things their own way (the team member's) or the method applied by the society. I think it's one of the problems workers do have with such leaders, and they forget that this person owns the business and invited them to work alongside him in achieving the goal, not changing his vision. Also, somebody like Fords, had a vision outside the original method of manufacturing cars. He had multiple disagreements with the engineers due to numerous errors, yet he continued until he achieved what he wanted. When you try to do different things, those close to you or team mates will be your greatest problems. They don't want to be part of a project that'll be a complete failure. Visionary leaders careless about their opinions. Not that they're not good CEO, the vision shouldn't be altered.

I would more likely to invest money on capable leader than corrupted leader. Visionary is the atrribute included.

Reason? Capable leaders would face every challenge like real man, while corrupted leader quickly run away and steal investor money. To keep my investment safe, not being stolen, it is always wise to identify who is capable leader in life. Obviously there is too many snake oil salesmen who are trying to deceive you, and stabbing each other on the back for some benefit.

What I know is that a CEO has a big role in a company; in fact, if he has strong leadership and if he has good intentions for the company, it is certain that with the help of the team he will gather, he will also be able to lift the company he owns. managed for sure.

He seems to be the commander; all commands come from him, so the rise of a company also depends on the mission and vision that a CEO has. That's why, for me, it's not a question of whether a CEO is great or not, because the issue here is how a company can be great.

Success do not come by single effort but certainly by teamwork and that every member of the team contributes to the success of the group or company. However, I don't have issue with visionary leaders as long as they are also capable to put in application all their positive visions that will bring asset to the company. But being authoritative is another story. If there is no healthy relationship with the superior and the employees, then the success of the company will never be achieved. It's important that leaders should also go down to the level of their employees, and not to degrade them but to keep uplifting them.

But if you are trying to point in general that visionary leaders do not make great CEOs, well I have to disagree on this. In fact, their brilliant minds could be their asset in the company, but if they are mixed with negative act of superiority, that is one big factor that will threat the company's success and progress.

Actually in this case being someone who is visionary is very good but to be a good leader then they must also be aware that sometimes there are other situations that require them to look for teammates who are in the same ideology with them. This can indeed be used as an ideal leader if you have a visionary leadership spirit but in the world of work visionary alone is not enough and those of us who have jobs must be aware of this because in the end we also have to build good chemistry to bring our team to a better direction and this is where we must realise that looking for colleagues is also important so that visionaries can be more effective. Looking for colleagues is also important so that visionary or not when colleagues understand what we (leaders) want then the spirit of visionary leadership can run very well but on the other hand relying on visionary alone sometimes it will not be enough because we cannot stand alone considering there must be a team support behind that integrates well.

Wenn you have good vision about something, and things you talk about usually come as plan, or you have a great sense of finances and growth, many people turn to almost want to worship you as God. Und this set of people are people who don't actually believe in theirselves or don't have much to offer to success, but depend on mentorship and all of that. 
 
The aspect of business and company management is beyond what only you have in your head. If you want to be a great leader, you should be ready to accept suggestions from others and add to yours in order to make the company a better one.
 
One attribute of success and good management is paying attention, and one can also be a brainstormer about a particular idea and still not end up being the CEO of the company because they might lack all the skills to make the business or the idea explore. Teamwork and good collaboration are essential to every business growth.

visionary PEOPLE become inventors and recruit investors in and managers to run as CEO
visionary LEADER run as CEO (emphasis on the leader part the OP stipulates)

a visionary LEADER is someone that can see outside of the box AND LEAD .. which is the positive aspects..
a general CEO can be a a-hole 'boss' and just want to be "the boss" and not seeing the big picture(not visionary) nor inventive

so visionary leaders make great CEOS
idiot "bosses" make bad CEO's

visionary leaders can also be so intense on their vision they can be bad bosses too.

of course when visionary leaders see a big picture view of the direction he wants the company to move towards he needs the right people below him to delegate those tasks to that can perform those tasks. so he should know what his employees are capable of and hire the right people to meet his visions requirements
a visionary LEADER can visualise his own limitations to hire a good HR team trained to hire the right workforce that can fulfil the vision

It varies on the attitude of the CEO and the employees. There are employees that would like to get pressured just as what the CEO want it to be. But there are chill CEOs that are also making productive employees that want to go to office everyday because they're pushed appropriately and they're praised according to the tasks that they finish. A visionary leader and a CEO, we can distinguish these two. There are CEOs that are just standing there pretending to know a lot of things while a visionary leader sees the potential of everyone and directs everyone that shall give out the potential of one employee.

People don't become "visionary leaders" overnight, it takes a large mix of the right ingredients and a lot of self determination to achieve this position. That's not to say that visionaries are necessarily good leaders either, there are plenty of people out there who had grand ideas and were in a position of management over people, but failed to successfully convert it into productive outcomes. However naturally people who reach the level of CEO in larger organizations will have the ability to combine a lot of successful traits together. Charisma is a key ingredient most of the time and it can often be a honed skill, as people move up from the lowest rungs in a company or move sideways after achieving success elsewhere.

It mainly depends on the team you gather as a CEO. There are different personalities in every field. Some people like being told what to do, others don't. There are people who accept jokes, even when they are a bit inappropriate, while others will take everything to themselves.

If you're a psychopathic slave driver CEO who makes a lot of money for the company, you need a money oriented team that doesn't care about the atmosphere at work and can take a lot of punishment as long as they walk out of there with a full pocket. That's why stock trading companies are full of these psychopaths because they're there to make a lot of money in a short time and leave it behind them. Most stock traders resign from their jobs after a few years and they admit the job is for young people because you get burned out fast.

I'd prefer a boss who is a leader we look up to, treats us good and stays calm under pressure than a screaming nerve ball of a boss who pays more, but makes you feel like shit.

First I don't like involving myself with an argumentative discussion because it often leads to disagreement between two parties or groups of persons. Then boiled down to what your title and content saying, I will say it depends on individuals boldness and there are people who are born with the mantle of leadership they always appears to be the head of family and in every meeting be international and national. While making a good CEO required a discipline, whomever that is not discipline can not make a good CEO this could be someone whose discipline is in financial study & department and or that has acquired lot of degree in business and finance.

The thing is, you can't make everyone happy.  But that also doesn't mean that you should be a total As**hole. Keep believing in what you believe. That will lead you to success and success attracts people. If you stay on your path, many will come and go but those who are gonna stay will bring more success. And when they are putting their efforts into making you more successful, you should try to adjust to their needs and decisions. If you don't, then those who took you up will be the reason for your downfall.

Being a visionary is not the problem, but you need people around you who are the same as you. The ability to shape the future is not easy and not a job for average people. But it is also true and I agree with you that visionary leaders do not make great CEO. When you are dealing with same-minded people, you will gain success. But when it comes to a huge industry, it's a whole different story. But this is what makes them unique and despite having a bad reputation, they are at the top of the world.

Visionary CEO will give you ideas and work, it is up to the employee to figure out how to do it so that they can do it in an efficient way. If you can't do it, then leave. There might be other people who are better than you. And no one can deny that fact.

We are awed by so-called visionary leaders because may possess unique strengths and charisma. However, I have found that most of them have a weakness in communication, being adaptable, and in team collaboration.  For example, a visionary leader Steve Jobs though he was praise for all the great stuff he did for Apple there where complaints of his intense and demanding nature. This negatively impacted the morale of his employees and lead to high turnover rates. Obviously employees would naturally seek out more collaborative and supportive work environments. My point is visionary leaders do not make great CEO. I believe the success of a company should not solely rely on the charisma and vision of one leader but should be built on a foundation of effective teamwork and inclusive decision-making. Do you support this argument?