I called my friend Karen Lovell, VP of planning. She, in turn, called Crawford Huggins, who, as VP of public affairs, has the unenviable job of putting a good face on even our most stupid actions. The three of us met in the cafeteria to have coffee and commiserate about this terrible turn of events. We spent a half-hour complaining to each other about the company's poor judgment before we all glumly went back to our desks and assorted meetings.

Over the years, Ron had done a good job of impressing each of us with his jovial incompetence. Whereas Kratmeyer, executive VP of international operations, is without human compassion-he is very talented, even though we wish we could ignore that fact in our desire to dislike him.

Warren Gotland, who Ron is replacing, was both talented and pleasant-unless you were foolish enough to not meet your commitments to him, in which case he became a Kratmeyer clone. Ron, on the other hand, is friendly, supportive, intensely interested in what everyone has to say, and probably shouldn't work alone in the office on weekends since he might not be able to find the men's room without guidance. Given that the company earnings are not what they should be, the three of us agreed that we needed leadership, and the man who had earned the sobriquet of "Ron Who?" would not provide it.

Why had he been promoted? I pondered this question off and on for the rest of the day. That evening over adult beverages with Cindy, the answer started to take form in my mind. Our company, like many others, entrusts its executives with decisions that can negatively impact thousands of employees and shareholders. On the other hand, again like many firms, we could muddle along for quite some time if all we do is take the safe path and avoid risky ventures. True, at some point, upstart competitors or hungry entrepreneurs would no doubt beat our brains out-but by that time, most of the bigwigs calling the shots will be retired and the problem will be someone else's concern.

The way I see it, and I shall coin it as Lovelace's Law of Corporate Promotions, is that an executive is rewarded primarily for not making mistakes. The corollary principle is that executives may be congratulated on their achievements, but they are promoted because they've avoided failures.

It all fits with Stagweg's elevation. Every one of the other candidates for the job had done some admirable things, but each had stumbled at least once. They all had great batting averages, but on occasion had swung and missed. Ron, however, who has never taken the bat off of his shoulder, was voted Most Valuable Player.

The more I thought about it, the more sense it made. Individuals are all too frequently characterized by their mishaps, not their successes.

The Law of Corporate Promotions seems to have wide application. Politicians must be instinctively aware of it. Maybe that's why they're so vague about their real beliefs. They recognize that people are voting not so much for them as they are voting against the other candidate.

Check it out. Ask someone why they voted the way they did in the last election, and I bet the answer starts with, "I didn't like the way his opponent ... "