Mark Zuckerberg, co-founder of Facebook and current CEO of Meta, recently shared his perspective on the importance of having a tech-savvy leadership team in today’s rapidly evolving tech industry.

During an appearance on the Acquired podcast, Zuckerberg emphasized that companies that consider themselves technology-driven should be led by CEOs and senior executives with substantial technical expertise to truly thrive.

Reflecting on the key factors that have contributed to Meta’s growth, Zuckerberg highlighted the critical role of having a leadership team that not only understands product development but also embraces technological innovation as core to the company’s identity. According to him, Meta’s success can be attributed to maintaining a strong balance between product innovation and technological leadership.

“I think that that’s something that we’ve held ourselves to and built a good organization around,” he remarked, indicating that Meta’s structure emphasizes technical knowledge and development throughout its organizational hierarchy.

Zuckerberg did not shy away from critiquing what he views as a common flaw in many so-called tech companies—namely, the lack of technical proficiency among their leadership. Drawing from his early experiences in Silicon Valley, he described a recurring scenario where firms identified as technology companies lacked leadership teams with technical expertise.

“The CEO wasn’t technical, the board of directors had no one technical on it. They had one dude on the management team who was the head of engineering, who was technical, and everyone else wasn’t,” Zuckerberg recounted, noting that such companies, despite their potential success in certain aspects, could not genuinely be considered tech firms unless a significant portion of the leadership possessed strong technical acumen.

He suggested that firms claiming to be tech-oriented need more than just one or two technical roles at the top. Instead, they must cultivate a culture where technical understanding permeates the senior leadership, allowing them to drive innovation and adapt to rapid technological advancements.

The Meta vs. Apple Approach

In the interview, Zuckerberg also drew comparisons between Meta and other tech giants, notably Apple, to illustrate different approaches to product development. Apple is known for taking its time to perfect products before launch, while Meta has cultivated a culture that values agility and rapid iteration.

Zuckerberg pointed out that Meta has consistently embraced a more reactive approach: “We have a culture that values shipping and getting things out and getting feedback,” he said.

He admitted that this mindset sometimes brings Meta close to “the line of being embarrassed about what [it] put[s] out,” but stressed that this approach has proven valuable for the company’s growth.

Learning from Competitors and Embracing Feedback

Beyond advocating for tech-savvy leadership, Zuckerberg emphasized the importance of being open to external insights, warning companies against overprotecting their pride.

“There are more smart people outside of your company than inside your company,” he said, underscoring the need for businesses to stay humble and learn from the successes and failures of others. He suggested that companies often gain valuable insights from observing rival firms’ strategies and outcomes.

Navigating Emerging Trends like AI

Zuckerberg’s insights come at a time when many companies are grappling with the rapid advancement of technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), which requires quick adaptation to maintain competitiveness. He indicated that innovation should not just be about pushing the envelope with new technologies but also about having the right leaders who understand these advancements well enough to guide strategic decisions.

His views echo a growing trend among some tech giants to elevate engineers and product developers to senior leadership roles. For instance, companies like Google and Microsoft have appointed leaders with deep technical backgrounds—such as Sundar Pichai and Satya Nadella, respectively—who have played pivotal roles in shaping their companies’ focus on AI and cloud computing. This aligns with Zuckerberg’s argument that a solid grasp of technology at the leadership level is essential for companies to thrive in today’s market.

At Meta, Zuckerberg has practiced what he preaches, ensuring that the company’s leadership team is infused with technical expertise. His background as a coder who co-founded Facebook in a dorm room informs his hands-on approach to technological leadership. Furthermore, Meta’s focus on emerging technologies, such as virtual reality, augmented reality, and AI, reflects a deliberate strategy to stay ahead of the curve by fostering a culture of technical innovation.

The World Bank has reported that Nigeria lost a staggering N13.2 trillion due to mismanagement of its foreign exchange policy between 2021 and 2023.

This loss, attributed to the government’s dual exchange rate system, has sparked significant discussion about how the country got to its current economic trajectory and the measures needed to correct its fiscal course.

The breakdown of the losses reveals that N2 trillion was lost in 2021, N6.2 trillion in 2022, and N5 trillion in 2023. These figures highlight the disparity between an official exchange rate—where the government controlled the price of the naira—and a parallel market rate that was governed by market forces.

The two-tier exchange rate system was initially introduced as a stabilizing measure, designed to protect the naira and specific sectors of the economy. However, as time passed, the policy became a massive financial drain.

According to the World Bank, the difference between the official rate and the parallel market rate significantly reduced the amount of naira-denominated revenue that flowed into Nigeria’s treasury. Vital sectors such as oil and gas, import and export duties, value-added tax (VAT), and corporate taxes were deeply impacted by this practice.

In their report, the World Bank stated, “Quantifying the fiscal cost, through forgone revenue of multiple exchange rates: Prior to the full FX unification in February 2024, the presence of a parallel FX premium generated enormous fiscal costs, in the form of forgone revenues.”

The report further explained that revenues, particularly those linked to foreign exchange, were being converted into naira at the official rate, significantly lower than the parallel market rate. This resulted in the government earning far less than it could have had it unified the exchange rates earlier.

Impact on the Nigerian Economy

During the years in question, the impact of these losses was felt across key areas of the economy. Of the N13.2 trillion lost, N3.9 trillion was attributed to forgone revenues from the non-oil sector. The World Bank’s report noted that about 44.3% of Nigeria’s net VAT revenue came from imported goods paid for in foreign currency, while 40% of total company income tax was also paid in foreign currency.

“The unification of the FX rate has therefore eliminated the forgone revenues that previously benefited certain groups at the expense of the entire nation,” the report said, emphasizing the profound implications of these losses.

The report makes a direct comparison between the cost of Nigeria’s foreign exchange subsidy and its fuel subsidy. In 2022, the government spent N4.5 trillion on the Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) subsidy, which represented 2.2% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Meanwhile, the losses due to the foreign exchange premium amounted to N6.2 trillion—representing 3% of the GDP.

“These forgone revenues due to the parallel FX premium were even larger than the PMS subsidy, underscoring the importance of maintaining a unified FX rate,” the World Bank explained.

The breakdown of the FX-related losses further revealed that N4.5 trillion was lost from gross oil revenues, while N1.7 trillion was lost from non-oil tax revenues, underscoring the widespread fiscal impact across multiple sectors of the economy.

The cost of maintaining FX subsidies is believed to be the major reason the present administration floated the Nigerian FX market in June 2023.

Nigeria has long subsidized fuel and foreign exchange, spending enormous amounts to keep prices artificially low. However, this has come at a high cost. In its report, the World Bank argued that the FX subsidy, which was finally eliminated in February 2024, had been a larger drain on Nigeria’s economy than even the fuel subsidy.

However, eliminating the subsidies has brought about severe economic hardship to the Nigerian people, as it has shot up the cost of living. Finance Minister Wale Edun announced last Thursday that Nigeria would no longer subsidize fuel and foreign exchange. He made this declaration during an event where the World Bank unveiled its latest report on Nigeria’s development.

“Fuel and FX subsidies are extinguished,” Edun declared, explaining that the policies were no longer sustainable for Nigeria’s economy. He explained that these subsidies had been a major strain on the country’s finances, and removing them was a necessary step to avoid further economic deterioration.

Recommendations for Economic Recovery

The World Bank’s chief economist for Nigeria, Alex Sienart, pointed to the gains Nigeria has made since removing the foreign exchange subsidy, which has significantly boosted government revenue. Sienart noted that government revenues in the first half of 2024 increased largely due to the unification of the exchange rate.

“We are seeing a fiscal consolidation underway with the fiscal deficit shrinking from 6.2 per cent of GDP in the first half of 2023 to 4.4 per cent of GDP in H1, 2024,” he said, noting that while government expenditures have remained relatively constant, the removal of the FX subsidy has contributed to the surge in revenue.

Sienart further explained that the elimination of the FX subsidy had a more significant positive impact on Nigeria’s finances than the removal of the fuel subsidy.

“This surge in revenue is largely due to the removal of the implicit subsidy which was even larger than the PMS subsidy that we talk about,” he noted.

The World Bank report also strongly advised Nigeria to maintain its unified exchange rate policy going forward. It argued that reverting to multiple exchange rates would once again result in significant losses and that the government must avoid falling back into the costly practices of the past.

I remain convinced that the best days of terrestrial broadband providers like GSM companies are behind them, as Elon Musk goes all out with an asymmetric competitive playbook: “Elon Musk’s SpaceX has renewed its push for approval to significantly expand the Starlink satellite constellation, seeking permission from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to launch nearly 30,000 more satellites into low-Earth orbit.”

If they do approve these satellites, he could crash the cost of his data by up to a factor of 4, and by 2027, his cost model will be cheaper than whatever your local mobile provider is giving you. And because he has the satellite-to-cellphone capabilities already in place, a massive disintermediation is loading.

I understand that our regulators and policymakers are always sleeping, but they cannot afford to do that on this matter. If Africa loses all the core taxes from the telecom sector to satellite providers which are not indigenous, our economies could collapse. So, they need to immediately put a tax regime at the African Union level on how to handle this new vector.

Understand that the solution is not for MTN, Glo or Safaricom going satellite. That is a waste of time. Why? None has the engineering capacity to design, make and launch satellites, and can only rely on external providers. But for Starlink, it is end-to-end in-house, and because of that, the Starlink price model could be superior on multiples. This is why this is an existential threat to many telcos in terrestrial space!