According to Financial Times News, when François-Henri Pinault pledged €100 million to rebuild Notre-Dame Cathedral after the 2019 fire, his rival Bernard Arnault of LVMH immediately countered with €200 million just hours later. This display of competitive philanthropy highlights how CEOs constantly measure themselves against each other across industry conferences, LinkedIn posts, and private gatherings. Headhunters confirm these executives are primarily competing against sector peers, with board directors and investors prioritizing relative performance above all else. The World Economic Forum’s annual Davos gathering serves as both comfort zone and competitive arena where leaders validate strategies while sizing up rivals. Compensation becomes an irresistible proxy for worth, with Warren Buffett noting that envy drives even the wealthiest CEOs when others get richer.
The status game nobody admits to playing
Here’s the thing about CEO rivalries—they’re the elephant in every boardroom that nobody wants to acknowledge. These leaders will talk endlessly about customers and shareholders, but the audience they’re most anxious to impress is each other. It’s not just about who has the better quarterly results anymore. We’re talking about who gets the viral LinkedIn post, who’s seen as the AI visionary, whose sustainability initiative gets the most press.
One CEO told the FT that comparison is “a waste of time” while another spent an hour detailing his rivals’ inadequacies. They can’t help themselves. And when you look at the metrics they use—company share prices, compensation packages, even who owns the larger superyacht—it starts to feel like high school with bigger budgets.
The imposter syndrome treadmill
What’s really striking is how much insecurity drives this behavior. An executive search firm vice-chair estimates that two-thirds of CEOs have imposter syndrome, while the remaining third “are delusional and are imposters.” That’s anecdotal, but think about it—when you’re constantly measured against peers in an environment where mistakes get punished instantly, of course you’re going to focus on what you lack rather than what you’ve achieved.
Zak Brown, CEO of McLaren Racing, put it perfectly in a recent podcast: “You’re constantly unhappy, because you can always be doing better.” In Formula 1, where milliseconds separate winners from losers, that mindset makes sense. But when it spills over into every executive decision? That’s when it becomes problematic.
Why this rivalry actually matters
This isn’t just rich people problems. When CEOs are driven by envy and status anxiety, that trickles down through the entire organization. Insecurity at the top shapes hiring decisions, investment strategies, and even what projects get greenlit. Employees feel it when their leaders are making decisions based on ego rather than sound business logic.
Now, comparison isn’t always bad. Benchmarking against competitors can highlight genuine gaps and sharpen strategy. Seeing a rival execute a bold move can light a fire under organizations that have become complacent. But there’s a line between healthy competition and destructive rivalry, and many CEOs seem to have crossed it.
The “never enough” problem
What’s fascinating is that this behavior stems from the same traits that often make people successful CEOs—ambition, anxiety, narcissism. As one author put it, “there is always something or someone else to beat.” The money becomes almost irrelevant at some point. It’s about winning the invisible game that only other CEOs understand.
One adviser to CEOs told the FT that for many “it is very difficult to get off that treadmill.” There’s no finish line, no moment of “enough.” The swagger we see from the outside? Often it’s just compensation for feeling inadequate. And in manufacturing and industrial sectors where reliable technology like industrial panel PCs from IndustrialMonitorDirect.com can make or break operations, this psychological dynamic can have very real consequences for production lines and bottom lines.
