You focused on the wrong part of that. Yes, it's semantics, but I think having a common definition is important.
Also important - the executive controls processes. Executive level leadership is privy to information that the people who literally process payments are not.
As I said; if the paperwork is in order, AP will cut the check. They do not evaluate right/wrong. They evaluate allowable and/or appropriate based on common accounting practices and specific institutional policies. Many private companies have people who, because they are executives, are absolutely able to take advantage of the company, because they are the ones deciding what is right and wrong for the company.
What I'm saying is, the person processing payment for executive level leadership is not, generally, in a position to ferret out the right or wrong of the various contracts. Unless the contract comes across and says, "this is to keep Loughla's dirty damned mouth shut," I would bet most AP offices would never catch this sort of thing.
I'm not saying that some person in Accounts Payable is meant to launch an inquisition on every cheque that goes out and blow a whistle.
What I'm saying is that I don't understand how a company does not get looted by its execs if they can unilaterally and w/o consequence cut six-figure cheques to what amounts to a personal expense. Someone like Marty sounds like the type of person to have to cut these regularly.
Surely these execs have a responsibility to their shareholders and their board to turn a profit and not misappropriate funds. Marty might be an exec but he's a cog in the ZeniMax/Bethesda machine. You'd imagine someone up the chain would notice that their project is way over-budget and over-time and look at the many zeros on the legal budget allocated to various settlements attributed to one of their rough-shot execs.
To be clear, I'm not saying what you claim isn't true, what I'm saying is that I don't understand how its in the interest of the Powers That Be at ZeniMax to do anything but bury folks like Marty by sending him to the cloud spotting division on the roof.
Also important - the executive controls processes. Executive level leadership is privy to information that the people who literally process payments are not.
As I said; if the paperwork is in order, AP will cut the check. They do not evaluate right/wrong. They evaluate allowable and/or appropriate based on common accounting practices and specific institutional policies. Many private companies have people who, because they are executives, are absolutely able to take advantage of the company, because they are the ones deciding what is right and wrong for the company.
What I'm saying is, the person processing payment for executive level leadership is not, generally, in a position to ferret out the right or wrong of the various contracts. Unless the contract comes across and says, "this is to keep Loughla's dirty damned mouth shut," I would bet most AP offices would never catch this sort of thing.
I hope that's clearer.