I think this is a commonly repeated but warped view of executive responsibility in a corporation. You could prioritize shareholder interest by chopping up and selling off successful parts of a corporation to get incredible quarterly results for a quarter or two, but quickly the corporation would dissolve due to a lack of an ability to make money. You could argue the CEO made the right call because shareholders made a lot of money in those quarters therefore he did what’s in their interest but at the same time he/she collapsed the entire company in order to do it, which isn’t in anyone’s interest. Prioritizing long-term growth can benefit shareholders even further than burning bright and burning out fast.
Prior to the last several decades, this is how companies operated, with an eye for long-term growth, but in recent history, this has shifted more toward short-term gains which has only benefitted the 1% of the 1%, while the rest of us suffer with inflation, recessions, unemployment, and an evaporating middle class.