Comments

Knowing who or how to hire the CEO is only half the battle. Knowing when to get ride of one is the other. I have enormous admiration for Michael Eisner. Maybe not for the last few years but what he did over twenty years is nothing short of Wow. I worked for Coke when Roberto Goizueta was at the helm. Great hire and departed too soon from this earth to feel the enormous impact of his leadership.

Posted by RTodd at March 16, 2005 11:30 AM

Recently, looking at a photo of Carly Fiorina in full flight on stage, it occurred to me that the CEO of a major corporation has a job not unlike the presidency of a small country.

All those people! All those individual hopes, resentments, wishes, problems and ideas! And like a magnet under a page covered in iron filings, this leader has to make everyone face the same direction and give their all to the corporate strategic plan. Even a presidential candidate with PR army can’t keep that level of enthusiasm going for more than a couple of months. In fact, I think CEOs would find the presidency easy by comparison.

Dave

Posted by Dave at March 16, 2005 12:38 PM

Howard Schultz of Starbucks perhaps?

Posted by John at March 16, 2005 1:02 PM

Maybe the answer is in the question, "Can anybody...?" Very rarely, it would seem, so maybe a different approach is called for. Boards need a top level executive that pulls in one agreed direction and shares the job. They need to assign tasks, measures and rewards appropriately. They also need to be more willing to change tack when needed and more willing to allow a degree of failure - provided it's excellent failure, of course! Investing full responsibility in 1 person is beginning to look ridiculous. And the analogy with politics is frightening: what sane person would expose himself to the pressures and (over)personal scrutiny of politics? Do we want business to go the same way?

Posted by Mark JF at March 16, 2005 1:10 PM

You could probably add Michael Eisner to the list of fallen CEOs -- from what I understand, he wouldn't have quit now if it weren't for controversies related to his "centralizer" management style.

Posted by jarango at March 16, 2005 1:37 PM

John, yes, Howard Schultz.

Posted by tom peters at March 16, 2005 2:17 PM

ekkehard schulz of thyssen-krupp might also make it.

but i am affraid nobody knows him over in the states:)

Posted by jens at March 16, 2005 2:58 PM

Can anybody really do all this? Well, based upon the "superman" (person) compensation packages these people receive, they sure as hell should be able to do it all. And apparently if history is any judge, even when they fail they get rewarded. I think the bigger issue is "let's get real" and come up with some meaningful performance and compensation metrics that are truly aligned with what these people actually contribute vs. what they should be contributing. Put a cap on compensation to X times the average worker bees compensation. Just like the price of internet stocks before the bubble burst, these compensation levels are totally unrealistic and unreasonable based upon a top executives true ability to influence the end result outcomes of businesses this large. The bottom line is no single person is worth what most of these people get paid, it is truly obscene.

Posted by Steve at March 16, 2005 3:58 PM

"Apple CEO salary remains at $1.

But gets a $75 million restricted stock in exchange for his outstanding stock options in March 2003"

the company and the man. role models once again.

sorry. i am getting carried away...

Posted by jens at March 16, 2005 4:14 PM

Boards don't do what they are supposed to anymore, CEO's either can't find or don't look for good teams to take care of business, and the oversight is left up to the government. No wonder these companies and their leaders fail.

Posted by Mike at March 16, 2005 4:28 PM

Yes, character is important. But what is it? And are businesses truly looking at this with any clarity when they are hiring a CEO, or, for that matter, anyone?

Look at the Code of Ethics for busienss and Boards. That is one indication of the degree to which character matters in a business.

I think it is very tough to be a leader at any level. You have to be your own person or you get divided into a thousand different parts trying to accommodate the expectations of people. At the same time, you have listen and understand what those expectations are incorporate them into your perspective of what is the business. The CEO needs a flexible backbone of steel.

If character is shallow or weak, then the relationships that the leader has with people will be too, and when you are in a high stress job, like a CEO, then that weakness will show itself. The temptations to violate moral/ethical norms come every day. One slip, and you could be a goner. So, character goes to the clarity of principle or values that govern their life over and above what is required for their job.

Finally, I think character also goes to the kind of person who handles adversity, impossible challeges, and a grand vision of acheivement with continued resourcefulness and optimism. There is never, ever a reason to give up. Cynicism and defeatism are not sufficient options.

Character is critical, and because it is not easily measured, it gets ignored. And what applies to CEOs also applies to the Boards that hire them. They should be held to the same high standards.

Posted by Ed Brenegar at March 16, 2005 4:30 PM

One forgotten ex-CEO who could be on the list is Richard Scrushy of Health South. He has not one, but FIVE ex-CFOs turning state's evidence against him. Do those accountants stick together or what?

Posted by Mike at March 17, 2005 8:48 AM

Just one thought on the list of CEO's - Nardelli is not as great as people want to make him. Yes he has a great work ethic - Yes he has squeezed large scale profit and efficiency from Home Depot - Yes he does lead a huge company - BUT where is the growth - and by growth I mean profitable growth?

Bob is not a forward thinker - he is not a leader - He IS a MANAGER. He took the reins from two founder / leader / big thinker types and he implemented GE-esque cost control programs to wring profitability from each and every store.

I know several people in Atlanta that would build monuments to Bernie and Arthur and no one that would consider the same for Bob.

Bob is a good CEO but there is a reason that Jack chose Immelt.

Posted by Steve at March 22, 2005 5:48 PM