Michael Porter talked recently about seven things that surprise new CEOs. In a nutshell - it's tough to be a real leader vs. an operations manager, be clear on whom you're supposed to please, stay within yourself and know that the role is as much an icon as it is a real person.
I was around a number of CEOs recently, new ones, veterans, successes, and soon to be unemployed ones as well. Many shared stories of the surprises that Porter referenced.
Few had read Jim Collins' Good to Great, a book that in my opinion eliminates the prospect of any of these seven (and many other) gotchas. Even fewer had read The Art of War by Sun Tzu; sadly many had never even heard of this book!
It saddens me that so many CEOs are so ill-equipped to be in that role. The basics of leadership seem to be lost, and most of these people's pedigree tended to be one (often public) success that propelled them to be poached and then placed in this supreme role with high expectations and little preparation.
Most of the new CEOs also disdained anything that was done before they got there, and without real analysis or discussion, started from scratch a-la the "new sheriff in town". This resulted in disempowerment, lack of focus, a lot of self-doubt, and fear of sharing any "un-massaged" news at the risk of being another casualty of new-CEO-itis. This isn't to say that one should always stay the course, but being smart and judicious, and listening to the organization and its people might guide how best to affect change.
Is this forced upon them? Did they just do a bad job of negotiating (getting caught up instead in the definition of their golden parachute)? Why does this happen so often?
What about the board of directors? Where is their culpability in setting themselves up for failure like this? Bringing in this new gunslinger (as many are wont to do in tough times) places an enormous burden on the person and the organization. Change happened because of poor performance, or bad planning (no succession strategy). And the new CEO's expected to boldly lead the company out of the mess and onto a path of unmitigated success.
How often does that happen? (Very rarely.) And how often has it been tried? (Almost every day.) Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. How insane are the boards of today?
They demand change (sounds like our election:)). But change for the sake of change is just dumb. Is change really needed? If so, what kind? People? Strategy? Products? How much time should it take to really understand the business as the new person? How long does it take to figure out your management team, identify the people you trust and believe in, and those that may need to move? How do you take the time you need without taking so long that all of a sudden you're just part of the establishment and unable to make change happen? What is the definition of success for the company, it's employees, it's external stakeholders? What latitude do you have?
If I didn't know the answers to these and a bunch of other questions (about how the business operates, rewards people, shares information, creates revenue, etc.), there is no way I'd even consider signing up as the CEO. How long does it take to figure all this out?
Well, if it was me, I'd absolutely NOT want to waste time figuring all this out after I was hired!! I would want to know all of this during the interview process - this is my due-diligence opportunity, not unlike the home inspection prior to purchase.
Many of the surprises that Porter referenced above look to be the result of an unprepared board hiring an un-strategic CEO.
Recent Comments