Decisions on CEO succession have never been more critical to an organization’s success. No wonder, then, that boards are insisting on being involved in the process and not leaving the choice up to a departing chief executive officer. Are boards doing a good job? A string of brief CEO tenures at some of the best-known corporations — for instance, Douglas Ivester at Coca-Cola, Michael Hawley at Gillette and Rick Thoman at Xerox —suggests ongoing problems. But as current research shows, companies that identify the pitfalls can make succession decisions that will stand the test of time. (See “The Optimum CEO Succession.”)
Passing the baton is a complex process for several reasons. First, the labor market for CEOs bears little resemblance to the labor market for other executives. Both the number of open CEO positions and the number of people capable of running large, complex organizations are few. Second, most candidates already are employed and thus difficult to identify or uninterested in another position. Third, the risks involved in making the wrong choice and having to remove a CEO are enormous. Not only can dismissal cost tens of millions of dollars in severance compensation, but the disruption to the organization can result in lost opportunities.
Finally, the search for a new CEO occurs under a spotlight. A change in leadership affects many stakeholders, including shareholders, employees, customers and suppliers. The board’s search for the best candidate must respond to the interests and scrutiny of many constituencies.
But although such factors complicate the search, they are not the main cause of poor selection outcomes, which are rooted in boards’ succession practices — practices so commonplace and institutionalized they are rarely questioned.
From 1995 to 2000, I conducted research on the process by which boards of large corporations select CEOs. After scores of interviews with directors, executive-search consultants and job candidates — plus careful examination of 100 CEO successions — I developed a deep understanding of the practices boards use now and the implications for identifying and hiring the most appropriate CEOs. The bad news is that seven pitfalls are derailing searches at even some of the best-run organizations. The good news is that there are ways to avoid those pitfalls —and trailblazing companies are doing so successfully.
Pitfall One: Missing the Chance for Organizational Introspection
CEO succession offers boards a chance to assess the company’s objectives, evaluate performance and diagnose the source of problems. Unfortunately, most boards don’t take
Get Premium Already a Premium Subscriber? Sign In
Purchase
Buy this article
Purchase one or more copies as a PDF


Copyright © Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1977-2011. All rights reserved.








