The news consumed the business world at large, ripples felt
globally as they impacted a large set of employees, customers, shareholders and
the industry. Allegations and insinuations bordered on libel with subjective
views on leadership of the individual who had steered the drifting ship,
stabilizing and setting course that (almost) everyone had welcomed. Everything
appeared to be going well until the brown stuff hit the roof and suddenly the
knight in shining armor was declared incompetent and unworthy of the position.
Grave matter it was since the allegations were cast by the
person who had anointed the CEO to begin with. Pronouncements at the time of
appointment lauded the decision as a bold move that will transform the company
fortunes and bring them back to the forefront. The market loved the sure and
swift measures taking the market capitalization beyond earlier peaks. Market
analysts bullish on the company helped the momentum and things seem to be
settling into place when the murmurs of a rift were heard.
A couple of years later when the market got tougher, some
old-timers left the company and a set of acquisitions did not bring the value, it
was a matter of time. Their styles of operation were divergent, the market
perceptions different, the go-to-market and customer focus not where the
company had started from. The new leadership sought independence by virtue of
the numbers doing the talking, the founders wanted to retain control over the
direction taken by the company, influence decisions and outcomes.
Thus the rift became a chasm with the founders prevailing
over the professionals; markets were not kind to the events, valuation dropping
sharply, trolls on social media made hay further damaging the now fragile
reputation of the bellwether. Customers called for review wondering if there is
a change in focus of the company; whether they were still relevant especially
as the new team and brought in many new revenue streams which put the customers
at risk should the teams be disbanded or left to drift to natural death.
This is not the first time such a war has broken out between
the Promoters and Professionals hired to run the company; history will repeat
itself ad infinitum. This is where the Board of Directors – an independent
conscience keeper – is expected to moderate the decisions and outcomes.
Companies pick Board members based on their agenda and if they desire real
advice with someone willing to challenge and provide expertise, or an
acquiescent collective that will endorse decisions of the majority shareholders
(Founders).
One of the companies where I spent some time had gone
through a similar turmoil, the end result damaging the company’s market
position, profitability and high talent attrition. The Board played second
fiddle while the company spiraled downward. Another much publicized case
involved a large conglomerate and a non-family member who was hired after a
global search lasting more than a year; the downfall was spectacular and all
kinds of hypothesis and speculation floated to undermine the outgoing person.
Were these cases of bad hires ? Probably not considering
that the due diligence done was extensive and involved many senior leaders
within and outside the company. The appointments were put to trail by media
akin to baptism by fire – the individuals came through unscathed. At the helm
of the company the accountability is to the Board and shareholders, apart from
customers and employees whose interests come later. So was it a case of lack of
transparency or willful withholding of sensitive information to the Board ?
In most cases there is a fall guy or a set of people who are
blamed for the fiasco; life takes a dip and then limps back to normalcy. The
triggers: the Promoters and the new Management fight fierce public battles only
to be forgotten; the actors change, situations probably are different and so
could be geographies, the outcomes are however predictable with the Promoters
prevailing over the hires. The Board in such cases is deemed ineffective, new
members brought in with a hope to remedy the situation, and then …
Every episode has lessons for both the Promoters as well as
the Managers; these are published, discussed, debated, converted to slides, and
become case studies in management schools. Every incident adversely impacts
company reputation, customers, employees and at times the industry; in almost
all cases the management is the antagonist – probably unaligned to the original
ethos – who gets the short end. Every time we hope that now people would have
learned a lesson and then they surprise us again.
Do you mind if I quote a ffew oof your articles as long as I provide credit and sources back to your webpage?
ReplyDeleteMy blog is in the very samne area of interest as yours and my
users would really benefit from some of the information you provide here.
Please let me know if this okay with you. Cheers!
Hi,
ReplyDeleteThanks for this great post contribution. I really appreciate you.
Andy Britnell