Archive: May 24, 2009 - May 30, 2009
The process for ensuring senior military leaders do not stagnate is provided for by law. Once a four-star general is relieved from the position, the officer must be reappointed to a position at the same grade, revert to a lower grade, or retire within 60 days.
By Col. Charles D. Allen | May 29, 2009; 2:59 PM ET | Comments (1)
In the end, the question of succession all depends on the quality of leadership the CEO exercises. It is that which matters, not the duration of his or her stay.
By Pablo Eisenberg | May 28, 2009; 12:03 PM ET | Comments (0)
When to leave poses one of the most wrenching decisions a Chief Executive must make. Here are three questions to light the way.
By Gen. Monty Meigs (Ret.) | May 28, 2009; 11:57 AM ET | Comments (0)
Boards need to do a better job of making sure CEOs understand from their first days on the job that they will be expected to develop solid succession plans across the enterprise.
By John R. Ryan | May 27, 2009; 10:56 AM ET | Comments (0)
The succession process Xerox used in the the transition from Anne Mulcahy to Ursula Burns is a model of how succession should be done.
By Bill George | May 27, 2009; 10:53 AM ET | Comments (0)
Boards should start off new administrations with the express understanding that the CEO's term is limited, and exceptions should be rare.
By Slade Gorton | May 27, 2009; 10:50 AM ET | Comments (0)
Anne Mulcahy's departure raises the question of how long political leaders should stay in office -- even when they're still effective.
By Gen. John Batiste (Ret.) | May 27, 2009; 10:45 AM ET | Comments (1)
Length of time is not the issue; appropriateness for the position and the capacity to change and grow are the crucial factors in deciding when a leader should leave.
By Howard Gardner | May 26, 2009; 4:36 PM ET | Comments (0)
Transition is not equivalent to failure and the needs of the organization trump the desires of the individual.
By George Reed | May 26, 2009; 4:32 PM ET | Comments (0)
Board members must always bear in mind why they hired a particular CEO. If the objectives have changed, if the reasons for hiring the CEO no longer apply, then it's probably time for a new chief executive.
By Yash Gupta | May 26, 2009; 4:06 PM ET | Comments (0)
When a leader stays too long, it's usually the fault of the oversight committee--people who are too timid or too intimidated to do what they probably know is right.
By Alan M. Webber | May 26, 2009; 2:59 PM ET | Comments (0)
It is rare to hear people say that a leader's tenure was too short. Too often the discussion of succession is seen as disloyal or conspiratorial.
By Andy Stern | May 26, 2009; 2:14 PM ET | Comments (0)
When we work with top teams, we often ask about succession plans. Instead, what we frequently find, instead, are non-succession plans. People who stay too long no longer bring their A game.
By Marty Linsky | May 26, 2009; 10:55 AM ET | Comments (0)
Different types of leaders are needed at different stages of an organization's life cycle, and, in the final analysis, boards of directors have the primary responsibility to find the right fit.
By David Walker | May 26, 2009; 10:52 AM ET | Comments (0)
Non-profits face this challenge all the time, especially with founders who have more of a psychic than a financial investment, and whose organizations often lack a deep bench due to financial constraints.
By Bill Shore | May 26, 2009; 10:47 AM ET | Comments (0)