- مبلغ: ۸۶,۰۰۰ تومان
- مبلغ: ۹۱,۰۰۰ تومان
In a much anticipated event on January 25, 2012, Ron Johnson, the new outside CEO of JC Penney at the time, presented his bold turnaround strategy: ‘‘he was not going to juststabilize JC Penney, but was going to revolutionize it.’’ He definitely did not disappoint investors who had boosted the company’s shares six months previously with the announcement of Johnson becoming JC Penney’s new CEO. Just over one year after his presentation though, Johnson was again in the headlines, but this time with a starkly different tone: ‘‘JC Penney ousts CEO Ron Johnson after turnaround strategy fails, names predecessor to top spot. . . Ron Johnson’s short-lived tenure as JC Penney’s CEO will go down as one of the biggest flameouts in corporate America’’ (Yahoo News, April 8—9, 2013) The experience of JC Penney is not an isolated case. A recent study of CEO succession trends found that outsider CEOs have been forced out of office 44% more often than insiders have been during the past 10 years. Furthermore, compared to insiders, outsiders are nearly seven times more likely to be dismissed after a short tenure.
Outsiders are more likely to be hired under turbulent conditions when change is needed, but they are also more likely to get trapped in those unstable corporate environments. On the other hand, corporate stability enables outsider CEOs to bring about strategic change. Boards should not wait for signs of deteriorating firm performance to give serious consideration to hiring an outside CEO candidate. Hiring an outsider CEO is a method for generating proactive change to break strategic inertia, rather than a panacea for deep-seated company problems in tough times. Insider CEOs are more effective in generating change geared toward fixing problems in troubling companies. These recommendations are somewhat inconsistent with the stereotypical depiction of outsider CEOs, who take risky and bold action in highly turbulent circumstances. This may indeed explain why boards so often choose CEOs that are bound to fail. The implications are significant. Boards should refrain from concentrating solely on outsider CEO candidate skills and past track records. Rather, they should consider the constraining effects of the succession context in tough times on an outsider CEO.