Two unrelated events in the past couple of weeks made me think about leaders who let go - or not. Steve Ballmer announced his departure from Microsoft, triggering speculation as to whether Bill Gates might or should step back to the company he founded in 1975. Tony Blair, widely condemned for taking the UK into Iraq has stepped back into the limelight, throwing himself into the debate about whether or not the UK should take military action in Syria.
Bill Gates concentrated on his Foundation (a million miles in content from Microsoft) when he stepped down as CEO in 2000, since when he has resisted commenting about the company he left behind (and despite remaining on its Board). Microsoft's value halved in his absence. Doubtful though Gates' return might be, he is being talked about as Microsoft's latter day saviour. Steve Jobs, during his break from Apple between 1985 and 1996, went about building other successful entities (LucasFilm into Pixar and NeXT, whose platform eventually became Apple's Mac operating system). During his second tenure Apple's shares soared 9000%. Procter & Gamble's AF Lafley was enticed back to become CEO of P&G after an absence of three years.
These are leaders who left their jobs, whether voluntarily, or whether they were ousted having lost a boardroom battle, with positive reputations for delivering good results. They move on to new pastures and allow their successors to breathe, to find (sometimes) better ways to lead their organisations towards success. These are leaders who are comfortable and confident enough in their own skin to believe their successors too, can make a difference.
Their vision, drive, commitment, skills for making things happen and the confidence that they are the right person to lead are acknowledged by enough stakeholders to sustain their credibility as leaders who deliver. So when the going gets tough for the organisation they left behind, inevitably stakeholders' minds are drawn towards trying to get them back.
Then there are leaders who leave their jobs with business unfinished and an obsession for making good a negative legacy. Today's best example is Tony Blair on the UK national platform. His insistence on sharing strong opinions about the Middle East, and more recently, undermining the current leadership of the party he professes to love must be painful for his successor. Nawaz Sharif is another political leader who will not let go, though Pakistan's political system is such that he was able to come back a third time. Vladimir Putin, Silvio Berlusconi are also frequent returners. In the US, the only way to ensure a sustainable legacy is through political dynasties - the Bushes, Kennedys and now possibly the Clintons.
There is, as ever, the third way. Many corporations encourage outgoing CEOs to remain on the Board, sometimes as Chair. This provides the dual benefit of insight and continuity during a period of change. But this also keeps ex CEOs sufficiently close to the company to ensure loyalty. However, there are great dangers to this approach - the question of who is boss looms large and companies such as Occidental, BestBuy and JCPenney have paid dearly for this dual leadership.
These scenarios are replicated all over the business world without the public glare afforded to world leaders and global corporations. The biggest challenge for outgoing CEOs is to leave the stage, offer insights and wisdom when asked and resist a running-sidelines commentary either in public or in private. The best approach for a new CEO is surely to seek the space to make decisions on how best to take the organisation forward with the integrity of his/her own vision and leadership style.
Family businesses face their own challenges in succession and legacy integrity - I blogged about this last January Founders Keepers - family businesses so will leave well alone on this occasion.
There is a great deal of interest and energy being spent on helping CEOs start a job, do a job, account for a job, succeed in a job. More energy should be spent in helping CEOs walk away from a job - whether to grow roses or to run another company.
Comments
Post a Comment