Monday, April 01, 2013

Do Outsider CEOs really Add Value?

Contemporary Evidence suggests that Outsiders may be likely to Excel and Outperform Insiders at Companies that are in crisis. But Historical and Empirical Research Suggests otherwise. Where does reality stand?

It was the spring of 1985, and the board of Apple Computer decided it no longer needed the services of one Steven P. Jobs. The main dramatis persona in the tech world’s biggest unfolding drama of a quarter-century ago was John Sculley, the Pepsi executive whom Apple’s board had brought in as CEO to oversee Jobs and grow the company — similar to Eric Schmidt’s role with Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin — in 1983.

Was Apple’s board right in bringing outsider Sculley to revive the waning fortunes of the company? The truth is that, depending on the company and its situation, it can be just as important to bring in outsiders as it is to develop homegrown talent. Around the time Sculley came on board, Apple was struggling with low Macintosh sales and there was a need to bring some order to the creative chaos Jobs had unleashed. Sculley got Jobs out of his hair two years after taking over Apple. In the course of undertaking his major reorganisation, Sculley fired 1,200 employees (20% of the total workforce) and put the broken parts of the company together to form one unified Apple and delivered its biggest growth, percentage wise, in its history prior to the return of Steve Jobs in 1997.

Like Apple, there are many global companies that are famous for promoting talent and grooming leaders from within but have all brought in outsiders when they needed to. According to analysts, the health, stability and competitive position of the company at the time of transition are the critical factors in determining whether an insider or an outsider is the best choice. Experts contend that insiders perform more consistently when their companies are in a healthy state at the time of appointment, whereas outsiders perform better when the company is in some form of crisis.

Ford CEO Alan Mulally, a longtime former Boeing executive, transformed an iconic American company that was on the brink of bankruptcy. Under Mulally, decision-making became more transparent, once-fractious divisions began working together, and cars of better quality started rolling faster from design studio to showroom. Mulally may be getting the rewards and accolades now, but who remembers what Ford was like in ’06, ‘07 and ‘08 when bold and difficult decisions were being made and people wondered if the aerospace executive could cut it in the automotive world. “Many doubted Mulally’s ability when he first came to Ford. There are doubters no more. He has proved to be an outstanding leader, and helped the company reach new heights,” said Michelle Krebs, an automotive expert and Senior Analyst for auto experts Edmunds.com. To get a sense of Mulally’s contribution to Ford’s turnaround, take a look at the increase in the value of the company from 2008 to 2011 as measured by its market capitalisation. During the period there has been over 1000% increase or an increase of $51.26 billion. A 1% share of that would be $512 million. The share price of the company has soared from a low of $1.26 on November 19, 2008, to $18.97 on January 13, 2011 and is currently trading around the $15 mark.


Source : IIPM Editorial, 2012.
An Initiative of IIPM, Malay Chaudhuri
and Arindam Chaudhuri (Renowned Management Guru and Economist). For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,