Tag: CorporateGovernance

Steve Jobs vs. Tim Cook – Innovator vs. Operator – It’s In Their DNA

Steve Jobs vs. Tim Cook – Innovator vs. Operator – It’s In Their DNA

Personality Analytics Holds the Key as to Why Apple Was More Innovative Under Steve Jobs than Tim Cook

Apple has lost its creative mojo under Tim Cook. Incremental product enhancements have become the norm, replacing a time when revolutionary new products, space age design and landmark advertising was the standard. What changed? Look no further than the CEO chair. Apple founder, CEO and creative genius Steve Jobs prematurely passed away in October 2011. Jobs’ hand-picked successor, Tim Cook, is by experience an operator with a background steeped in supply chain experience. Cook could not be more different from Jobs from a personality standpoint (see our table below).

The importance of assessing a CEO’s personality when conducting a CEO selection process (corporate boards, executive recruiters), or investment due diligence process can not be overstated. This is especially true of industry verticals marked by rapid change where the cost of having an ineffective CEO can be extremely high. It is not so rare to find a situation where a CEO, Board and institutional investor base were slow to realize that a given company’s customers were migrating elsewhere due to product obsolescence or other factors that ought to have been recognized. Few participants want to acknowledge this type of deterioration early or mid-cycle and only do so when it’s too late.

CEOs that create “adaptable” corporate cultures are less likely to lead companies that suffer irreparable declines due to product under-investment or other negligent factors. Adaptable cultures are less likely to be caught off guard and instead lead market change.

Corporate cultures are often an extension of the CEO’s personality. Yes, CEOs influence culture and corporate strategy even in mega-cap companies. Look no further than Microsoft (MSFT) during Steve Ballmer’s tenure as compared to Satya Nadella‘s time as CEO. MSFT’s product & services strategy is dramatically different as is the firm’s approach to competing and partnering with other technology companies.

We highly value the personality trait “openness” in large part because of its relationship to adaptable cultures.  Steve Jobs and Tim Cook score similarly on the openness scale – 92nd percentile and 94th percentile respectively. However, looking at the personality sub-traits under openness, Jobs scores far higher than Cook in the two most creative personality sub-traits: “artistic interests” and “imagination”.

Given that Cook lags in these areas, one would need to get comfortable with the idea that a non-creative personality like his (32nd percentile and 14th percentile as detailed below) is capable of generating massive creative output from Apple’s 120,000-plus employees. This is asking too much of Tim Cook in our view.  What doesn’t come naturally doesn’t come easily and may not come at all.

Our May 2018 CEO personality analytics research piece may be found here: Personality Analytics: Technology CEOs Analyzed

source: CEORater; IBM

 

 

 

 

 

Our recent podcast on the subject:

Your CEO’s Personality Influences His/Her Ability to Scale<span class="badge-status" style="background:red">Premium</span> 

Your CEO’s Personality Influences His/Her Ability to ScalePremium 

It is true. Your CEO’s personality influences his/her ability to scale (among other things). It may seem self-evident. One’s intuition may suggest such a relationship between personality traits and workplace effectiveness. Well, it is more than a hunch. Published research demonstrates a relationship between CEO personality traits and company performance. Gow, Kaplan, Larcker and Zakolyukina…

Upgrade to premium to continue reading this article and to access all premium content. Already a member? Login
How to Communicate CEO Succession Plans to Investors<span class="badge-status" style="background:red">Premium</span> 

How to Communicate CEO Succession Plans to InvestorsPremium 

Transparent CEO Succession Plans Are Best Communicating CEO succession plans to institutional investors does not have to be complicated. Generally speaking, transparency around your CEO succession process is a good thing. This should not be confused with providing investors with a play-by-play update (I would not recommend the latter). Here’s a high-level outline that may…

Upgrade to premium to continue reading this article and to access all premium content. Already a member? Login
Corporate Governance & Communicating Your Long-Term Strategy

Corporate Governance & Communicating Your Long-Term Strategy

BlackRock (tkr: BLK) is going “activist” within the passive investment (i.e. index funds) side of their house. Regardless of whether or not you agree with the approach (we don’t entirely agree with the social activist element nor the activist approach to passive funds) there is great merit to the idea of holding public company management teams and Boards accountable from a strategic, tactical, operational and general Corporate Governance standpoint.

Additionally, both institutional investors and company management teams need to do a better job of engaging one another. BlackRock’s Corporate Governance effort should be a catalyst to kick start a more substantive and frequent dialogue between institutional investors and public company management teams. For that, we applaud BlackRock.

We share our perspective on this matter in CEORater Podcast episode 111:

Further, here is Larry Fink’s open letter to CEOs and Boards: Read Here.

BLK
View BlackRock CEO Larry Fink and other CEO profiles at CEORater.com

 

Distracted CEOs and CEO Overreach<span class="badge-status" style="background:red">Premium</span> 

Distracted CEOs and CEO OverreachPremium 

We Have Entered an Unprecedented Era of Shareholder Tolerance It is interesting that corporate boards and institutional investors are willing to tolerate “Distracted CEOs” and founder CEOs who wish to exercise outsized control of the companies they founded. Both are examples of poor corporate governance. Our definition of a Distracted CEO is the CEO that…

Upgrade to premium to continue reading this article and to access all premium content. Already a member? Login

CEO Compensation Analysis: “Comp-to-Cap”

Gabelli

We at CEORater recently published a report analyzing executive compensation which you may access HERE  (should you prefer the Excel version email us at: sales@ceorater.com). We take a unique approach in that we measure CEO compensation as a percentage of market cap. In the future it is likely that we will measure CEO compensation against other metrics such as YTD total stock return as well as vs. peer group performance. We aim to incorporate these and other metrics into the CEORater platform in the not too distant future as part of a portfolio of self-service tools. For now, enjoy the list. By the way, you don’t want to be at the top of our “Comp to Cap” report.

 

The Three “I”s for Selecting Board Members

The Three “I”s for Selecting Board Members:
1.) Intellectual Curiosity
2.) Industry Experience
3.) Inquisitive

ibm-booth

IBM lacks Board members that have Software industry experience other than CEO Ginni Rometty. We recommend that IBM turn over its Board and replace BoD members with new members who have significant Software industry experience given that Software – particularly a strategic M&A plan focused on Software/SaaS/AI/ML/Info Services acquisitions – is likely what will lead IBM out of its malaise. If IBM does not address its BoD and Executive shortcomings proactively it is probable that an Activist investor will make changes for IBM – with or without the latter’s consent. Click HERE for our CEORater Podcast episode concerning the 3 “I”s.