Well! Without doubt this is the fastest and most efficient way to send whores to the company. There is no doubt possible to find.
In this case when speaking of top management speak CEO of the company, although it is a normal consequence the first level, another practice that we have already analyzed how harmful and added that the first has devastating effects, it is almost always without return.
The company consists of shareholders, but the daily management and strategic is left to a CEO. This is what can lead to the failure of the company. I do not speak of the positive part of the fallen, because if the company consists of an initial level of capable managers can survive without difficulty, perhaps not grow as it might grow, but unlikely there will be danger of destruction. The CEO accompanies growth, but accelerating destruction. Sendo its strongest impact to the destruction that is not the growth of its importance. If we add this factor to the change of CEO and consequently the succession of characters, we understand that the acceleration is worse than that of particles of an atom that comply atomic explosion.
What happens when you change a CEO? When we ask why, we do so because the answer many times a little rational.
The change of CEO entails a change of strategy because you assume from that there was a change was made because the shares before they have worked. And there we could stay, provided that the former CEO had at least long enough to prove that actions have worked. And that will depend on industry to industry and very attached to the cycle of the product, specifically the time of renewal that is needed there. Knowing the cycle of the product or their renewal can measure time that one needs to be able to collect the actions implemented. So many changes of CEO, so many changes in strategy because yes, adding confusion in management and customers in the rear because the different products or actions that will come out completely barbaric.
Second thing that happens, adjust structure, so that as the former did not work (not obbiettivizato) need to change. Even small changes are that the company remains immobilized to understand, to learn how interrelazionarsi in the new structure.
The third thing that happens, the new CEO declares that counts with the management in place, it found motivated and able to address new networks, which will not bring anyone. Well! Only time to organize, make calls and allow time to resign to new managers who must go. So, first dance levels. People who go (to motivate), new arriving. Who need time to adapt, the more we come from different countries, whether arriving for various industries. Each time you add an adjective in most explosive effect.
Fourth, but a consequence of earlier immobility on the part of the company, motivation, loss of the compass ...
Lasciamolo case and the effect in the chain that if it produces: change in strategy, change of structure, change management, immobility of the rest of the people who comply with the company. For every time an explosion, you must multiply by every new CEO arriving, and power should be elevated to the square or three times as short as is the period in which remains in place the new CEO, the result is the destruction of ' company.
If you take a company in 3 years has seen successive 4 CEO can find a formula destructive type:
(changing strategy change management structure change immobility) 2 (changing strategy change management structure change immobility) 3 (changing strategy change management structure change immobility) 3 (changing strategy change management structure change immobility) 2
* 2 sendo more than one year and 3 position in less than one.
Devastating!
The why? They do not understand very well, no one can expect a CEO of a miracle in months, if they can somehow have to wait, but not in months. There are times in business necessary if this happens more in times of recession, you can add to the formula power to another front. Why should I be the results if there are inside of times, yes change, absolutely yes. But is not the only one who reaches the shareholder and send to the company whores.
This must be a process indefinitely until the final death? Not necessarily, we need only to stop the chain of San Antonio. We need to stop and leave the time to spend, can not be worse, even if ever there. We risk leaving less see what happens, that jumping in full race.
I will be pedantic, but always using football as a reference, which could be more like a business, because there is a shareholder who is the chairman, there is a coach who is the CEO, there are players who are the managers different level and the remaining staff that are employed. In this case the product is what I am capable of doing together, to mark the most goals possible and leave as little to do. How many companies change and change coach during the season and again in subsequent? How many of these companies have seen win the championship or at least the positions of honor? None! No, because you can not, you can not change continuously as a coach for players! The companies that win are those that have strong nerves, working on average with a good coach, with a solid team that is renewed in positions where there are opportunities that solidifies over the years. This win, not because they are large, benefit because they are constants in the basic rules of any business, working over time!
