 "Dilemma of the superb CEO")
A superb CEO retires from executive position and becomes a non-executive chairman (NEC) of the same company. Is it a good idea or a bad one? Opinions are probably loaded on both sides of the argument, and there is no yes or no answer. It depends on the circumstances and the precautionary processes; while there are examples of success, examples of failure are vastly more. When a superb CEO is appointed as the NEC of the same company, behaviours change.
Why should the superb CEO at all be associated with the company after completing executive tenure? There may be two reasons:
Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper
