Comments on: The "captain's chair" phenomenon http://www.techiteasy.org/2009/06/08/the-captains-chair-phenomenon/ A Technology and Business Weblog provided to You by a Global Group of Friends. Wed, 29 Dec 2010 19:44:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Vincent van Wylick http://www.techiteasy.org/2009/06/08/the-captains-chair-phenomenon/#comment-4391 Vincent van Wylick Tue, 09 Jun 2009 07:55:13 +0000 http://techiteasy.org/?p=1932#comment-4391 >> But i also agree with your points above, so this is rather an extension to your post above. And a nice one it is, I can't argue with a single thing you wrote. >> But i also agree with your points above, so this is rather an extension to your post above.

And a nice one it is, I can’t argue with a single thing you wrote.

]]> By: Toby Berster http://www.techiteasy.org/2009/06/08/the-captains-chair-phenomenon/#comment-4389 Toby Berster Mon, 08 Jun 2009 20:14:11 +0000 http://techiteasy.org/?p=1932#comment-4389 I personally dont think that this seat can be filled by just processes that are "idiot proof".. Why do i call them idiot proof? Because a failure proof is basically just a book that you follow and dont actually have to think about anything concerning it.. The chair rather should be filled by a successor that has been cultured by the founder of the company. Most of the time if an old CEO has to come back or the contract of a CEO is being extended, it only means that there is no successor that can actually do that job of the previous/current CEO. The CEO has clearly failed to mentor someone. So yes, that chair is a trap for someone to make themselves comfortable and not think about the bigger picture. As an example, lets just take the current situation of the "Deutsche Bank". The current CEO Ackermann just got an extension. Maybe it is because of the financial situation or not, but in my opinion if someone who has stayed for so long in a company and cant be let go because of no real other options, it is a failure of leadership. But i also agree with your points above, so this is rather an extension to your post above. I personally dont think that this seat can be filled by just processes that are “idiot proof”.. Why do i call them idiot proof? Because a failure proof is basically just a book that you follow and dont actually have to think about anything concerning it..

The chair rather should be filled by a successor that has been cultured by the founder of the company. Most of the time if an old CEO has to come back or the contract of a CEO is being extended, it only means that there is no successor that can actually do that job of the previous/current CEO.

The CEO has clearly failed to mentor someone. So yes, that chair is a trap for someone to make themselves comfortable and not think about the bigger picture.

As an example, lets just take the current situation of the “Deutsche Bank”. The current CEO Ackermann just got an extension. Maybe it is because of the financial situation or not, but in my opinion if someone who has stayed for so long in a company and cant be let go because of no real other options, it is a failure of leadership.

But i also agree with your points above, so this is rather an extension to your post above.

]]>