The term CEO is the import from US management idea. It works well initially producing outstanding consequtive financial results. Many countries like the idea because it make sense, at least in term of accountabilty of CEO to maximise shareholder's value. Thus, the word 'CEO' become a buzz then. Most CEO has then been compensated handsomely.
Until recently, the trend is that CEO's in the US fail to deliver the financial results that are required of them. They got fired. The organisation which hired them went looking for replacement. But then the new CEO also fails. Looking back, these fired CEO has the credential and did well in their previous job. The thing is they fail anyhow.
They are numerous possible reasons why it happenned.
These CEO probably been given an unachievable target in order to satisfy the need to maximise shareholder value in a short time. Of course being paid so much, they have to deliver. Being under the pressure to deliver results they probably went to the basic accounting to show better revenue. Try to improve sale and cut cost. But does it work in the long run?
Some of the CEO were sourced out side of the organisation. They fail to deliver for their ignorance to first understand the culture and the environment of the organisation of their new posting. Thus, fail to work with the people of the organisation. The lack of understanding also contributes to their failure to identify the improvement to done and the kind of compromise that they have to make. They are isolated at the top and fail without support from the people of the organisation.
Other reason maybe, 'celebrity' CEO which come to the new job. Unfortunately arrogant, who thinks they can alway delivers the numbers given to them. Yet, they fail, they forget that what makes them successful in their previous job does not guarantee the same success as new assignment needs CEO to think of different approach and tools in order to succed
The other reason is communication. It is not that these CEO do not know how to communicate. It is just that they focus their communication to the external parties. External parties are shareholders and media. They forgot that they are to bring changes and communicate. They bring about changes but leaves the communication to someone else. Normally, it is ineffective as the idea do not fully understood because it went through many layers. CEO are to do more internal communication as the bigger the organisation the more people are isolated and confused of the mission and vision of the organisation. They may not even understand the contribution that they expected of them.
There are many other reasons why they fail. But the important thing is, the country which invented the 'CEO', has been putting effort to rethink and redefine the function and scope of CEO.
The idea is,
Are we going to wait until we fail? only then will we do the same as them?. Why not do it now?
The topic here is GLC CEO. It is specific. I am not talking about PLC and private company
First, we analyse to the reason why we have GLC. The reason is that we model Japan in their effort to grow their entreprenuer. They have MITI to prepare their entreprenuer to compete globally. Their government in the past run government own organisation temporarily after the World War, as at the time Japanese enterprenuer are incapable of capital and know how. But their intention is to prepare entreprenuer.
So maybe one of the role of our GLC CEO is to help to develop Malaysian entreprenuer. Are they being measure seriously on this matter? Or are they being measured only in term of financial figure? Most GLC are monopolising the area of business that they are in. They are also given previllage in term of government policies. Thus their CEO are not to be measure the same as other PLC and private company CEO.
They should have other responsibilities and their KPI shall be different.
They maybe asked to deliver and measured in term of developing entrepenuership, human capital and other KPI with the interest of the developing the country in the long run. Not solely measured from what they produce in their quartely and yearly financial statement.
No comments:
Post a Comment