When Apple CEO Steve Jobs recently announced that he’d be taking a leave of absence until the end of June to address his health concerns, investors panicked and initiated a wave of selling that sent the stock down 10% within minutes of the news.
Now, despite the company posting better than expected first quarter results, some are expressing doubt about Apple’s long-term outlook. As Slate’s Farhad Manjoo asked in a recent article, “What happens to a cult without a leader?”
Apple’s milieu raises several important questions about leadership and corporate governance issues that all successful firms must address. Here are just a few:
How integral is a CEO to a company’s success? Should firms work to dispel the idea that one individual can play such a large role in the company’s business?
By allowing senior leadership to personify the company’s message, is it in effect diluting its brand in the long term?
How necessary is it for companies to develop transparent leadership succession plans?
Should firms be wary of creating celebrity CEOs that become too closely associated with their brand?
What obligation do publicly traded companies have to disclose the health of its senior leadership to its shareholders?
Have an opinion on any of these issues? Let us hear it. By allowing senior leadership to personify the company’s message, is it in effect diluting its brand in the long term?
How necessary is it for companies to develop transparent leadership succession plans?
Should firms be wary of creating celebrity CEOs that become too closely associated with their brand?
What obligation do publicly traded companies have to disclose the health of its senior leadership to its shareholders?
Photo credit: acaben
More...