CEO的去留问题：如何确定合适的CEO任期

    今年7月，思科公司CEO约翰·钱伯斯宣布卸任，结束其整整20年的任期。这一绵长的“统治”时间，纷纷引发商界讨论：应该如何确定合适的CEO任期？尽管在钱伯斯的领导下，思科的营收从12亿美元增长到470亿美元，总股东回报率达到1632%，或年均15%。

    《圣经》传道书一章有云：“凡事都有定期，天下万物都有定时。”（To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.）这是否也适用于CEO的任期？CEO的任期是否有理想的时间限制？是否应该制定一个CEO任期时间表？《财富》杂志编撰的CEO数据显示，美国500强公司CEO的平均任期为4.9年，其中有许多刚刚走马上任，还有一些并不急于离职。

    对于“美国的CEO”，我们认为8年刚刚好。富兰克林·德拉诺·罗斯福连任四届，使得一些人担心美国有可能出现一位“君主”。所以，美国国会在1947年通过了《宪法》第22条修正案，规定美国总统任期不得超过两届。1951年，该修正案获得全部50个州的批准。

    20年前，当约翰·钱伯斯刚刚出任思科CEO时，美国最高法院驳回了对国会领导人任期的限制，撤销了23个州限制美国议员任期的法律。短命的《十三州邦联条例》曾规定实行官员轮换制，以确保制宪者们构想的政府的革命性。美国最高法院以5:4的投票结果，压制了全美掀起的任期限制运动。最高法院的大法官均为终身制。奥利弗·温戴尔·荷马在美国最高法院任职到90岁，威廉·O·道格拉斯担任了36年大法官。

    如此长的任期在企业界并非不可能。根据《财富》杂志的分析，除了钱伯斯，还有20位CEO的任期达到20年以上，另有26位CEO任期至少为15年。有几位CEO的任期甚至超过了美国最高法院大法官。84岁的鲁伯特·默多克担任新闻集团CEO已有63年。84岁的沃伦·巴菲特在伯克希尔哈撒韦公司的任期也达到了59年。71岁的弗雷德·史密斯担任联邦快递公司CEO已有42年。91岁的萨默·雷石东从1967年开始领导全美娱乐公司，旗下包括CBS和维亚康姆等公司。

    巴菲特在过去几十年间一直高歌猛进，尽管伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司规模不大，但其股东回报率却达到1,063,315%（或每年22%），堪称传奇。然而，他也一直在努力确保自己离开时能有合适的继任者接掌这家公司。

    在2007年由比尔·盖茨主办、笔者担任主持人的CEO聚会上，沃伦·巴菲特询问了鲁伯特·默多克的继任计划。默多克有些烦恼地回答说，98岁的母亲仍很硬朗，思维敏捷，所以他还没有下台的打算。巴菲特似乎有所预感地开玩笑说：“那可真是名副其实的非传统型管理了。”

    从笔者30多年针对CEO退休问题的研究中，我发现，可以根据CEO对任期长度的看法，将这些领导者分为四类。

    1. 君主型：追求永恒的传奇

    最佳例证：鲁伯特·默多克与弗雷德·史密斯，在他们之前还有几位类似的历史人物，比如西方石油公司的阿曼德·哈默尔和波士顿咨询集团创始人布鲁斯·亨德森

    他们通常都是才华横溢的远见者，他们相信自己是公司真正不可或缺的那个人。威廉姆·布莱克经营Chock full o’Nuts咖啡店60年，最后两年都是躺在医院的病床上指挥，当时他已经83岁。君主型的CEO都在苦苦追求永恒的传奇，他们在意这个职位所带来的英雄形象。他们希望这个世界因为有了他们而变得不同，但他们有时会被自己的空想蒙蔽双眼。

    如果出现了有威胁的继任者，他们往往会在董事会尚未意识到发生了什么的时候，就被消灭掉了。这进一步加深了董事会对君主型CEO的依赖。雷曼兄弟公司的理查德·福尔德便属于这种情况。他们的退位往往伴随着极具戏剧化的场景——要么死在办公室，要么成为宫廷政变的受害者。波士顿咨询集团的创始人布鲁斯·亨德森在负责一个客户项目的时候，公司合伙人发动了叛乱，甚至没有在办公室给他留下一张办公桌。幸运的是，在曾经富有远见的救世主迈克尔·艾斯纳扼杀明日之星罗伯特·伊戈尔之前，沃尔特·迪士尼的董事会就采取了行动。伊戈尔是艾斯纳延续其20年任期的巨大威胁。伊戈尔将迪士尼带到了新的历史高度，进一步增强了该公司的战略资产，并将业务扩展到中国，10年间创造了312%的股东收益（或每年12%）。

    2. 将军型：会留有回旋余地

    最佳例证：史蒂夫·乔布斯，迈克尔·戴尔，玛莎·斯图尔特和霍华德·舒尔茨

    就像巴顿、麦克阿瑟、蒙哥马利、戴高乐等二战时期那些著名的将军一样，这些CEO在危机中力挽狂澜，带领公司实现复兴，使公司绽放出比他们第一轮任期更耀眼的光芒。通常，他们具有在公司推行重大变革的威信。正如迈克尔·戴尔所强调的那样，他们会留有回旋余地，以“显示这是一家公司，而不是一个宗教。”

    将军型CEO所面临的挑战是夸大危机感，并以此为借口重新掌权。国际电话电报公司的哈利·格雷、CBS的威廉·巴莱和泛美航空公司的胡安·特里普都属于这种情况。对此，公司董事会必须确认，危机是真实存在的。

    3. 大使型：最为睿智的导师

    最佳例证：英特尔的安迪·格罗夫与克雷格·贝瑞特，高露洁的鲁宾·马克，麦肯锡创始人马文·鲍尔，谷歌的埃里克·施密特，微软的比尔·盖茨

    这些CEO通常与公司内部培养的门徒有着融洽的关系。他们可以作为年长睿智的政治家和导师，可以担任跨行业代言人、政府特使和全球外交官。时代华纳的杰夫·贝克斯与前任理查德·帕森斯顺利完成了权力交接，在担任CEO的6年内，他创造了388%的股东回报（或每年28%）。

    这类领导人所面临的挑战是，在继任者正在努力学会独立的时候，不要因昔日下属的表现不符合预期，或者受到他们自己尚未完成的职业目标的驱使，而去干预和破坏他们的决策。自从艾伦·库尔曼接管了杜邦公司以来，他已经创造了263%的股东回报（每年23%）。

    4. 州长型：任期短效率高

    最佳例证：eBay及惠普CEO梅格·惠特曼；3M及波音CEO吉姆·麦克纳尼；施乐公司CEO任期结束后担任救助儿童基金会主席的安妮·穆尔卡西；硅谷图形公司和网景公司CEO吉姆·克拉克；永健公司和我的CFO

    这些领导者的任期通常比较短，但效率极高。他们通常会在公共服务、初创公司或转型期公司寻找新的机会。吉姆·麦克纳尼在3M公司担任四年CEO之后，前往丑闻缠身的波音担任领导人。在他担任CEO的10年间，这家公司重新恢复了全球领先地位，并为股东创造了228%的回报（每年12%）。

    在这类领导者执掌的公司，董事会需要确保他们不会太快追求新的机会而改变方向，或者为了建立短期信誉而减价拍卖公司资产。

    ——

    对于CEO任期的问题，没有一个简单的答案。领导者不论任期长短，公司都可以有出色表现。公司的董事会成员必须客观评估公司的战略环境、企业文化、CEO的领导风格等因素，以确定合适的离职方式和任职时间。如果有什么自动的配方可以使用，我们也就不需要董事会的独立判断了。（财富中文网）

    本文作者杰弗里·索南菲尔德为耶鲁大学管理学院高级副院长，莱斯特·克朗教席教授。他是《英雄谢幕：公司CEO退休时会发生什么事》（ The Hero’s Farewell: What Happens When CEOs Retire）一书的作者之一。

    译者：刘进龙/汪皓

    审校：任文科

    Cisco CEO John Chambers announced on May that he would step down in July after a full 20 years at the helm. While in office, he took revenues at the company from $1.2 billion to over $47 billion with a total shareholder return of 1632%, or 15% on an annualized basis. Nonetheless, his exit has triggered widespread discussion over the appropriate length of a CEO’s term.

    Bible readers will recall Ecclesiastes, which states, “To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven.” Does this apply to CEO tenure? Is there an ideal time limit for a CEO’s reign? Should there be a schedule for CEO terms? Fortune’s own CEO data indicates that the 500 largest companies in the U.S. have a median CEO tenure of 4.9 years, but there is quite a range as many of those chief executives are new to office and some are in no hurry to depart.

    When it comes to the CEO of the United States, so to speak, we decided that eight years was just fine. Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s four terms of office led some to worry about the risks of an imperial CEO. So, in 1947, Congress passed the 22nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which was ratified by all 50 states in 1951, limiting U.S. Presidents to two four- year terms.

    Exactly 20 years ago, just as Cisco’s John Chambers took the reins as CEO, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected term limits for Congressional leaders, wiping off the books laws in 23 states limiting the terms of office for U.S. legislators. The short-lived Articles of Confederation required a “rotation” out of office as a mechanism for ensuring the revolutionary character of the government that the framers conceived. In a 5 to 4 vote, the Court—whose justices have lifetime appointments—deflated the nationwide movements for term limits. Oliver Wendell Holmes served on the U.S. Supreme Court until he was 90 and Justice William O. Douglas served 36 years.

    Such long reigns are not out of the question in the corporate world either. In addition to Chambers, 20 CEOs included in Fortune’s analysis have served for 20 years or longer, and an additional 26 have been in office for at least 15 years. Some even surpass the reigns of U.S. Supreme Court justices. Rupert Murdoch, 84, has served as CEO of News Corp for 63 years. Berkshire Hathaway’s Warren Buffett, who is also 84, has been in office for 59 years. Seventy-one-year-old Fred Smith of FedEx has been CEO for 42 years. And at 91, Sumner Redstone has led National Amusements since 1967, with control over CBS and Viacom.

    Buffett’s performance has not tapered off over the decades, despite Berkshire Hathaway’s size, with its legendary 1,063,315% shareholder returns over the years (or 22% annualized). However, he has worked to ensure that succession options are at the ready when he steps down.

    At a 2007 CEO gathering hosted by Bill Gates, at which I served as a moderator, Warren Buffett asked Rupert Murdoch about his intended succession plans. Murdoch responded with annoyance and said that his then 98-year-old mother was quite active and intellectually sharp and he was in no hurry to go anywhere. Buffett quipped forebodingly, “Well that really is managing outside-the-box!”

    In my 30 years studying CEOs retirements, I have found that chief executives fall into four primary categories when it comes to the way they think about their term lengths.

    1. Monarchs

    Prime examples:Rupert Murdoch and Fred Smith, who were preceded by such historic figures as Occidental Petroleum’s Armand Hammer and Boston Consulting Group Founder Bruce Henderson

    They are often brilliant visionaries who believe that they are the one person on earth who is truly indispensable to their companies. William Black ran the Chock full o’Nuts café chain for 60 years, with his last two from his hospital bed at age 83. Monarch CEOs are driven by an elusive quest for an immortal, lasting legacy, as well as for the heroic stature that comes with the position. They want the world to be different because they lived, but they can be blinded by their visions.

    Threatening successors are often eliminated before the board realizes what happened, increasing the board’s dependence upon such monarch CEOs; that was the case with Richard Fuld at Lehman Brothers. They often suffer a stormy, feet-first exit—either dying in office or as the victim of a palace revolt. BCG’s partners revolted while its founder Bruce Henderson was on a client assignment, not even leaving him a desk in the office. Happily, the Walt Disney board moved quickly enough before their once visionary savior, Michael Eisner, could derail the rising star Robert Iger, who was a genuine threat to Eisner extending his 20-year reign. Iger has taken Disney to historic heights, key strategic portfolio enhancements, geographic expansions into China, and 312% shareholder returns over 10 years (or 12 % annualized).

    2. Generals

    Prime examples:Steve Jobs, Michael Dell, Martha Stewart, and Howard Schultz

    Like the great generals of World War II (Patton, MacArthur, Montgomery, De Gaulle), these CEOs return to office at a time of crisis to revive their enterprise and lead their companies to greater glory than they did during their first tour of duty. Often, they have the credibility to make major changes at their companies. They have the leeway, as Michael Dell has emphasized “To show that this is a business, not a religion.” The challenge for some generals is to not exaggerate the sense of crisis as a pretext to engineer their return to power, as was the case with Harry Gray of ITT,William Paley at CBS, and Juan Trippe at PanAm. Company boards must ensure that the crisis is genuine.

    3. Ambassadors

    Prime examples:Intel’s Andy Grove and Craig Barrett, Reuben Mark at Colgate-Palmolive, McKinsey Founder Marvin Bower, Eric Schmidt of Google, and Bill Gates at Microsoft

    These CEOs often have an excellent relationship with an internally groomed protégé. They can serve as wise elder statespersons and mentors, with roles like cross-industry spokesperson, government emissary, and global diplomat. Time Warner’s Jeff Bewkes assumed power through a graceful transition from his predecessor, Richard Parsons, and in six years as CEO he has produced 388% total shareholder returns (28% annualized).

    The challenge for these leaders is to not be tempted by the pull of past associates or their own unfinished career agenda to intervene and undermine their successors as they learn to walk on their own. Since taking over the reins in an ambassadorial succession at DuPont, Ellen Kullman has produced 263% shareholder returns (23% annualized).

    4. Governors

    Prime examples:Meg Whitman, CEO of eBay and then HP; Jim McNerney of 3M then Boeing; Anne Mulcahy of Xerox then chairman of Save the Children; Jim Clarke of Silicon Graphics, Netscape; Healtheon, and My CFO

    These leaders generally have short, but highly effective, terms of office.

    Governor CEOs often look for new opportunities in public service, start-ups, or turnarounds. After a four-year stint as CEO at 3M, Jim McNerney assumed the leadership of a highly scandalized Boeing and in a decade, has regained its global luster as well as delivering 228% shareholder returns (annualized at 12%).

    The challenge for boards with these leaders is to ensure that they don’t get diverted by new opportunities too soon or engage in fire-sale asset auctions to build short-term credibility.

    —

    There is no simple answer to the question of CEO tenure. A firm can perform well with leaders enjoying a wide spectrum of terms of office. The strategic context of the business; the culture of the enterprise; and the character of a CEO’s leadership must be assessed by objective board members to determine which departure style and time frame are appropriate. If there was an automatic formula that we could apply, we would not need boards with independent judgment. Now, as for the issue of board term limits….

    Jeffrey Sonnenfeld is Senior Associate Dean and Lester Crown Professor at the Yale School of Management. He is the co-author of The Hero’s Farewell: What Happens When CEOs Retire (Oxford University Press).