谁能接替杰米•戴蒙？

    在一个理想世界中，称王当帝当然是桩美事。但在公司拥有无上权力的董事长兼CEO往往并不是最高效的领袖，这一点也早已不是什么新闻了。咨询师兼作家吉姆•考林斯很久以前就阐明过这一点。

    但在最近两三年，董事会对于CEO应当拥有多大掌控权，业界的想法已经有了很大的转变。在设立独立董事长的问题上，传统观点是“不能一刀切”。换言之，这可能对有些公司适用，但不适合所有的公司。有些董事会成员的确也是这么认为的，但其他董事可能只能向现实妥协：作为董事，他们觉得自己没有力量贯彻这个理念。

    但现在，与我对话的大部分董事都不认可分立CEO和董事长职务。他们积极支持没有作出这种安排的董事。

    迪斯尼（Disney）股东错过了将CEO和董事长职位分离的机会（这项提案获得了36%的投票），而身为摩根大通（J.P. Morgan）CEO的杰米•戴蒙正在奋力保卫自己的董事长头衔。沃伦•巴菲特也支持这么做——在这一点上，他错了。

    当前的问题不是公司是否应当设立独立董事长，而是要找到合适的独立董事长人选。从公司管理中独立出来，不仅仅是分离，才是当今越来越多股东和董事们的诉求。雷•拉尼在惠普（HP）并不是真正意义上的独立董事长，Occidental的雷•伊拉尼也不是。拉尼今年失去了董事长的职位。伊拉尼最近也失去了董事席位和董事长职位。

    董事长更替对于弱势的董事会而言更替是一个非同小可的问题。惠普今年不得不设立了临时董事长，目前估计正在寻找一位新的董事来填补这些职位。

    如果摩根大通的股东投票决定分拆董事长和CEO职位，它也将面临同样的困境。作为CEO，他像埃克森美孚（ExxonMobil）的李•雷蒙德一样强势，但他担任摩根大通董事长所表现出来的软弱成了这个效率低下的董事会身上的一个严重不足。

    像惠普一样，这家大银行也该引入新董事了。或许，他们应当考虑前美国商品期货交易委员会（CFTC）负责人布鲁克斯理•伯恩、前美国贸易代表布拉德•米勒或前美国银行业监管官员比尔•布莱克。所有这3个人都谙熟银行业、监督和监管，有望给投资者带来信心。

    如何管好董事长更替这件事对于很多董事会来说还是个新领域。但这是一个受欢迎的转变。（财富中文网）

    埃里诺•布洛克斯哈姆是董事会咨询公司价值联盟与公司治理联盟(http://thevaluealliance.com/)的首席执行官。

    In an ideal world, it would be great to be king. But it's no news flash that imperial chairman-CEOs are not the most effective leaders. Consultant and author Jim Collinsdemonstrated that long ago.

    But in the last couple of years, the shift in board thinking on how much control a CEO should have has been remarkable. Regarding the issue of having an independent chair, the old rhetoric was "one size doesn't fit all." It may work for some companies, but not all, the thinking went. Some board members really believed the line, but for others, it was resignation to the fact that, as board members, they didn't believe they had the muscle to push the idea through.

    Today, the majority of board members I speak with, however, don't just embrace the idea of having a board chair that's independent of the top manager. They actively sympathize with directors who don't have that arrangement.

    Disney (DIS) shareholders missed out on splitting the CEO and chair roles (the proposal won36% of the vote), and Jamie Dimon, CEO of J.P. Morgan (JPM), is fighting to keep his chairmanship. Warren Buffett supports this -- and, on this, he is wrong.

    At this point, it's not a question of whether companies should have an independent chair but of identifying the right person for the chair role. Independence from management -- not just separation -- is what more and more shareholders and board members are looking for today. Ray Lane was not a truly independent chair at HP, nor was Ray Irani at Occidental. Lane lost his chairmanship this year. Irani recently lost his board seat and chair position.

    And chair succession is a serious problem for weak boards. HP had to install an interim chair this year and is presumably looking for a new board member who can fill those boots.

    If at J.P. Morgan shareholders vote to split the chair and CEO roles, the company will face the same dilemma. As strong a CEO as Lee Raymond was at ExxonMobil (XOM), his weakness as presiding director at J.P. Morgan has been a black mark for the bank's ineffective board.

    As with HP (HPQ), it's time for new board members at the megabank. Maybe they shouldconsider former CFTC head Brooksley Born, former U.S. representative Brad Miller, or former bank regulator Bill Black. All three know a thing or two about banks, oversight, and regulation and would instill confidence in investors.

    Managing chair succession is new territory for many boards. But it's a welcome change.

    Eleanor Bloxham is CEO of The Value Alliance and Corporate Governance Alliance (http://thevaluealliance.com/), a board advisory firm.