别声张,但专家们表示,特斯拉(Tesla)董事会是时候不再让埃隆·马斯克担任CEO了。
倡议者认为,这位富有远见的创业者应该放弃日常运营公司,充分发挥自己的长处——新产品创新。
他在社交媒体X上已经采用了这种做法。X的运营由琳达·雅卡里诺负责,马斯克则专注于推动创新。
这样一来,在特斯拉开始增长乏力且股价下跌这个具有挑战性的关键节点,他就可以避免成为众矢之的。特斯拉目前的处境,在一定程度上是由于糟糕的治理文化,马斯克本人要为此负责。
Corestone Capital的董事长兼CEO韦尔·麦克多诺表示:“一家公司由创始人掌舵,既有好处也有坏处,因为有远见的人很少能成为优秀的CEO。”
这位理财经理认为,特斯拉需要找一位类似于谷歌(Google)的埃里克·施密特或Facebook的雪莉·桑德伯格这样的人,能在马斯克的总体战略指导下,以专业的方式管理公司。
被《华尔街日报》形容为“维持特斯拉运营的高管”的扎克·柯克霍恩,可能就是最好的人选。但在8月,这位备受尊敬的财务主管突然从特斯拉离职,且没有解释任何理由。
迄今为止,唯一长期与马斯克共事而且毫无怨言的人只有SpaceX的总裁格温·肖特韦尔。
正常情况下,任命新CEO取代马斯克,这听起来像是一种鲁莽的想法,因为他是同一代人中最具影响力的企业家,他执着于追求成功,他能为自己的事业招聘到最优秀的人才,而且他善于预测影响人类社会的趋势。
但他也带来了一些棘手的问题,使经营特斯拉这样一家超大规模上市公司,变得充满挑战。
马斯克——“合规官的噩梦”
本周,一名特拉华州法官发布了一份长达200页的法庭意见书,我们从中可以看出马斯克对公司治理的重视程度。
这份文件披露了马斯克在2018年如何为自己制定了一份560亿美元的薪酬计划,当时的特斯拉董事会无人敢提出异议。
伦敦商学院(London Business School)教授兰德尔·彼得森专注于研究CEO的个性和董事会动态。他对《财富》杂志表示,法官的这份裁定是对马斯克董事会的“严厉批评”,他认为如果马斯克担任辅助岗位,就能全身心投入到开发新产品,这对特斯拉更有好处。
彼得森在2022年参与发表了一本有关董事会失灵的书。他表示:“他们能否找到一种折中方案,让马斯克能留在特斯拉,但不再参与日常管理?如果他们能找到这样的方案,公司就能继续运营。否则,公司会面临巨大风险。”
去年,马斯克曾表示他从不关心投资者是否会因为他宣扬没有事实依据的阴谋论而赔钱。
去年11月,迪士尼(Disney)CEO鲍勃·艾格因担心其品牌在X上不安全,因此停止在X上投放广告,当时马斯克直接对艾格爆出粗口。
麦克多诺对《财富》杂志表示:“马斯克口无遮拦,所以他是合规官的噩梦。”
挟持特斯拉董事会
马斯克决定公开谈判他未来的薪酬方案后,也引起了一些争议。他表示,他不会在特斯拉内部开发人工智能,除非董事会保证他能获得25%有否决权的少数股份,这相当于赋予他对某些股东决定的否决权。
去年3月,马斯克直接开启了他的宏图计划的第三阶段,尽管他在第二阶段提出的四个主要目标均未实现。即便如此,他还是提出了这样的要求。
虽然马斯克眼睁睁看着他的非营利组织OpenAI变成了微软(Microsoft)的商业附属物,还有人对他表示同情,但他任性的态度和对董事们赤裸裸的勒索,只会让他变成无理取闹。
投资银行杰富瑞集团(Jefferies)的资深汽车行业分析师菲利普·霍乔斯表示:“他的说法很危险,因为这相当于挟持了董事会。如果你开始在公司内部开发某项技术,不能威胁要把它拿走。”
“你在什么时候认为特斯拉比马斯克更重要?”
一个马斯克不担任CEO的特斯拉似乎难以想象,其中一个原因是多年来他都是特斯拉公开的形象代言人,而且公司股价在一定程度上得益于他富有远见的领导力。
但华尔街不再愿意帮助马斯克。
虽然特斯拉在疫情期间表现出色,但自2021年初以来,特斯拉股价下跌了20%,而纳斯达克100指数同期上涨了35%。
相比之下,英伟达(Nvidia)、微软和Meta等公司的股价最近几天均创下历史新高。
杰富瑞集团分析师霍乔斯表示:“过去两年,许多投资决策让特斯拉偏离了正轨,这是董事会的问题。你在什么时候认为特斯拉比马斯克更重要?”
这位创业者曾多次表示,他从来不想担任CEO,他希望在六年前的关键时期解决了Model 3最初的生产问题之后就辞去CEO,担任首席产品架构师。
特斯拉董事詹姆斯·默多克甚至证实,公司已经确定了继任者人选。
现在董事会有独一无二的机会重新树立自己的权威,减轻52岁的马斯克的负担,并在下一次法庭败诉之前彻底修复特斯拉在治理方面的严重缺陷。
电动汽车媒体网站Electrek的总编表示,这位极富魅力但性格多变的CEO是时候下台实现他的产品架构师的愿景了。这位总编作为特斯拉股东,曾投票支持马斯克560亿美元的薪酬计划。
他在周三写道:“你知道是谁首先想到的这个计划吗?是一个叫埃隆·马斯克的家伙。”(财富中文网)
翻译:刘进龙
审校:汪皓
别声张,但专家们表示,特斯拉(Tesla)董事会是时候不再让埃隆·马斯克担任CEO了。
倡议者认为,这位富有远见的创业者应该放弃日常运营公司,充分发挥自己的长处——新产品创新。
他在社交媒体X上已经采用了这种做法。X的运营由琳达·雅卡里诺负责,马斯克则专注于推动创新。
这样一来,在特斯拉开始增长乏力且股价下跌这个具有挑战性的关键节点,他就可以避免成为众矢之的。特斯拉目前的处境,在一定程度上是由于糟糕的治理文化,马斯克本人要为此负责。
Corestone Capital的董事长兼CEO韦尔·麦克多诺表示:“一家公司由创始人掌舵,既有好处也有坏处,因为有远见的人很少能成为优秀的CEO。”
这位理财经理认为,特斯拉需要找一位类似于谷歌(Google)的埃里克·施密特或Facebook的雪莉·桑德伯格这样的人,能在马斯克的总体战略指导下,以专业的方式管理公司。
被《华尔街日报》形容为“维持特斯拉运营的高管”的扎克·柯克霍恩,可能就是最好的人选。但在8月,这位备受尊敬的财务主管突然从特斯拉离职,且没有解释任何理由。
迄今为止,唯一长期与马斯克共事而且毫无怨言的人只有SpaceX的总裁格温·肖特韦尔。
正常情况下,任命新CEO取代马斯克,这听起来像是一种鲁莽的想法,因为他是同一代人中最具影响力的企业家,他执着于追求成功,他能为自己的事业招聘到最优秀的人才,而且他善于预测影响人类社会的趋势。
但他也带来了一些棘手的问题,使经营特斯拉这样一家超大规模上市公司,变得充满挑战。
马斯克——“合规官的噩梦”
本周,一名特拉华州法官发布了一份长达200页的法庭意见书,我们从中可以看出马斯克对公司治理的重视程度。
这份文件披露了马斯克在2018年如何为自己制定了一份560亿美元的薪酬计划,当时的特斯拉董事会无人敢提出异议。
伦敦商学院(London Business School)教授兰德尔·彼得森专注于研究CEO的个性和董事会动态。他对《财富》杂志表示,法官的这份裁定是对马斯克董事会的“严厉批评”,他认为如果马斯克担任辅助岗位,就能全身心投入到开发新产品,这对特斯拉更有好处。
彼得森在2022年参与发表了一本有关董事会失灵的书。他表示:“他们能否找到一种折中方案,让马斯克能留在特斯拉,但不再参与日常管理?如果他们能找到这样的方案,公司就能继续运营。否则,公司会面临巨大风险。”
去年,马斯克曾表示他从不关心投资者是否会因为他宣扬没有事实依据的阴谋论而赔钱。
去年11月,迪士尼(Disney)CEO鲍勃·艾格因担心其品牌在X上不安全,因此停止在X上投放广告,当时马斯克直接对艾格爆出粗口。
麦克多诺对《财富》杂志表示:“马斯克口无遮拦,所以他是合规官的噩梦。”
挟持特斯拉董事会
马斯克决定公开谈判他未来的薪酬方案后,也引起了一些争议。他表示,他不会在特斯拉内部开发人工智能,除非董事会保证他能获得25%有否决权的少数股份,这相当于赋予他对某些股东决定的否决权。
去年3月,马斯克直接开启了他的宏图计划的第三阶段,尽管他在第二阶段提出的四个主要目标均未实现。即便如此,他还是提出了这样的要求。
虽然马斯克眼睁睁看着他的非营利组织OpenAI变成了微软(Microsoft)的商业附属物,还有人对他表示同情,但他任性的态度和对董事们赤裸裸的勒索,只会让他变成无理取闹。
投资银行杰富瑞集团(Jefferies)的资深汽车行业分析师菲利普·霍乔斯表示:“他的说法很危险,因为这相当于挟持了董事会。如果你开始在公司内部开发某项技术,不能威胁要把它拿走。”
“你在什么时候认为特斯拉比马斯克更重要?”
一个马斯克不担任CEO的特斯拉似乎难以想象,其中一个原因是多年来他都是特斯拉公开的形象代言人,而且公司股价在一定程度上得益于他富有远见的领导力。
但华尔街不再愿意帮助马斯克。
虽然特斯拉在疫情期间表现出色,但自2021年初以来,特斯拉股价下跌了20%,而纳斯达克100指数同期上涨了35%。
相比之下,英伟达(Nvidia)、微软和Meta等公司的股价最近几天均创下历史新高。
杰富瑞集团分析师霍乔斯表示:“过去两年,许多投资决策让特斯拉偏离了正轨,这是董事会的问题。你在什么时候认为特斯拉比马斯克更重要?”
这位创业者曾多次表示,他从来不想担任CEO,他希望在六年前的关键时期解决了Model 3最初的生产问题之后就辞去CEO,担任首席产品架构师。
特斯拉董事詹姆斯·默多克甚至证实,公司已经确定了继任者人选。
现在董事会有独一无二的机会重新树立自己的权威,减轻52岁的马斯克的负担,并在下一次法庭败诉之前彻底修复特斯拉在治理方面的严重缺陷。
电动汽车媒体网站Electrek的总编表示,这位极富魅力但性格多变的CEO是时候下台实现他的产品架构师的愿景了。这位总编作为特斯拉股东,曾投票支持马斯克560亿美元的薪酬计划。
他在周三写道:“你知道是谁首先想到的这个计划吗?是一个叫埃隆·马斯克的家伙。”(财富中文网)
翻译:刘进龙
审校:汪皓
Whisper it, but the time may have finally come for Tesla’s board to nudge Elon Musk towards stepping down as CEO, experts suggest.
Advocates argue that the visionary entrepreneur should relinquish day-to-day operations, allowing him to zero in on his forte—innovating new products.
It’s an approach he’s already adopted at his social media platform X, where Linda Yaccarino is in charge of running the company while Musk focuses on driving innovation.
By doing so, he would take himself out of the firing line during a challenging juncture when Tesla’s growth is starting to falter and its stock price has languished—in part due to a flawed governance culture, for which he is responsible.
“When you have a founder at the helm, it’s both a gift and a curse, because visionaries rarely make great CEOs,” says Corestone Capital chairman and CEO Will McDonough.
The wealth manager argues Tesla needs to find someone like Google’s Eric Schmidt or Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg, who can professionally manage the company under the overarching strategic direction of Musk.
Zack Kirkhorn, described by the Wall Street Journal as the “executive who keeps Tesla rolling”, might have been exactly that individual. But the highly respected finance chief abruptly departed in August with no explanation given.
Thus far the only individual to work with him noiselessly over a long period is SpaceX president Gwynne Shotwell.
Normally the idea of replacing Musk as CEO might sound foolhardy given he is the most influential entrepreneur of his generation, someone blessed with an uncanny drive to succeed, an ability to recruit the best talent to his cause, and a gift for predicting what trends will shape society.
But he also comes with a lot of sharp edges that make it challenging to run a publicly traded megacap like Tesla.
Musk ‘a compliance officer’s nightmare’
A 200-page court opinion from a Delaware judge this week sheds light on Musk’s degree of consideration for governance.
The document reveals how he crafted his own $56 billion compensation package in 2018, as Tesla’s directors dared not reject it.
Randall Peterson, a professor at the London Business School whose research centers on CEO personalities and boardroom dynamics, told Fortune the ruling was a “pretty damning critique” of Musk’s board and believes Tesla would be better off with him in a supporting role where he could devote himself to creating new products.
“Could they find some kind of accommodation that keeps Elon in the atmosphere but takes him out of day-to-day management of the rest of Tesla?” says Peterson, who co-authored a 2022 book on dysfunctional boards. “If they can come to that, then they’re in business. If not it’s a huge risk.”
Last year, Musk went on the record saying he did not care whether his investors lost money because he might promote unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.
In November, he then told Bob Iger to “go f*** yourself” after the Disney CEO pulled his advertising over concerns his brand might not be safe on X.
“He’s a compliance officer’s nightmare because he shoots from the hip,” McDonough tells Fortune.
Holding Tesla’s board hostage
Musk also ruffled feathers after he decided to negotiate in public over his upcoming pay package, saying he will no longer develop artificial intelligence within Tesla unless the board ensures he can gain a 25% blocking minority—essentially a power to veto certain decisions of shareholders.
This demand came even though Musk seamlessly moved onto the third part of his Master Plan this March without arguably accomplishing any of the four main targets laid out in the second one.
While there is some sympathy given he watched his non-profit OpenAI become a commercial appendage of Microsoft, the petulant attitude and unvarnished attempt to blackmail his directors only served to undermine his case.
“The way he phrased it is dangerous because it’s holding the board hostage,” says Philippe Houchois, a veteran auto analyst with investment bank Jefferies. “If you start building something inside the company, you cannot just threaten to take it out.”
‘At what point do you decide Tesla is bigger than Musk?’
Contemplating a Tesla in which he is not CEO seems impossible in part because he has been the public face of Tesla for years, and the stock price has in part been juiced by his visionary leadership.
But Wall Street isn’t helping Musk’s case any longer either.
While Tesla enjoyed a stellar pandemic year, the share has dropped 20% since the start of 2021 while the Nasdaq 100 has gained 35% during the same period.
Other companies like Nvidia, Microsoft and Meta have marked all-time highs in recent days, by comparison.
“There have been a number of investment decisions made in the last two years that have put Tesla off track, and that is the issue for the board,” says Jefferies analyst Houchois. “At what point do you decide Tesla is bigger than Musk?”
The entrepreneur has repeatedly claimed he never wanted to be CEO and hoped to step back and serve as chief product architect once the initial problems manufacturing the Model 3 were solved during the critical launch over six years ago.
Tesla director James Murdoch even testified that a successor had been identified.
Now the board has a unique chance to reassert its authority, ease the burden on the 52-year-old and overhaul its acute governance shortcomings before Tesla suffers its next courtroom defeat.
The chief editor of EV-friendly media website Electrek, who himself voted as Tesla shareholder in favor of Musk’s $56 billion pay package, argued this was the time for the charismatic yet mercurial CEO to step down to advance his vision as a product architect.
“You know who first thought of that plan?” he wrote on Wednesday. “A guy called Elon Musk.”