|
|
"Corporate Leadership Structure: On the Separation of the Positions of CEO and Chairman of the Board," James Brickley, Jeffrey Coles, and Gregg Jarrell , Working Paper and presentation October 1994.
Executive Summary Many shareholder groups have argued for the separation of CEO and Chairman of the Board of Directors. This paper looks at the fact that 80% of firms have a single CEO who is also Chairman the Board of Directors and suggests that such a relation may be optimal. Notably the paper posits the view that the CEO has valuable inside information and he may be better able to use that in both roles. Further that firms use the multiple title to phase in and phase out new CEOs. Conclude that there are good points of having a single person in charge of both positions.
Many have looked at the apparent lack of response by Board of Directors as evidence that things must change. Benjamin Rosen Chairman of Compaq: "when the CEO is also Chairman...Checks and balances have been thrown to the wind." This is a common view in popular press and with the United Shareholders Association. Many large firms (notably GM) have given into these groups and separated the power. Prior research (Pi and Timme 1993 and Rechner and Dalton 1991) finds that firms with dual leadership (that is a different person for each role) tended to do better than firms with unitary leaders on several accounting based measures. Thus emphasizing potential benefits of separating the two titles. This paper looks at costs and benefits of unitary vs. dual leadership. They argue that Non-CEOs are accompanied with the following costs of separation:
Surprisingly there is more separation in small firms. Further finds that CEOs who hold only CEO position tend to be younger and do not have as long tenure. The authors use this to support their theory of a phase-in succession process. However it could equally be used as evidence that the Chairman is doing his/her job and removes those CEOs that do not do a good job. Overall this paper suggests that these costs may result in a unitary management position being optimal. Further since nearly 80% of firms do this and many others have their old CEO as Chairman, this view is well supported empirically. However, it does not really say anything definitively and the current form where unity dominates may be sub optimal due to agency costs.
|
|
|
************************************************************** Due to several requests, the non-Financial Pages have been de-emphasized but remember Finance is supposed to be fun so I will be keeping these "fun" pages online. **************************************************************
Copyright 2002, 2003 for FinanceProfessor.com |