• An overt zeal for prestige, power and wealth.
• A reputation for shameless self-promotion.
• A proclivity for developing grandiose strategies with little thought toward their implementation.
• A fondness for rules and numbers that overshadows or ignores a broader vision.
• A reputation for implementing major strategic changes unilaterally or for forcing programs down the throats of reluctant managers.
• An impulsive, flippant decision-making style.
• A penchant for inconsiderate acts.
• A love of monologues coupled with poor listening skills.
• A tendency to display contempt for the ideas of others.
• A history of emphasizing activity, like hours worked or meetings attended, over accomplishment.
• A career marked by numerous misunderstandings.
• A superb ability to compartmentalize and/or rationalize.
Friday, December 7, 2007
How to spot a flawed CEO--before you hire her
From the Wall St. Journal:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
See also the paper by Chatterjee and Hambrick in the June 2007 ASQ, "It’s All About Me: Narcissistic CEOs and Their Effects on Company Strategy and Performance":
ReplyDeletehttp://jacksonleadership.com/pdfs/Narcissistic_CEOs_05-04-06_ASQ.pdf
This study uses unobtrusive measures of the narcissism of chief executive officers (CEOs) — the prominence of the CEO’s photograph in annual reports, the CEO’s prominence in press releases, the CEO’s use of first-person singular pronouns in interviews, and compensation relative to the second-highest-paid firm executive — to examine the effect of CEO narcissism on a firm’s strategy and performance. Results of an empirical study of 11 CEOs in the computer hardware and software industries in 1992-2004 show that narcissism in CEOs is positively related to strategic dynamism and grandiosity, as well as the number and size of acquisitions, and it engenders extreme and fluctuating organizational performance. The results suggest that narcissistic CEOs favor bold actions that attract attention, resulting in big wins or big losses, but that, in these industries, their firm’s performance is generally no better or worse than firms with non-narcissistic CEOs.
See also the paper by Chatterjee and Hambrick in the June 2007 ASQ, "It’s All About Me: Narcissistic CEOs and Their Effects on Company Strategy and Performance":
ReplyDeletehttp://jacksonleadership.com/pdfs/Narcissistic_CEOs_05-04-06_ASQ.pdf
This study uses unobtrusive measures of the narcissism of chief executive officers (CEOs) — the prominence of the CEO’s photograph in annual reports, the CEO’s prominence in press releases, the CEO’s use of first-person singular pronouns in interviews, and compensation relative to the second-highest-paid firm executive — to examine the effect of CEO narcissism on a firm’s strategy and performance. Results of an empirical study of 11 CEOs in the computer hardware and software industries in 1992-2004 show that narcissism in CEOs is positively related to strategic dynamism and grandiosity, as well as the number and size of acquisitions, and it engenders extreme and fluctuating organizational performance. The results suggest that narcissistic CEOs favor bold actions that attract attention, resulting in big wins or big losses, but that, in these industries, their firm’s performance is generally no better or worse than firms with non-narcissistic CEOs.
Seems we could use these basic criteria to assist us with our presidential selection.
ReplyDeleteHow could anyone with all these liabilities ever be considered for CEO? The only characteristic with an upside is compartmentalization (see Clinton, William, J. who wasn't a train wreck). Maybe someone has a list customized to economists?
ReplyDelete