CEO and the Organization
The role of a CEO has always become acrimonious and today’s competitive world has raised another debate, whether the CEO should just toe the line based on the company’s predefined goals or he should even intrude to the operational wings, which might create a churning inside the company.
As CEO is mainly responsible for brand promotion, business growth, his role as a top most marketing person can hardly be questioned.
On the other hand the entry of a marketing person to the operations might wilt the operational guys. This is also true that when the entire market is battered by cutthroat competition, the cost conscious companies might transit from an ideologue to a realistic view, which may prompt them to look for one top notch to manage the entire show. In such a situation, any tough stand of the CEO might raise question about his loyalty to the company.
Whether the CEO should show his loyalty to the company’s views or he should show resilience to show his loyalty to the traditional role of CEO, may induce more debates.
The organization structure of the company may also depict a clear supremacy of the CEO in the organization by vacating some immediate following positions, where the CEO becomes the prime face and his position as the front-runner is accepted by the entire organization.
Some CEOs may not averse the idea of playing multiple role to ensure his stronghold in the organization and some might accept just not to embitter the relationship, but conflicting role often leads to a formidable devastation, where the ever growing marketing target can build up unnecessary pressure on the delivery front, and the fierce pace might force them to compromise with the quality parameters.
So, even unnecessary loyalty may keep the CEO as a blue-eyed boy, but it may even devour the company in the long run, when mere repenting may not find its right solace.
On the contrary it has also been witnessed that two people almost in the same rung of the organizational ladder like CEO and COO often exhibit personality clash, which is never desirable in any organization.
The bitterness may even reach a situation, where one always gets engaged in taking umbrage of each acts of the other and the BOD has to intervene to maintain a working relationship, which can ultimately keep the momentum up for running the company.
When one wants to dominate the other or wants become a hero than the other, confusion builds up and gets replicated through out the organization and the entire company heads towards the trouble, may be even to find the end of the road.
At times even the management invades into such controversy and unknowingly encourages the split into two camps which puts the final nail into the coffin.
Any stern action may cause irreparable loss for the company. Rather it is a much better approach to appoint an arbitrator or emissary to find out the reality and then formulating the strategy to build up a harmonious relationship for the overall growth of the organization.
One funny solution at the end. Competition may not be just a limbo.The jolt of a fierce pace of a newly emerged competition may cap the tumultuous relationship and prompt both to exhibit their exuberance towards the growth of the organizations in the same tune, ignoring the trifles for their own survival..