So with the announced sabbatical of the "man behind the curtain" (i.e. the Chairman), Richemont is set for its own version of the Hunger Games.
For some background here is something from the good folks at Reuters -
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/12/richemont-management-idUSL5N0F11UI20130712?goback=%2Egmp_56533%2Egde_56533_member_258245912
So as a departure from my usual, sunny-side up commentary on the watch world, let me start by saying that this is, quite possibly the most "assed-up" thing I have read in some time. And this is where I think we can safely say the day of the "rock-star" watch group CEO has passed its "sell-by" date. Picture if you will an elite group of brand managers fighting it out to see who will be the winner. While the argument could be made that competition brings out the best in people, I think that the decision makers at Richemont are setting themselves up for a whole lot less collaboration, and a whole lot more acrimony.
So the real challenge in this future "battle royal" will be to see which brand manager/CEO can rise to the top without jamming the "blade of executive excellence" into their fellow-CEO's back.
Cue the "battle theme" from Star Trek ; )
So my sincere hope that the powers at be at Richemont will reconsider pursuing this Jack Welch "redux" with a Lord of the Flies approach to determining corporate succession. On the other hand, if you're not too worried about collaboration or sustained growth for the WHOLE group, then maybe this is the perfect approach. I'm sure SWATCH, LVMH and everyone else won't mind!
For some background here is something from the good folks at Reuters -
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/12/richemont-management-idUSL5N0F11UI20130712?goback=%2Egmp_56533%2Egde_56533_member_258245912
So as a departure from my usual, sunny-side up commentary on the watch world, let me start by saying that this is, quite possibly the most "assed-up" thing I have read in some time. And this is where I think we can safely say the day of the "rock-star" watch group CEO has passed its "sell-by" date. Picture if you will an elite group of brand managers fighting it out to see who will be the winner. While the argument could be made that competition brings out the best in people, I think that the decision makers at Richemont are setting themselves up for a whole lot less collaboration, and a whole lot more acrimony.
So the real challenge in this future "battle royal" will be to see which brand manager/CEO can rise to the top without jamming the "blade of executive excellence" into their fellow-CEO's back.
Cue the "battle theme" from Star Trek ; )
So my sincere hope that the powers at be at Richemont will reconsider pursuing this Jack Welch "redux" with a Lord of the Flies approach to determining corporate succession. On the other hand, if you're not too worried about collaboration or sustained growth for the WHOLE group, then maybe this is the perfect approach. I'm sure SWATCH, LVMH and everyone else won't mind!
No comments:
Post a Comment