Michael Barnes, who is currently Fossil Inc.’s president and chief operating officer will be taking over Terry Burman’s position as the new chief executive of Signet Jewelers. He is starting to work as CEO when Mr. Burman retires on January 29th. Due to his new job, Fossil is now looking for a successor to Barnes. As Signet chairman Malcolm Williamson states, Mr. Barnes is a “seasoned and accomplished manager" and said he "will be an able successor to Terry Burman,”
I believe that in order for companies to succeed, it is necessary for them to hire new CEO’s about every ten years. With new, intelligent individuals comes new and different ideas. I strongly suspect that Signet Jewelers will benefit from Barnes’s new position because he is not only talented with a “business” mind, but will bring new thoughts and propositions to the table. Would you agree or disagree that a change in chief executives is advantageous to a company? Also, a new CEO might attract more customers to the company. With improved ideas, they can think of different strategies to market their product. Thus, an addition of new executives can be extremely essential to corporations in today’s society.
View this at:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704116004575521843110736192.html?mod=WSJ_Retailing_leftHeadlines
Posted by Tania Dabdoub
I do agree that a change in chief executives is beneficial to a company. With changing times, comes changing generations (as exemplified by Jacky's recent post, "Department Store Targeting Generation Y"), and changing consumer tastes and preferences. Hiring new chief executives can bring in new ideas and new ways to market products to newer generations and consumer bases.
ReplyDeleteCompanies have to be flexible to accommodate changes in society. This flexibility can come by way of switching out chief executives, thus bringing in new business ideas and perspectives.