要說疫情期間各公司首席執行官的工作職責是什么,你可能想象不到這個故事開頭。這是利潔時集團(Reckitt Benckiser Group)的拉克斯曼·納拉西姆漢和同事開視頻會的故事。該集團總部位于英國,主要生產清潔和個人護理產品,旗下品牌包括Lysol、Woolite、Clearasil等。拉克斯曼畢業于沃頓商學院,曾在麥肯錫(McKinsey)任合伙人,會說多種語言。就在疫情爆發前幾個月,他才被任命為該公司首席執行官,期待他能帶領公司扭轉局面。當時,納拉西姆漢在他位于倫敦西區的公寓里,正在策劃公司的一次重要戰略轉型,涉及價值數十億美元的品牌買賣。
就在這時,他79歲的母親走進了鏡頭里,對他說:“抱歉打擾,但你沒把垃圾拿出去。”
他做了作為兒子唯一能做的選擇:暫停會議,倒垃圾。
今天再回頭看,納拉西姆漢將那一刻視為恩賜。正是那一刻,他理解了各行各業和世界各地的首席執行官們會在接下來的兩年里認識到的重要一點。“我發現,對于組織而言,做到超級接地氣十分重要。”他說,“讓人們看到真實的你,看到你面對的所有弱點。”
疫情改變了首席執行官的職責,這種改變往往與領導者的傳統角色存在天然沖突,他們不得不做出極大的改變。他們本應該見多識廣、準備充分、牢牢控制局面,不應該有弱點。他們應該樂觀自信。智睿咨詢有限公司(Development Dimensions International)的高管兼首席執行官培訓師馬特?佩斯表示:“成為首席執行官意味著,除了必須做好本職工作外,還必須演好人設。”但在這場百年一遇的危機里,沒有劇本,他們有時不得不放棄人設。
高管獵頭公司史賓沙(Spencer Stuart)的吉姆?西特林表示,廣泛說來,“首席執行官們從像神一樣變得更有人情味了。”在疫情爆發后的前六個月,西特林與100多名首席執行官進行交談。他們花了大量時間來處理員工的情感需求,盡管并非所有人都擅長此道。“有兩種趨勢出現了融合。”西特林表示,“趨勢一是認識到目標的重要性,10年前就開始了,但最近加速了,首席執行官們對此進行了深入挖掘。另外一種趨勢是,開始允許首席執行官展現真實和真我,保持透明。”其他關注該領域的咨詢師、教授和專家也注意到了類似趨勢。
一些人在變化中苦苦掙扎。還有一些欣然接受。現在,不管愿不愿意、舒不舒服,所有的首席執行官和他們的繼任者都必須面對這個新現實:疫情改變了當好企業掌門人所需的條件。
人文關懷成為頭等大事
疫情到來時,許多首席執行官立刻意識到,員工們最關心的事源于人類最原始的恐懼,不僅是對自己的生計,也是對家人生命的關心。這是領導者最需要解決的問題,盡管如何解決還不清楚。“很多人都指望從你這得到指導或支持,得到答案。”在史賓沙公司從事首席執行官業務的凱特?赫爾利表示,“你有責任給他們情感支撐,或許以前你不需要這么做。“
一些領導者迅速做出調整。獵頭公司海德思哲(Heidrick & Struggles)的顧問羅斯?蓋利說:“人文關懷成為頭等大事。”按照史賓沙公司北美首席執行官繼任業務負責人凱茜?安特拉斯恩的說法,某家大型保險公司的首席執行官原本是個不茍言笑的人,“而那時他在職工大會上甚至沒談一點業務。他只是表達了關愛、同情、關心,傳達了與員工福祉有關的信息。”一些行業的恐懼感格外強烈,醫療行業尤甚。
“維系員工的信任成了我們的首要任務。”杰弗遜健康(Jefferson Health)的總裁布魯斯·梅耶說,該集團在費城地區擁有18家醫院和100家門診。他不得不不斷回答這些問題:“我們會如何保護你們?會如何為你們提供一個安全的工作環境,確保你們不會因為繼續工作而危及自己或家人?”商業問題退居次位。這是生死攸關的問題。
照顧員工的需求是件辛苦事。納拉希姆漢說,由于形勢嚴峻,而公司里的員工還不太熟悉他,去年他給公司400名員工分別打了兩次15分鐘的電話。算一下,折合一個月的全職工作。
邁耶每三個星期都會在集團下屬的18家醫院輪轉一圈,每家醫院半天。也就是說,每15個工作日中要花9天,唯一不同的是,疫情期間,每周的工作日都不止5天,每個工作日也超過兩個半天相加。他在醫院大廳里巡場時,主要表達感謝,詢問員工是否需要什么幫助。“我并不能總是立刻給他們提供幫助,”他回憶道,“但至少我了解了,傾聽了。”
疫情初期,害怕的不僅是員工。首席執行官們也是如此,他們不僅和每個人一樣,擔心家人和朋友的健康,還因為自己根本不知道要怎么做而感到害怕。危機領導策略中很重要的一部分是讓員工和其他成員相信,公司以前曾經歷過這種考驗,已經吸取了教訓,變得更加強大。如果面臨的危機是經濟衰退、通貨膨脹、戰爭或自然災害,這種策略沒有問題。但現存的公司中沒有幾家曾經經歷過上一次全球性疫情,而上一次疫情也是很久以前的事了(1918年),對今天幾乎沒有什么借鑒意義。直白地說,領導者不知道自己還能不能領導。
世界各地的首席執行官們分別在2020年7月和5個月后接受了哈佛商學院教授鮑里斯·格羅伊斯伯格及其同事的采訪,他們在采訪中敞開心扉。他們承認自己面臨個人危機,其中一位受訪者稱,自己試圖在“沒有任何人知道答案“的情況下領導公司。另外一個人的描述非常形象,他說,疫情擊中了自身領導能力的要害所在,自己“突然意識到,所有過去沒有做/推遲做的決定,需要在同一時間做出決定。”這種感覺就像是“因為推遲了這些事情,現在要付出代價,要在同一時間經歷一切,如噩夢一般。”
作為當地政府的首席執行官,費城市長吉姆·肯尼不僅要應對疫情,還要面對2020年5月喬治·弗洛伊德被殺后引發的社會動蕩。抗議活動除了本身的影響,還可能引發新冠肺炎病例激增。“我還記得,當時我坐在緊急行動中心,盯著大概10塊大屏,每一塊屏幕上都顯示著東西在被燒毀,汽車在被點燃。”他向本刊表示,“你真的不知道接下來該做什么。聽起來有點無助。我認為從某些方面來講,我們的確感到無助和迷茫。”
選擇和壓力可能會非常痛苦。皇家加勒比的首席執行官杰森·利伯蒂在疫情初期是該公司的首席財務官,同時兼管其他業務。他說,與所有郵輪公司一樣,疫情意味著他的公司“被一顆流星直接擊中了。被流星擊中仍能幸存的物種幾乎不存在。”他和家人從邁阿密搬到了北卡羅來納州,在那里,他日日奔波,籌集巨額資金以幫助公司度過難關。他回憶道,那年5月,有一場非常重要的借貸活動,“一簽完文件,我立刻就往醫院趕,我母親在幾個小時后去世了。”
其他一些領導者不得不在公司和家庭之間做出選擇。一位首席執行官告訴格羅伊斯伯格及其同事,他做出了一個艱難的決定:“搬到另一個離員工更近的城市,但要離開家人。”利潔時的納拉西姆漢有19個月沒見過女兒;她在美國,而他在英國。“哪怕你已經當上了首席執行官,你還承擔著多重身份。”他說,“有些人已經兩年沒見過父母了,因為擔心父母會生病。這些事情確實會在某種程度上對你產生影響。19個月沒見到女兒就影響了我。”
為了應對疫情危機和自身的領導力危機,許多首席執行官做的第一步是從個人的混亂中建立秩序。“我一直在小心翼翼地保持家庭和工作間的界限,現在這條界限消失了。”杰弗遜醫療的梅耶回憶道,這也是每一名上班族的抱怨。“有大約一年的時間,這條界限完全不存在。”他說,自己仍在努力重建邊界。晚餐是第一步。“在我們家,一起吃晚餐真的非常重要。”他說。而在疫情最嚴重的時候,“晚餐變得更加重要”。
他的經歷非常典型。格羅伊斯伯格及其同事在報告中指出,“首席執行官們要做好自我關懷,最基本的一點是給“失去的(工作日)秩序”找到替代品,不斷努力維持新秩序。
首席執行官們在疫情中,往往會去健身,健身也被賦予了更多意義。在格羅伊斯伯格和首席執行官們的談話中,健身是最常出現的話題之一,許多受訪者說自己在疫情期間加大了健身強度。他們提到了健身公認的許多好處——改善情緒、判斷力、耐力和思維敏銳度。但還有一點也很關鍵。不管他們有沒有提到,但很明顯,對于他們中的許多人來說,健身也是一種冥想方式。他們給格羅伊斯伯格描述的健身項目中,大多數 “本質上是重復的、冥想性的”。格羅伊斯伯格及其同事在報告中寫道:“沒有人提到賽跑或自行車比賽、拳擊或其他任何競爭性或攻擊性的體育活動。”想想看,首席執行官可是世界上最好勝的一批人,這個現象很不尋常。然而,在疫情中,他們并不需要更多競爭。格羅伊斯伯格的研究報告寫道:“一半受訪者都認為日常冥想或祈禱是他們進行自我關懷的重要方法和基礎要素,這也與上述觀察相吻合。”
和所有人一樣,首席執行官也需要可以交心交談、能夠信任的同事、朋友或同行,甚至比任何人都需要。身居高位的人往往十分孤獨,而且很難找到能理解自己困境的知己。一些首席執行官說,疫情期間進行這樣的談話比以前更容易。惠普(HP )的首席執行官恩里克?洛雷斯表示,僅僅需要一個Zoom會議邀請鏈接,而且這期間“每個人都想和別人建立聯絡”,包括“面臨類似問題的其他公司的首席執行官”。
但也有其他一些領導者比以前更孤獨。費城市長肯尼把前費城市長、前賓夕法尼亞州州長埃德?倫德爾視為“朋友、向導和知己”,他說,但“我甚至不能給他打電話問他,‘你會怎么做?’因為沒人知道該怎么做。”邁耶害怕承認自己在苦苦支撐。“能讓我傾訴自己內心最深處的想法、擔憂和焦慮的朋友圈變得越來越小。”他說,“老實說,在疫情的某些時候,在組織內部根本沒有人(可以交流)。”
許多首席執行官把高管教練當作知己。海德思哲的羅斯?蓋利說:“我們合作過的大多數首席執行官都有一位外部教練,對著這個人,他們可以無所不談,而且確信自己會得到誠實的反饋。這是他們的安全港。”
即將到來的首席執行官離職潮
在新冠疫情爆發后的大約前6個月,首席執行官們都處于應急管理模式。然后,政府推出了刺激措施和PPP紓困貸款來復蘇經濟,幾個月后,疫苗出現了。他們終于可以松口氣了,至少是稍微松口氣。有些人在此期間失去了家人朋友。他們開始像許許多多其他人一樣,重新評估自己的生活、職業和未來。曾在億康先達(Egon Zehnder)獵頭公司擔任高管的克勞迪奧?費爾南德斯表示:“他們開始傾聽自己內心的聲音,這個聲音回響在我們每個人心中。他們重新計算一切。我想生活在什么地方?我有多想待在辦公室?我真正想為什么樣的公司工作?” 克勞迪奧目前為首席執行官提供咨詢,并在哈佛商學院的高管培訓項目中授課。
一些人對自己有了新的認識,決定離開。另一些人則面對著自己已經筋疲力盡的現實。高管教練佩斯說:“疫情期間,有太多企業掌門人和高管談過自己打算什么時候離職。‘真的太難了’,好多人都這么說。”
許多已經決定要改變生活的首席執行官,還有其他許多原本計劃在2020或2021年離職的首席執行官,仍然沒有離開。史賓沙的安特拉斯恩說:“一些公司的董事會暫停了首席執行官的輪替。首席執行官也覺得自己要掌好舵,這是使命的召喚。”根據再就業服務公司Challenger Gray & Christmas的說法,過去兩年,上市公司首席執行官的流失率降至至少10年來的最低水平。
現在,隨著疫情似乎出現了長期向好的趨勢,高管層的大門可能即將打開。史賓沙公司的西特林認為,2022年將是首席執行官離職率“創紀錄的一年”。杰弗遜醫療的邁耶一直在關注業內同行,他說:“特別是在首席執行官這個級別,從現在開始將出現一波退休潮。當人們開始回顧自己經歷的一切時,他們會說,‘ 我受夠了。’”
隨著疫情期間在職的首席執行官相繼離任,而員工們也在期待后疫情時代的到來,過去兩年那種高度人性化、情緒敏感型的領導風格還會繼續嗎?最大的可能性是,員工不會像疫情之前那樣完全重返辦公室,消費者也不會像以前一樣完全重回實體店,與之類似,首席執行官也不會完全回到疫情前的領導風格。
下一代首席執行官將是一些因為疫情傷痕累累的經理人,下下一代也可能如此。此外,疫情期間的經歷也改變了員工的期望值。他們已經習慣了這種隆重的待遇,而疫情導致的勞動力短缺只是其中一部分原因。史賓沙的赫爾利說:“現在的領導方式比以往任何時候都更加個人性化。這是員工們的要求。他們不會說,‘想想現在的形勢吧。’他們會說,‘想想我吧。’”短期內他們不會改掉這個習慣。
首席執行官們可以松口氣了,因為他們已經度過了職業生涯中最艱難、最迷茫、最疲憊的一段時間,對一些人來說,也可能是最可怕的一段經歷。然而,歷史表明,有一天他們再次想起這一切時,可能會心懷感激。過去兩年是一次實打實的磨煉。磨煉很痛苦,迫使他們比大多數人更深入地審視自己。這改變了他們。很少有人主動尋求磨煉。但那些經歷過的人幾乎總是會在很久以后回頭看時得出結論:這段經歷讓他們變得更好。(財富中文網)
譯者:Agatha
要說疫情期間各公司首席執行官的工作職責是什么,你可能想象不到這個故事開頭。這是利潔時集團(Reckitt Benckiser Group)的拉克斯曼·納拉西姆漢和同事開視頻會的故事。該集團總部位于英國,主要生產清潔和個人護理產品,旗下品牌包括Lysol、Woolite、Clearasil等。拉克斯曼畢業于沃頓商學院,曾在麥肯錫(McKinsey)任合伙人,會說多種語言。就在疫情爆發前幾個月,他才被任命為該公司首席執行官,期待他能帶領公司扭轉局面。當時,納拉西姆漢在他位于倫敦西區的公寓里,正在策劃公司的一次重要戰略轉型,涉及價值數十億美元的品牌買賣。
就在這時,他79歲的母親走進了鏡頭里,對他說:“抱歉打擾,但你沒把垃圾拿出去。”
他做了作為兒子唯一能做的選擇:暫停會議,倒垃圾。
今天再回頭看,納拉西姆漢將那一刻視為恩賜。正是那一刻,他理解了各行各業和世界各地的首席執行官們會在接下來的兩年里認識到的重要一點。“我發現,對于組織而言,做到超級接地氣十分重要。”他說,“讓人們看到真實的你,看到你面對的所有弱點。”
疫情改變了首席執行官的職責,這種改變往往與領導者的傳統角色存在天然沖突,他們不得不做出極大的改變。他們本應該見多識廣、準備充分、牢牢控制局面,不應該有弱點。他們應該樂觀自信。智睿咨詢有限公司(Development Dimensions International)的高管兼首席執行官培訓師馬特?佩斯表示:“成為首席執行官意味著,除了必須做好本職工作外,還必須演好人設。”但在這場百年一遇的危機里,沒有劇本,他們有時不得不放棄人設。
高管獵頭公司史賓沙(Spencer Stuart)的吉姆?西特林表示,廣泛說來,“首席執行官們從像神一樣變得更有人情味了。”在疫情爆發后的前六個月,西特林與100多名首席執行官進行交談。他們花了大量時間來處理員工的情感需求,盡管并非所有人都擅長此道。“有兩種趨勢出現了融合。”西特林表示,“趨勢一是認識到目標的重要性,10年前就開始了,但最近加速了,首席執行官們對此進行了深入挖掘。另外一種趨勢是,開始允許首席執行官展現真實和真我,保持透明。”其他關注該領域的咨詢師、教授和專家也注意到了類似趨勢。
一些人在變化中苦苦掙扎。還有一些欣然接受。現在,不管愿不愿意、舒不舒服,所有的首席執行官和他們的繼任者都必須面對這個新現實:疫情改變了當好企業掌門人所需的條件。
人文關懷成為頭等大事
疫情到來時,許多首席執行官立刻意識到,員工們最關心的事源于人類最原始的恐懼,不僅是對自己的生計,也是對家人生命的關心。這是領導者最需要解決的問題,盡管如何解決還不清楚。“很多人都指望從你這得到指導或支持,得到答案。”在史賓沙公司從事首席執行官業務的凱特?赫爾利表示,“你有責任給他們情感支撐,或許以前你不需要這么做。“
一些領導者迅速做出調整。獵頭公司海德思哲(Heidrick & Struggles)的顧問羅斯?蓋利說:“人文關懷成為頭等大事。”按照史賓沙公司北美首席執行官繼任業務負責人凱茜?安特拉斯恩的說法,某家大型保險公司的首席執行官原本是個不茍言笑的人,“而那時他在職工大會上甚至沒談一點業務。他只是表達了關愛、同情、關心,傳達了與員工福祉有關的信息。”一些行業的恐懼感格外強烈,醫療行業尤甚。
“維系員工的信任成了我們的首要任務。”杰弗遜健康(Jefferson Health)的總裁布魯斯·梅耶說,該集團在費城地區擁有18家醫院和100家門診。他不得不不斷回答這些問題:“我們會如何保護你們?會如何為你們提供一個安全的工作環境,確保你們不會因為繼續工作而危及自己或家人?”商業問題退居次位。這是生死攸關的問題。
照顧員工的需求是件辛苦事。納拉希姆漢說,由于形勢嚴峻,而公司里的員工還不太熟悉他,去年他給公司400名員工分別打了兩次15分鐘的電話。算一下,折合一個月的全職工作。
邁耶每三個星期都會在集團下屬的18家醫院輪轉一圈,每家醫院半天。也就是說,每15個工作日中要花9天,唯一不同的是,疫情期間,每周的工作日都不止5天,每個工作日也超過兩個半天相加。他在醫院大廳里巡場時,主要表達感謝,詢問員工是否需要什么幫助。“我并不能總是立刻給他們提供幫助,”他回憶道,“但至少我了解了,傾聽了。”
疫情初期,害怕的不僅是員工。首席執行官們也是如此,他們不僅和每個人一樣,擔心家人和朋友的健康,還因為自己根本不知道要怎么做而感到害怕。危機領導策略中很重要的一部分是讓員工和其他成員相信,公司以前曾經歷過這種考驗,已經吸取了教訓,變得更加強大。如果面臨的危機是經濟衰退、通貨膨脹、戰爭或自然災害,這種策略沒有問題。但現存的公司中沒有幾家曾經經歷過上一次全球性疫情,而上一次疫情也是很久以前的事了(1918年),對今天幾乎沒有什么借鑒意義。直白地說,領導者不知道自己還能不能領導。
世界各地的首席執行官們分別在2020年7月和5個月后接受了哈佛商學院教授鮑里斯·格羅伊斯伯格及其同事的采訪,他們在采訪中敞開心扉。他們承認自己面臨個人危機,其中一位受訪者稱,自己試圖在“沒有任何人知道答案“的情況下領導公司。另外一個人的描述非常形象,他說,疫情擊中了自身領導能力的要害所在,自己“突然意識到,所有過去沒有做/推遲做的決定,需要在同一時間做出決定。”這種感覺就像是“因為推遲了這些事情,現在要付出代價,要在同一時間經歷一切,如噩夢一般。”
作為當地政府的首席執行官,費城市長吉姆·肯尼不僅要應對疫情,還要面對2020年5月喬治·弗洛伊德被殺后引發的社會動蕩。抗議活動除了本身的影響,還可能引發新冠肺炎病例激增。“我還記得,當時我坐在緊急行動中心,盯著大概10塊大屏,每一塊屏幕上都顯示著東西在被燒毀,汽車在被點燃。”他向本刊表示,“你真的不知道接下來該做什么。聽起來有點無助。我認為從某些方面來講,我們的確感到無助和迷茫。”
選擇和壓力可能會非常痛苦。皇家加勒比的首席執行官杰森·利伯蒂在疫情初期是該公司的首席財務官,同時兼管其他業務。他說,與所有郵輪公司一樣,疫情意味著他的公司“被一顆流星直接擊中了。被流星擊中仍能幸存的物種幾乎不存在。”他和家人從邁阿密搬到了北卡羅來納州,在那里,他日日奔波,籌集巨額資金以幫助公司度過難關。他回憶道,那年5月,有一場非常重要的借貸活動,“一簽完文件,我立刻就往醫院趕,我母親在幾個小時后去世了。”
其他一些領導者不得不在公司和家庭之間做出選擇。一位首席執行官告訴格羅伊斯伯格及其同事,他做出了一個艱難的決定:“搬到另一個離員工更近的城市,但要離開家人。”利潔時的納拉西姆漢有19個月沒見過女兒;她在美國,而他在英國。“哪怕你已經當上了首席執行官,你還承擔著多重身份。”他說,“有些人已經兩年沒見過父母了,因為擔心父母會生病。這些事情確實會在某種程度上對你產生影響。19個月沒見到女兒就影響了我。”
為了應對疫情危機和自身的領導力危機,許多首席執行官做的第一步是從個人的混亂中建立秩序。“我一直在小心翼翼地保持家庭和工作間的界限,現在這條界限消失了。”杰弗遜醫療的梅耶回憶道,這也是每一名上班族的抱怨。“有大約一年的時間,這條界限完全不存在。”他說,自己仍在努力重建邊界。晚餐是第一步。“在我們家,一起吃晚餐真的非常重要。”他說。而在疫情最嚴重的時候,“晚餐變得更加重要”。
他的經歷非常典型。格羅伊斯伯格及其同事在報告中指出,“首席執行官們要做好自我關懷,最基本的一點是給“失去的(工作日)秩序”找到替代品,不斷努力維持新秩序。
首席執行官們在疫情中,往往會去健身,健身也被賦予了更多意義。在格羅伊斯伯格和首席執行官們的談話中,健身是最常出現的話題之一,許多受訪者說自己在疫情期間加大了健身強度。他們提到了健身公認的許多好處——改善情緒、判斷力、耐力和思維敏銳度。但還有一點也很關鍵。不管他們有沒有提到,但很明顯,對于他們中的許多人來說,健身也是一種冥想方式。他們給格羅伊斯伯格描述的健身項目中,大多數 “本質上是重復的、冥想性的”。格羅伊斯伯格及其同事在報告中寫道:“沒有人提到賽跑或自行車比賽、拳擊或其他任何競爭性或攻擊性的體育活動。”想想看,首席執行官可是世界上最好勝的一批人,這個現象很不尋常。然而,在疫情中,他們并不需要更多競爭。格羅伊斯伯格的研究報告寫道:“一半受訪者都認為日常冥想或祈禱是他們進行自我關懷的重要方法和基礎要素,這也與上述觀察相吻合。”
和所有人一樣,首席執行官也需要可以交心交談、能夠信任的同事、朋友或同行,甚至比任何人都需要。身居高位的人往往十分孤獨,而且很難找到能理解自己困境的知己。一些首席執行官說,疫情期間進行這樣的談話比以前更容易。惠普(HP )的首席執行官恩里克?洛雷斯表示,僅僅需要一個Zoom會議邀請鏈接,而且這期間“每個人都想和別人建立聯絡”,包括“面臨類似問題的其他公司的首席執行官”。
但也有其他一些領導者比以前更孤獨。費城市長肯尼把前費城市長、前賓夕法尼亞州州長埃德?倫德爾視為“朋友、向導和知己”,他說,但“我甚至不能給他打電話問他,‘你會怎么做?’因為沒人知道該怎么做。”邁耶害怕承認自己在苦苦支撐。“能讓我傾訴自己內心最深處的想法、擔憂和焦慮的朋友圈變得越來越小。”他說,“老實說,在疫情的某些時候,在組織內部根本沒有人(可以交流)。”
許多首席執行官把高管教練當作知己。海德思哲的羅斯?蓋利說:“我們合作過的大多數首席執行官都有一位外部教練,對著這個人,他們可以無所不談,而且確信自己會得到誠實的反饋。這是他們的安全港。”
即將到來的首席執行官離職潮
在新冠疫情爆發后的大約前6個月,首席執行官們都處于應急管理模式。然后,政府推出了刺激措施和PPP紓困貸款來復蘇經濟,幾個月后,疫苗出現了。他們終于可以松口氣了,至少是稍微松口氣。有些人在此期間失去了家人朋友。他們開始像許許多多其他人一樣,重新評估自己的生活、職業和未來。曾在億康先達(Egon Zehnder)獵頭公司擔任高管的克勞迪奧?費爾南德斯表示:“他們開始傾聽自己內心的聲音,這個聲音回響在我們每個人心中。他們重新計算一切。我想生活在什么地方?我有多想待在辦公室?我真正想為什么樣的公司工作?” 克勞迪奧目前為首席執行官提供咨詢,并在哈佛商學院的高管培訓項目中授課。
一些人對自己有了新的認識,決定離開。另一些人則面對著自己已經筋疲力盡的現實。高管教練佩斯說:“疫情期間,有太多企業掌門人和高管談過自己打算什么時候離職。‘真的太難了’,好多人都這么說。”
許多已經決定要改變生活的首席執行官,還有其他許多原本計劃在2020或2021年離職的首席執行官,仍然沒有離開。史賓沙的安特拉斯恩說:“一些公司的董事會暫停了首席執行官的輪替。首席執行官也覺得自己要掌好舵,這是使命的召喚。”根據再就業服務公司Challenger Gray & Christmas的說法,過去兩年,上市公司首席執行官的流失率降至至少10年來的最低水平。
現在,隨著疫情似乎出現了長期向好的趨勢,高管層的大門可能即將打開。史賓沙公司的西特林認為,2022年將是首席執行官離職率“創紀錄的一年”。杰弗遜醫療的邁耶一直在關注業內同行,他說:“特別是在首席執行官這個級別,從現在開始將出現一波退休潮。當人們開始回顧自己經歷的一切時,他們會說,‘ 我受夠了。’”
隨著疫情期間在職的首席執行官相繼離任,而員工們也在期待后疫情時代的到來,過去兩年那種高度人性化、情緒敏感型的領導風格還會繼續嗎?最大的可能性是,員工不會像疫情之前那樣完全重返辦公室,消費者也不會像以前一樣完全重回實體店,與之類似,首席執行官也不會完全回到疫情前的領導風格。
下一代首席執行官將是一些因為疫情傷痕累累的經理人,下下一代也可能如此。此外,疫情期間的經歷也改變了員工的期望值。他們已經習慣了這種隆重的待遇,而疫情導致的勞動力短缺只是其中一部分原因。史賓沙的赫爾利說:“現在的領導方式比以往任何時候都更加個人性化。這是員工們的要求。他們不會說,‘想想現在的形勢吧。’他們會說,‘想想我吧。’”短期內他們不會改掉這個習慣。
首席執行官們可以松口氣了,因為他們已經度過了職業生涯中最艱難、最迷茫、最疲憊的一段時間,對一些人來說,也可能是最可怕的一段經歷。然而,歷史表明,有一天他們再次想起這一切時,可能會心懷感激。過去兩年是一次實打實的磨煉。磨煉很痛苦,迫使他們比大多數人更深入地審視自己。這改變了他們。很少有人主動尋求磨煉。但那些經歷過的人幾乎總是會在很久以后回頭看時得出結論:這段經歷讓他們變得更好。(財富中文網)
譯者:Agatha
It was an unexpected introduction to the CEO’s job in the age of the pandemic. Laxman Narasimhan was running a video meeting with colleagues at Reckitt Benckiser Group, the U.K.-based maker of cleaning and personal care products—Lysol, Woolite, Clearasil, many others. A Wharton-educated multilingual former McKinsey partner, he had been brought in as CEO just months earlier, before the pandemic, to turn the company around. Now, from his apartment in West London, he was orchestrating a major strategic transformation that would require buying and selling billions of dollars’ worth of brands.
Then his 79-year-old mother walked into camera range and said, “Sorry to interrupt you, but you haven’t taken the garbage out.”
He did the only thing a son could do. He put the meeting on hold and took the garbage out.
Today Narasimhan looks back on that moment as a gift. It helped him understand something CEOs across industries and around the world would discover in the following two years. “I found the magic in an organization is about being super down to earth,” he says, “letting people see you for who you are, with all the vulnerabilities that you face.”
The pandemic has changed the CEO’s job, often in ways that inherently clash with a leader’s traditional role, and CEOs have been forced to change profoundly. They’re supposed to be informed, prepared, and firmly in charge, not vulnerable. They’re supposed to be optimistic and confident. “Being a CEO means that in addition to having to do the job, you have to adopt the persona,” says Matt Paese, an executive and CEO coach at Development Dimensions International. But in a once-a-century crisis with no playbook, they sometimes had to abandon that persona.
More broadly, “CEOs went from being godlike to being more human,” says Jim Citrin of the Spencer Stuart executive search firm, who interviewed over 100 CEOs in the pandemic’s first six months. They spent significant time addressing employees’ emotional needs, though not all were adept at that skill. “There was a confluence of two trends,” Citrin says. “One started 10 years ago but just accelerated, and that is the importance of purpose. CEOs really tapped into that. The other one was the permission to be real and authentic and transparent.” Consultants, professors, and other experts who study CEOs noted similar trends.
Some CEOs struggled with the changes. Others embraced them. Now, willingly or not, comfortably or not, all CEOs and their successors will have to confront a new reality: The pandemic has changed what it takes to be an effective CEO.
Humanity comes to the fore
When COVID-19 arrived, many CEOs realized immediately that employees’ overriding reaction was raw fear, not just for their livelihoods but also for their families’ lives. That was the issue leaders most needed to address, even if how to do so wasn’t clear. “You have a lot of people looking to you for guidance or support, for answers,” says Kate Hurley, a member of Spencer Stuart’s CEO practice. “And it’s your responsibility to show up for them emotionally in a way that maybe you haven’t had to previously.”
Some leaders quickly shifted gears. “Humanity came to the fore,” says Rose Gailey, a consultant at the Heidrick & Struggles search firm. The CEO of a major insurance company, a buttoned-up, nuts-and-bolts executive, “didn’t even talk about business at his town halls,” says Cathy Anterasian, who leads Spencer Stuart’s CEO succession services in North America. “He was just sending messages about care, empathy, concern, the well-being of the workforce.” In some industries the fears were extraordinarily intense, none more so than health care.
“Maintaining trust with our workforce became the No. 1 priority,” says Bruce Meyer, president of Jefferson Health, a Philadelphia-area system of 18 hospitals and 100 ambulatory care centers. Questions he had to keep answering: “How are we protecting you? How are we allowing you to have a safe working environment where you can feel like you’re not going to jeopardize yourself or your family by continuing to work?” Business issues were secondary. This was life and death.
Ministering to the human needs of employees was hard work. Narasimhan says that because the crisis was so intense and he wasn’t well-known at the company, last year he made 15-minute calls to 400 employees, twice a year. Do the math: That’s a month of full-time work.
Meyer spent a half-day at every one of Jefferson Health’s 18 hospitals every three weeks. That’s nine days out of 15, except that in the pandemic, a workweek was more than five days and a workday was more than two half-days. As he walked the hospitals’ halls, he mostly thanked people and asked how he could help them. “I couldn’t always provide it instantaneously,” he recalls, “but at least I understood and was listening.”
It wasn’t just employees who were afraid in the pandemic’s early days. CEOs were too—not only in the way everyone was afraid, for families’ and friends’ health, but also because they simply didn’t know what to do. Part of the crisis leadership playbook is to reassure employees and other constituents that the organization has been through this kind of trial before, has learned from it, and has emerged stronger. That approach works when the crisis is a recession, inflation, war, or natural disaster. But few of today’s companies were around in the last global pandemic, and it was so long ago (1918) that it offers few lessons for today. In stark terms, leaders didn’t know if they could lead.
CEOs from around the world opened up to Harvard Business School professor Boris Groysberg and colleagues, who interviewed them in July 2020 and again five months later. They acknowledged the personal crisis they confronted, trying to lead when “no one knows the answer,” as one put it. Another confessed vividly that the pandemic struck at the heart of his leadership ability, saying it was like “[waking] up to all of the decisions I had not made/delayed in the past, and they all needed to be decided on at the same time.” The feeling was one of “paying the price of having postponed them and living the nightmare of all of it at once.”
A government chief executive, Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney faced not just the pandemic but also the civil unrest following the murder of George Floyd in May 2020. Beyond the significance of the protests, they also held the danger of sparking a surge in COVID-19 cases. “I remember sitting in the emergency operations center watching about 10 screens of things burning, cars being set on fire,” he tells Fortune. “You really don’t know what to do next. That sounds kind of helpless. And I think in some ways we felt a little bit helpless and lost.”
The choices and stresses could be wrenching. Royal Caribbean CEO Jason Liberty was CFO in the pandemic’s early days while also handling other executive tasks. As with all cruise lines, the pandemic meant his company “got directly hit by a meteor,” he says. “It’s very few species that survive a meteor.” He and his family moved from Miami to a home in North Carolina, where he spent long days raising the billions of dollars needed to get the company through. He recalls arranging a crucial lending facility in May. “As soon as I signed those documents, I had to rush to the hospital,” he says, “because my mother passed away a couple hours later.”
Other leaders had to choose between company and family. A CEO told Groysberg and colleagues about making the difficult decision to “move to a different city to be closer to the employees, [leaving] the family behind.” Reckitt’s Narasimhan didn’t see his daughter for 19 months; she was in the U.S., he in the U.K. “Even though you’re a CEO leader and all that, you’ve got these multiple roles,” he says. “Some people haven’t seen their parents for two years because they worry about them falling ill. It does at some point have an impact on you. And not seeing my daughter for 19 months had an impact on me.”
Responding to the pandemic crisis and to their own leadership crisis, many CEOs began by imposing order on their personal chaos. “The boundaries that I had very carefully established between my home life and my work life disappeared,” recalls Meyer of Jefferson Health, echoing a complaint of office workers everywhere. “For about a year, they utterly disappeared.” He says he’s still working to reestablish the boundaries. Dinner is a place to start. “In our family, family dinner is really, really important,” he says. In the depths of the pandemic, “it became even more important.”
His experience was typical. Groysberg and colleagues report that “the foundation of CEOs’ self-care was to replace the ‘lost structure’ of the workday” and to protect it through constant diligence.
A remarkably consistent element of CEOs’ response to the pandemic was exercise, which became something more. It was one of the most common themes of Groysberg’s CEOs, many of whom reported that they stepped up their pre-pandemic routines. Leaders reported the well-established benefits of exercise—improved mood, judgment, stamina, and mental sharpness. But there was another key element too. Whether CEOs mentioned it or not, it’s clear that for many of them exercise was also meditation. Many of the regimens described by Groysberg’s CEOs “were repetitive and contemplative in nature,” he and his colleagues report: “No one mentioned foot or bike racing, punching-bag work, or any other competitive or aggressive physical activity.” That is striking, considering that CEOs are among the world’s most competitive people. Yet in the pandemic crisis, more competition wasn’t what they needed. The Groysberg study reports, “This aligns with the fact that half of the sample considered daily meditation or prayer a crucial grounding element of their self-care.”
Like everyone, only more so, CEOs need trusted colleagues, friends, or peers with whom they can talk candidly. It really is lonely at the top, and it’s hard to find confidants who understand the quandaries CEOs face. Some bosses say that arranging those talks got easier in the pandemic. All it took was a Zoom invite, and “everybody wanted to connect,” says HP CEO Enrique Lores, including “CEOs of other companies that were going through similar issues.”
But other leaders felt even more alone. Mayor Kenney considers former Philadelphia mayor and former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell “a friend and guide and confidant,” he says, but “I couldn’t even call him and say, ‘What would you do?’ Because nobody knew what to do.” Meyer worried about confessing that he was struggling. “The inner circle to whom I would reveal my innermost thoughts and concerns and anxieties—that circle got way smaller,” he says. “There were portions of the pandemic, in all honesty, where there wasn’t anybody [to talk to] inside the organization at all.”
Many CEOs turned to executive coaches as confidants. “The majority of CEOs we’re working with have identified an external coach,” says Heidrick & Struggles’ Rose Gailey, “somebody they can just say anything to and have confidence they’ll get honest feedback. It’s a safe place for them.”
The coming wave of CEO departures
For six months or so after COVID-19 arrived, CEOs were in emergency management mode. Then stimulus checks and PPP loans resuscitated the economy, and a few months later, vaccines appeared. CEOs could finally unclench, at least a little. Some had lost family members or friends. They began to do what millions of others were doing: reassessing their lives, careers, and futures. “They started listening to the inner voice we all have within us,” says Claudio Fernández-Aráoz, a former executive at the Egon Zehnder search firm who now counsels CEOs and teaches them in executive education programs at the Harvard Business School. “They were recalculating everything. Where do I want to live? How much do I want to be in the office? What type of company do I really want to work for?”
Some CEOs came to new realizations about themselves and decided to leave. Others confronted the reality that they were worn out. “During COVID we heard a lot of CEOs and C-suite players talking about when they’re going to leave,” executive coach Paese reports. “‘This has become too difficult’—we got a lot of that.”
Many CEOs who have decided to change their lives, and others who had previously planned to step down in 2020 or 2021, still haven’t left. “Boards put CEO succession on hold,” notes Spencer Stuart’s Anterasian. “CEOs felt they would need to steer the ship. It was the call of duty.” CEO turnover at public companies plunged in the past two years to the lowest levels in at least a decade, says the Challenger Gray & Christmas outplacement services firm.
Now, with the pandemic seemingly in long-term decline, the C-suite gates may be about to open. Spencer Stuart’s Citrin believes 2022 “is really going to be a record year” for CEO departures. Meyer of Jefferson Health, observing his peers in health care, says that “particularly at the CEO level, there’s a whole wave of retirement starting now. As people start to process what we’ve been through, they say, ‘I’m just done.’”
As the pandemic CEOs step down, and as employees look ahead to a post-pandemic future, will the highly personal, emotionally aware leadership style of the past two years continue? The best bet is that just as workers won’t go all the way back to the office and shoppers won’t go all the way back to physical stores, CEOs won’t go all the way back to pre-pandemic leadership.
The next generation of CEOs, and likely the generation after that, will be managers who were scarred by the pandemic experience. In addition, that experience has changed employees’ expectations. It’s only partly because the pandemic labor shortage has accustomed them to royal treatment. “The approach to leadership right now is more personal than it ever has been,” says Hurley of Spencer Stuart. “That’s what employees are asking for. They’re not saying, ‘Think about the situation.’ They’re saying, ‘Think about me.’” They won’t break that habit anytime soon.
The pandemic CEOs are relieved to be past the most demanding, most disorienting, most exhausting experience of their careers, and for some the most frightening. Yet history suggests it’s just possible that they may someday remember it with gratitude. The past two years have been a classic crucible experience. It has been painful, and it has forced CEOs to look into themselves more deeply than most people ever do. It has transformed them. Few people seek out a crucible experience. But those who go through one almost always conclude much later, looking back, that it changed them for the better.