????為蘋果公司（Apple）CEO史蒂夫?喬布斯尋找接班人，或許是硅谷最困難的工作之一。但是，無論蘋果公司的董事會是否愿意，他們都必須完成這一任務。

????最近，《華爾街日報》（Wall Street Journal）援引未透露姓名的消息人士的話稱，“蘋果公司董事會的一些成員已經就CEO繼任問題與獵頭公司進行討論，并至少與一家大型科技公司的負責人進行了接洽。但他們似乎并不是在代表整個董事會來進行這項工作。該報道稱，（史蒂夫?喬布斯）在一封電子郵件中寫道，“這沒有任何意義”，同時稱，蘋果公司的發言人拒絕置評。

????蘋果公司董事會目前正處在一個左右為難的尷尬境地。如果董事會還不開始積極尋找CEO接班人，問題將隨之而來。但是，如果董事會成員以這種“非正式”的方式尋找接班人，同樣也會帶來問題。

????蘋果公司董事會對公司的治理一直是外界關注的焦點。近年來，公司遭遇了包括期權回溯、喬布斯健康狀況之謎以及圍繞CEO繼任計劃的疑云等諸多問題。

????不過，《華爾街日報》這篇報道引發的問題對任何一家公司的董事會來說都是值得借鑒的。

????很顯然，從我和董事們的交流可以判斷，CEO繼任是所有公司董事會面臨的最大難題之一。這主要與董事會權利平衡和CEO扮演的角色緊密相關。當CEO同時也是董事會成員時，他的身份會非常微妙：對于既是管理層又是董事會成員的雙重身份來說，很難清晰的界定其職責范圍（請參閱：默多克將何去何從？）。

????試想，如果一個公司的董事會成員企圖通過秘密的、未經授權的方式，僅由少數董事私下結成小集團來選擇CEO接班人，那么，這只能說這家公司在治理上的存在隱憂。相反，董事會成員應該利用合理的渠道，共同參與制定繼任計劃。

????董事會私下行事恰好說明董事會公開的工作出了問題——說明董事會的流程、權利或特性等方面存在需要解決的問題。在這種情況下，任何董事會都應該努力找出并解決真正的根源問題，而不是采用迂回方式達到目標。

????蘋果公司的董事會領導結構有些獨特，共有兩位聯席董事。蘋果公司網站的信息顯示，喬布斯雖然在董事會任職，但他不是董事會主席。其中一位聯席董事是雅芳化妝品公司（AVON）的CEO鐘彬嫻，她同時也是薪酬委員會主席。另一位是生物技術公司基因泰克（Genentech）前CEO亞瑟?列文森，他是提名和治理委員會主席。

????蘋果公司拒絕對當前董事會的做法置評。不過，蘋果公司網站上的公司治理準則中，有一部分題為“管理層評估和繼任”，描述了CEO、薪酬委員會和整個董事會在這一過程中應該扮演的角色。

????這一準則規定：“薪酬委員會應該對包括CEO在內的所有高管進行年度評價，并與董事會一道將對此進行審議。此外，董事會還要審議CEO的業績表現評估報告，以確保CEO能有效地領導公司。作為年度評估的一部分，董事會和CEO應對管理層發展和高管繼任計劃進行年度評估。”

????因為尋找CEO的接班人非常困難，所以CEO的參與將不無裨益。不過，除CEO外，董事會的獨立董事應該對這一過程擁有清晰的控制權。所有的董事會都應當評估董事會準則和章程，以確保董事會對這一過程擁有控制權——而且，他們應該每年進行評估，制定可靠的繼任計劃，并找出任何有可能影響工作流程的障礙。

????一份有效的CEO繼任計劃是董事會對公司進行良好治理的頭等大事。這對于任何公司來說都是至關重要的，無論公司現有狀況如何。事實上，它是董事會對公司和所有利益相關方承擔的最重要的職責之一。

????對蘋果公司來說，最好的局面應該是董事會能以適當的、經過授權的方式來制定CEO繼任計劃。

????本文作者愛麗諾?布洛斯罕是董事會咨詢機構價值聯盟和公司治理聯盟（The Value Alliance and Corporate Governance Alliance，http://thevaluealliance.com/）的首席執行官。

????（翻譯 喬樹靜）

????Lining up a successor to a CEO like Steve Jobs may very well be the least coveted job inSilicon Valley. But it's a task that Apple's board will have to perform, whether they want to or not.

????The Wall Street Journal recently reported, according to unnamed sources, that "some members of Apple Inc.'s board have discussed CEO succession with executive recruiters and at least one head of a high-profile technology company" and the "directors don't appear to have been acting on behalf of the full board." The Journal reported that "in an email, [Steve Jobs wrote] 'I think it's hogwash' "and "an Apple spokesman declined to comment."

????For the Apple (AAPL) board, this is a no win situation. If the board isn't actively working on CEO succession, it's a problem. But if board members are working on succession in this "unofficial" way, that's a problem too.

????The Apple board has been in the spotlight from a governance standpoint for a long time. Over the years, the issues have included stock options backdating, the lack of transparency related to Jobs' health, and questions surrounding a CEO succession plan at the company.

????But the issues raised by the Journal story offer lessons for any corporate board.

????When I talk to directors, CEO succession clearly stands out as one of the most difficult issues for their boards. Much of that has to do with the power dynamics in the boardroom and the role of the CEO. When the CEO sits on the board, it can be difficult to create a clear demarcation between the CEO's role as a member of management and what the CEO's role should be as a member of the board (See: What's in store for Rupert Murdoch?).

????If members of any board are trying to accomplish CEO succession via stealth or unauthorized, small cliques of directors, that is, of course, a very troubling sign for a corporation's governance. Directors should be using their own proper channels to engage in succession planning.

????Taking the work of the board offline means there is a working problem with the board online -- signaling that a problem with process, power, or personalities at the board level needs to be resolved. It behooves any board in such circumstances to try to address the real source of the difficulty, rather than use alternate means to accomplish a goal.

????Apple has a somewhat unique board leadership structure, with two co-lead directors. Jobs sits on the board but is not the chair, according to the company's website. One co-lead director is Avon (AVP) CEO Andrea Jung, who also chairs the compensation committee. And the other is former Genentech CEO Arthur Levinson, who also chairs the nominating and governance committee.

????While Apple declined to offer comment on the current processes of its board, the company's governance guidelines, available on their website, have a section entitled "management review and succession," which outlines a role for the compensation committee and for the full board, including the CEO, in the process.

????The guidelines state, "The Compensation Committee should conduct, and review with the Board, an annual evaluation of the performance of all executive officers, including the CEO," and "The Board also reviews the CEO performance evaluation to ensure that the CEO is providing effective leadership of the Corporation. As part of the annual evaluation, the Board and the CEO should conduct an annual review of management development and succession planning for senior management, including the CEO."

????While CEO involvement can be helpful, because the issue of CEO succession can be so difficult, independent members of the board need to establish clear authority over the process apart from the CEO. All boards should review their guidelines and charters to ensure that they actually have authority over this process – and they should review every year the extent to which they have developed a solid succession plan and identify any obstacles preventing a flexible, working process.

????The effectiveness of CEO succession is a bellwether for good board governance at companies. And it is important at any company, no matter its circumstances. In fact, it represents one of the most important duties a board has to its company -- and to all its stakeholders.

????The best-case scenario at Apple? A situation where the board is working on CEO succession and using proper, not unauthorized, channels to do so.

????Eleanor Bloxham is CEO of The Value Alliance and Corporate Governance Alliance (http://thevaluealliance.com/), a board advisory firm.