Many senior vice presidents are being handed the responsibilities of chief operating officers as cost-cutting has chopped rungs from the corporate ladder, says the Wall Street Journal.
“The CEO wants to be closer to the action,” says Tom Kolder, president of Crist|Kolder Associates, a Hinsdale, Ill., executive-search firm. The recession may be accelerating the trend as CEOs and chief financial officers, focused on cutting costs, “roll up their sleeves and get into the details of the business to a greater extent,” he says.
Between January 2008 and June 2009, 40 major companies eliminated the COO or president position, while only 20 added it, according to a study of 672 large public companies by Crist|Kolder. (The tally includes companies where the CEO took on the president’s title.) About 42% now employ a COO or president who isn’t the CEO, down from 44% last year and 48% in 2000.
Some companies view line-of-business leaders (usually vice presidents (VPs) or senior vice presidetns (SVPs)) already to be doing the work of the COO. Why not tap into that operational work directly?
Alan Barry, who retired as COO of Masco Corp. in November 2007, says the position becomes less central as companies grow larger and more complex. Companies with several big divisions “in effect have two, three or four COOs,” he says. “As companies get bigger, the CEO does not want to be as removed. He wants to have more direct hands-on control.”
SVPs get more work but more visibility to the CEO and board of directors — and possibly a bigger role in the company’s succession plans, since COOs have often been a heartbeat away from the chief executive position.
It also means more competition for CEO and potential for a board to appoint a chief executive from outside a company. Remember, it’s not only COOs who are being eliminated; many CEOs have left their posts in 2009.
[Image by fastparrot via Flickr CC 3.0]
C-level career advice:










Discussion
No comments for “Are COOs a Vanishing Breed?”