Thoughts on Management Change
1. One interpretation of the current shuffle is that it is a rationalization of functions. It is redundant for a 20+ employee company to have both a CEO and a COO. This view is reinforced by the hiring of the CMO, who will obviously fulfill some of the responsibilities of the departing COO. So, perhaps, they are just flattening the organizational structure, with Levitt picking up some responsibilities.
2. The datum that is at odds with this interpretation is that the CMO is only there in an "Acting" capacity. This implies less of a rational transition and gives the move the feel that it was done with a sense of urgency, before a smooth change could be put in place.
3. Holroyd was kept on as a consultant. This sounds like he was thrown a bone as thanks for past services. So the parting probably came at Levitt's instigation. Perhaps it is the Peter Principle at work.
4. Management's biggest failing since I have been following the issue is their inability to close a deal. Maybe this was laid at Holroyd's door - either because he could not negotiate it/execute it, or because his vision of the deal differed from Levitt's, and that led to paralysis.
5. To conclude, if the shuffle clears the way for a deal, this is a big positive. The sell-off was pure market jitters.
Thoughts?
Bob
