Your Next, Next Career is Closer Than You Think

Your Next, Next Career is Closer Than You Think

It is not just the youngsters today who are changing the employment landscape; the older cohort of workers are also doing their part to significantly alter the environment. This is seen strongest as working seniors redefine “retirement” to mean something entirely new and exciting. With that comes a significant amount of planning – what we like to call our clients’ “Next, Next.”

Whereas 65-year-olds used to stop working and live off their pensions, today’s older workforce is finding significant joy and productivity by creatively remaining engaged in the economic engine of employment. We encourage our executive clients to consider living a portfolio personal and professional life that is comprised of a handful of jobs that in aggregate comprise a fulfilling and fruitful new career.

Before engaging with the portfolio career there is a lot of preparation and steps that need to be taken. When we work with clients in career transition who are in their 60s we map out a very specific plan that includes dual focus of preparing for his or her next job, which is usually the last stop on their climb up the corporate ladder and urge them to consider what happens after that chapter ends.

To be sure, there are many who by the time they reach their mid-to-late-60s want to sit poolside and lounge in the sun-drenched glow of retirement, but we know from experience most C-Suite executives are not wired that way. I enjoy asking my clients: “have you done your greatest thing yet?” and witnessing the moment they realize they still have that fire. They, and we, know there is still a lot of work to be done and much to be accomplished late in careers and life. Consider the creative and business accomplishments by the following leaders of their crafts who were in “retirement” age:

  • At 62, JRR Tolkien published the first volume of his fantasy series “The Lord of the Rings;”
  • At 66, Noah Webster completed his “American Dictionary of the English Language;”
  • At 70, Cornelius Vanderbilt began buying up railroads.

Ready to get started on your Next, Next plan? Here are the three critical steps everyone should take to managing their “retirement” before it manages them:

Coaching. Reflection is generally not something executives do well on their own because they are so focused on their careers. These highly driven people are usually set on a specific career path and never look back until the very end of the road. Having a guide in the form of a coach can be an efficient and productive way to set a new course. Coaches can be invaluable resources to helping clients formulate what retirement looks like and how to get there without distraction.

Monetize. As part of the reflection piece, executives should start thinking about where his and her passions truly lie. Ask oneself what it is he or she loves to do and then how can they make money doing it.

Start. It is never too early, nor is it ever too late, to begin the process of considering this new and exciting phase of one’s career. Reflect, self-assess and start preparing.

Why not get ready for your Next, Next right now? The sooner you start, the more prepared you will be, and you will realize that your greatest career accomplishments have most likely yet to be achieved. With a little bit of planning and guidance you can make it happen.


Link(s) to Article:

CalPERS diversity strategy using strength in numbers

CalPERS diversity strategy using strength in numbers

Vivien Killilea/WireImage

For private companies, fund forgoing 1-on-1 engagement

Betty T. Yee wants more engagement on diversity for private company boards.

CalPERS has a well-developed plan to encourage diversity on public company boards on its own and as part of industry organizations, but when it comes to private companies, officials at the largest pension plan in the country are choosing to work as part of an industry group rather than go it alone.

Asset owners haven’t tackled the issue of diversity at private companies until relatively recently. But as the number of private companies choosing to stay private longer increases, more investors are asking their managers about it.

In October, California Controller Betty T. Yee, who also is a CalPERS and CalSTRS board member, sent letters to the two public pension funds on Oct. 29 urging greater diversity on private company boards and asking them to put the matter on a future meeting agenda. So far, the investment committee chairmen have not decided whether they will do so, spokeswomen at both pension funds said.

Ms. Yee noted in the letters that just one-third of private companies have a goal to diversify their boards, citing data from the 2019 National Association of Corporate Directors Private Company Governance Survey. According to Preqin, women make up 19.7% of the alternative investment firms’ workforce, an increase of 0.9 percentage points compared with 2017, and less than 12% of senior roles in alternative investment firms. Ms. Yee, citing Preqin, noted that only 5.7% of private equity board members are female.

And in September, private equity investor industry group Institutional Limited Partners Association expanded its due diligence questionnaire, template and codes of conduct for managers, limited partners and portfolio companies aimed at supporting greater diversity and inclusion in the private equity industry.

ILPA is in the process of creating a road map to advance diversity across the alternative investment money management industry that will include research links and other resources. Organization executives expect to release it in the first quarter of 2020.

Promoting diversity
At the Nov. 18 investment committee meeting of the $385.1 billion California Public Employees’ Retirement System, Sacramento, Ms. Yee asked pension staff what they are doing to promote diversity at private companies.

In response, CIO Yu Ben Meng said ILPA represents the entire asset owner community and that that organization can have the most impact on the matter.

Private company board diversity has been a topic of lively debate in the private equity community, said Anne Simpson, CalPERS director, board governance and strategy, in an interview. She added that CalPERS has adopted principles encouraging diversity that apply across its portfolio, including private markets. “It’s a question of control,” she said. Limited partners in funds have no control over portfolio companies including diversity at the executive team and board levels, she said.

The question of control in its relationships with private equity general partners appeared to be a stumbling block for CalPERS on other ESG-related topics, too. Also at the Nov. 18 investment committee meeting, board member Ramon Rubalcava asked what CalPERS was doing regarding human capital issues arising as a result of private equity ownership of companies, such as the mass layoffs at the private equity-backed Toys R Us, which filed for bankruptcy in 2017.

Greg Ruiz, CalPERS managing investment director for private equity, replied that staff considers manager integrity when it is deciding whether to invest with a manager.

“When we assess managers, we assess them across many dimensions. … It’s important to partner with people with integrity so that is kind of first and foremost, and there are many complexities when you get into managing companies,” Mr. Ruiz said. “Once we enter into a partnership we are not in control. We are only one voice but (we are) an active voice.”

Expanding due diligence
Other institutional investors and a growing minority of alternative investment managers are turning their attention to portfolio company-level diversity. Some asset owners are adding questions about diversity at the executive and board level of portfolio companies as part of their due diligence before investing with private equity managers, said Emily Mendell, Washington-based managing director of ILPA.

The aim of the expanded due diligence guidelines and template is to measure employee gender and ethnicity by role, she said.

The association is hearing anecdotally and with consistency that limited partners are asking questions about diversity at the portfolio company level more and more, Ms. Mendell said.

“It’s no longer taboo and uncommon” to ask general partners what they are doing to diversify their investment team and portfolio companies, she said.

Investors are absolutely thinking about diversity, including at the portfolio company level, and CalPERS is at the forefront, Ms. Mendell said.

“GPs are almost expecting the question now,” she said.

But it’s up to the GPs to promote diversity at their portfolio companies and more of them are asking human capital professionals and others for help to get more women and minority executives on their portfolio company boards, she said.

Regulators weighing in
A recent global regulatory push to diversify public company boards is also having an impact on private companies and their private equity backers.

These efforts include the International Organization for Standardization’s December launch of a human capital reporting framework that includes workforce diversity, Congressional bills and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission rule under consideration that would require public companies to disclose workforce diversity.

The Human Capital Management Coalition, an institutional investor organization, had proposed the SEC rule in 2017.

Private equity firms are taking notice because portfolio companies that file to go public would have to disclose the diversity of their workforces if the proposed SEC rule is adopted, said Laura K. Queen, Doylestown, Pa.-based founder and CEO of 29Bison, a strategic human capital adviser for middle-market private equity and venture capital firms and their portfolio companies.

Investor action, pending regulations and a desire by many GPs to diversify their executive suites and boards as well as those of their portfolio companies and boards are causing some general partners to take action, she said.

“Boards of portfolio companies tend to mirror the networks and connections of their founders and so are mostly made up of highly educated white males,” Ms. Queen said.

While GPs have a long way to go to diversify portfolio company boards, there has been progress. When Ms. Queen and her team starting bringing up the topic of diversity and inclusion on portfolio company boards and executive teams in 2013, few GPs wanted to discuss it, she said.

Now, some 25% of the private equity firms 29Bison works with are considering populating their boards and portfolio company boards and executive and operations teams with more diverse individuals. The conversation most often comes up in succession planning, she said.

So far, the definition of diversity includes women and people of color.

“I would argue over time, it’s a limiting definition of diversity,” she said. Firms should be looking more broadly to include diverse personnel from groups such as the LBGTQ community, people with disabilities and people from different cultures, Ms. Queen said.

Hugh A. Shields, a co-founder and principal in the Chicago office of Shields Meneley Partners, an executive coaching and consulting firm, said he also sees investors putting more pressure on private equity firms to have better representation of women and minorities on portfolio company boards.

Particularly, the larger private equity firms and larger portfolio companies are trying hard to get better representation of women and minorities on portfolio company boards, he said.

“We are really starting to see more and more … portfolio companies are more open to diverse candidates,” he said.

Link(s) to Article:

Your Next, Next Career is Closer Than You Think

My Virtual Board of Advisors

For the past 18 years, I have been utilizing a powerful tool that I look at as my Virtual Board of Directors. I formalized this process into a semi-organized form of keeping in touch with people whose perspectives I respect. In some ways, this is my rendition of Networking 2.0. (Before you read on, I recommend you first read my thoughts about best practices for Networking.)

So, how does this virtual board of advisors work? To start, we have never had a board meeting, never met in person, and none of the members even know they are part of this esteemed group, yet all have played incredibly important roles in the development of my life and career.

Wait, what?

I know, this sounds like the visions of a lunatic, but bear with me.

I have a group eight trusted advisors with whom I communicate individually three or four times per year. This team has a singular, shared objective to be a critical source of information and feedback. I turn to them to act as a sounding board, to provide creative input, to offer common sense, and even to play around with crazy ideas.

To be sure, this is not a hodge-podge assemblage of people. The group is diverse by design and includes men and women of all ages, geographical locations and professions. The youngest is 28 years old; the oldest is 81 years old. Members represent global perspectives from Canada, the United States, Germany and the UK. Professional backgrounds are just as diverse with a human resources professional, a country singer, a senior level recruiter, a chief executive officer, and an entrepreneur. A couple of the members are retired, several work on their own, and others work for companies. This mix helps with the quality and breadth of counsel I receive.

Several key principles make it work:

It must be a two-way relationship. I make sure that each meeting or call fulfills a need for the other person too. That could be as simple as buying lunch, listening, or coaching. I call quarterly even if there is no clear need or objective on my part. It is good to just catch up regularly.

Imagine the individuals as a team around a table. Even though this never happens, I prepare as if it will. What is the objective of the next round of calls and meetings? What do I want to accomplish? I prepare as if I am going to a board meeting. I enter quarterly call reminders on my calendar and spend a few hours preparing for the first call since inevitably, that discussion leads to topics that I may carry into the follow-on meeting with other board members.

Eight is enough. I believe too many advisors can be a problem to manage, just like any board. That said, I also feel fewer than five may reduce the diversity and richness of the input. In reality, I probably catch six of the eight in my quarterly meetings.

Keep track and take notes. I admit it. I started out as an engineer and I like building spreadsheets and tables. I keep a matrix that tracks contact information, last call, input from each member and some personal information. The latter gets the conversation going on the next call. I also color-code the input. Crazy ideas (orange) have led to some of the most valuable paths I have pursued.

You are the membership committee. I carefully considered who I wanted on my board. Diversity was important to me for a number of reasons. I also thought carefully about each relationship. I suppose the board could flex depending on the need or issue, but I have chosen to stay with the same eight people for several years. Importantly, I would like to have someone in their twenties and over the 18 years, that person has changed several times. I believe if you tailor the team to the task, you miss out on a unique viewpoint from someone who may not be knowledgeable about the specific issue – but may have related experience that informs your thinking. I also value people who are “fun’ to talk to – who are interested and interesting.

There is no need to let each person know you see them as part of a team. I suppose this article lets “the cat out of the bag” for my advisors who read this article, but, I don’t think they need to know the structure since it may lead to assumptions about the issue or the team that might be distracting and irrelevant. The bottom line is that I enjoy keeping up with this group of interesting people and I want to make sure our conversations are as genuine as possible.

I would love to learn more about how you network and use feedback from your trusted advisors. Please drop me a line in the comment section. Let’s get our own discussion started.

Link(s) to Article:

Your Next, Next Career is Closer Than You Think

Can Comp and Conferences Help Board Recruiting?

As boards compete to recruit highly sought-after diverse directors with a particular set of skills – such as technology and cyber-security expertise, for example – consultants are prompting boards to revisit some aspects of their compensation plans and to consider educational opportunities that could help their boards stand out to desirable candidates.

Generally, board compensation and attendance at global conferences aren’t the primary drivers that compel executives with data analytics or cyber-security experience to join boards, consultants say. However, on the margins, boards can optimize their recruiting efforts by making sure comp plans take into account the interests of younger, active executives and that onboarding and educational opportunities allow curious and intelligent but less seasoned board members to get a feel for an entirely different business or industry than the one they’re in.

“There is an element of board shopping that goes on,” says Hugh Shields, an executive coach who also works with board members at consulting firm Shields Meneley Partners.

Active executives, particularly those whose skill sets are highly coveted by boards, know they have “one shot” at an outside board seat, Shields says, so they try to find the best position they can. Executives will announce to colleagues and advisors that they’re interested in joining boards, visit the board practices divisions of search firms to get to know recruiters, and conduct their own networking to let board members know they’re looking for a seat, he says.

“There’s much more competition,” says Shields.

And while many aspiring directors are working hard to make themselves known to boards, it appears that many companies are creating similar wish lists for new board members, putting a premium on certain skill sets.

Among the 462 new directors who joined Fortune 500 boards in the past year, 55% were active executives and 42% had digital and social media or cyber-security expertise, according to a Heidrick & Struggles report.

A survey of 113 nominating and governance committee members conducted by Spencer Stuart found that the most high-priority recruiting profiles currently include women board candidates with technology experience. In three years, the profiles will also include minority candidates with digital and social media expertise, the survey found. Those skills will surpass financial and operational expertise, according to the results.

Therefore, many boards may be attempting to lure a lot of the same executives in the coming years, and the quest for board talent will grow increasingly heated. For some boards that have had recruiting challenges, directors may want to consider modifying their approaches.

Don Delves, managing director in executive compensation and practice leader for North America at Willis Towers Watson, points out that he sees a generational shift taking place as boards are recruiting more diverse directors. New board members, whom he calls “the human capital generation,” are more interested in workforces and question how people are valued by companies and the way organizations create shareholder and societal value. They also want to clearly understand what might be fascinating about a company and could interest them, he adds.

“They don’t hesitate to ask about the whole employee population and the whole pipeline of people moving through the company,” says Delves. Directors are asking, “Do you have the right people in the right places doing the right job?” he says. “That’s clearly a change that’s happening.”

Another Look at Equity

Directors aren’t primarily motivated by their compensation, and boards would be ill-advised to recruit a new member who was interested in a board seat simply for the money, says Dan Laddin, a founding partner at Compensation Advisory Partners (CAP). Most new directors are motivated to join a board if they believe they have the ability to contribute to the company they would be overseeing, and whether the work would be interesting to them.

Beyond those two screens, however, potential director candidates do want to understand how they will be compensated for their time, Laddin says. He notes that some of the active executives will be at different life stages than more traditional board members, with younger family situations, mortgages, school loans or children in college. Given that boards are attracting directors from a much broader pool of talent these days, board compensation becomes more meaningful than if the board were recruiting a former CEO, says Laddin. As boards diversify, they’re looking for a diversity of backgrounds in terms of career, which might also mean differences in wealth.

“The market for talent is highly competitive and companies can choose to compete or fall behind,” says Matt Vnuk, a principal at CAP. “One way to effectively compete for talent is through differentiation in compensation.”

A new director compensation report from CAP suggests that boards may want to revisit provisions allowing for initial equity awards to new directors. Initial equity awards have trended downward in recent years, but they could appeal to directors who are considering multiple invitations to join boards.

Among the 100 largest companies, 13 currently provide initial equity awards with a median value of $175,000, according to data from CAP. Vesting varies by company, CAP finds, with immediate or one-year vesting the most common schedule. An equity award upon election or appointment to the board can differentiate a director pay program in a way that ramps up new directors’ alignment with shareholders, Vnuk says.

“An initial award can make a lot of sense in attracting a candidate to your company versus another company,” Laddin says.

In addition, stock ownership guidelines, which have tended to grow more stringent as boards have adopted hold-until-retirement or hold-until-after-retirement requirements, could also be revisited, CAP suggests in its report. Directors could be required to hold stock until their holdings are equivalent to a five-times multiple of the annual cash retainer, for instance, rather than holding stock until they leave the board.

If a director joins a board and is paid half in cash and half in equity and is required to hold the equity until they leave the board, that means they’re only earning roughly 25% of their total compensation because they’ll be required to pay taxes on the cash compensation, points out Laddin. Having access to the other portion of their board compensation could be valuable to an actively employed board member who is at an earlier stage of their life and career, he says.

“If you can use compensation in a way to differentiate yourself in the recruiting process in away that remains very responsible, that’s certainly a plus,” says Vnuk.

Director Education

In addition, other issues to consider include onboarding and director education opportunities, says Delves. Once pay is competitive, it may not make a difference to some executives, he notes.

However, if a board can emphasize the importance of the job and provide opportunities to take in-depth corporate governance courses at top universities, a membership with the National Association of Corporate Directors or a subscription to board-director-focused publications, for example, an active executive could be interested in the opportunity to dive headfirst into learning about corporate governance.

In addition, Delves says that director orientation programs should be organized to allow executives the chance to visit company headquarters and offsite plants and locations and talk with executives and learn everything they can to immerse themselves in the company they’ll be overseeing.

In addition, boards benefit when directors bring broader perspectives into the boardroom, he says. Attending conferences or traveling to the Aspen Institute or the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, helps board members stay on the cutting edge while also bringing ideas back to the boardroom. Depending on the amount of time a director has and the board budget for education, one conference or event per new director could provide an interesting education component to board membership.

“Some of them are already making a lot of money,” says Delves. “What can you do to make it interesting and a whole fascinating adventure for them to take on that’s different from their daily lives?”

Originally Posted:

Senior Executive Churn Continues to Increase

According to Government statistics, Liberum Research and ADP’s November Employment Report there are positive signs for increasing hiring and executive turnover. In particular, we have noticed an increase in executive turnover for a few months in a row which makes us bullish for executives in a career transition. Liberum reports executive turnover totals were positive in the year to year November 2014 to the month of November 2014. For November 2014 increases in turnover occured in all four key categories. CEO changes increased 5% from November a year earlier, CFO changes increased 23%, C-level changes increased 5%, and board of director changes increased 2%. Liberum anticipates executive turnover will continue to grow as we move into the winter and the early spring which, if true, will bode well for the overall North American economies.

For more information contact:

  • Liberum Research – The largest database of C-level executive change at public companies. Frequently quoted in the financial press, Liberum helps investors monitor this important, continuous stream of investment events.
  • ADP – provides comprehensive payroll services, employee benefits administration and human capital management solutions for businesses of all sizes.

Rock, Paper, Scissors

As an executive you have had a career of making decisions based on your experience and available knowledge. At times, you considered the opinion of others; at other times you had to go it alone. You probably never relied on the childhood game of “Rock, Paper, Scissors” to help you make a decision. So as a time-tested executive that has won his share of business battles and hopefully learned from those that you did not win, what benefit would an executive coach be to you at this point in your career?

From coaching over 300 senior executives we have found three reasons why you might consider the idea that executive coaching is not just for your junior subordinates.

  • in a corporation does an executive feel more alone more exercised than
    at the senior level. Do you wonder if people are responding to you because of their own motivations and think first about how you would respond to their comments before they state them? An executive coach who is not part of the corporation can give you unbiased feedback where you don’t have to worry that the motivation is nothing more than to teach you something and improve your work performance.
  • a negative experience of someone sharing confidential information about him at some point in his career. The unique relationship that you have your coach ensures confidentiality of your discussion.
  • executive himself or herself can compare and contrast your thoughts and behaviors against other senior executives without fear of it affecting your job.


The specific content for coaching derives from many sources. But, the predominant themes have to do with dealing with peers, communicating more effectively with younger subordinates with diverse backgrounds and working with boards.

Senior executives have been finding that different skills are required for success than a generation ago. The demands of a changing work force and more active boards are two major changes we have noticed in the past ten years. It used to be enough to just do the job, to get results. Are you used to telling people what to do, but find that people don’t listen to you as they did before? Increased focus on teams to solve problems has required executives to be more participative in their management styles, rather than just be authority figures. Further, executives need to be more aware of what they say and whom they sit it to. For obvious reasons how the senior executive behaves and what he says has a ripple effect throughout an organization. The behavior may not represent a legal problem, but it could be an effectiveness issue for dealing with a diverse work force.

Sarbanes-Oxley has caused boards to be more active and this has required new skills for the senior executive. Are you spending more individual time with board members to get to know them better and for them to learn about you? Many executives are less successful managing up than down and recent changes in corporate governance have caused executives to rethink how they are dealing with boards. We have spoken with more than one executive who has lost his job, not because he didn’t produce results, but because he did not manage the board problem. In a nutshell, he did not spend the time to communicate individually with board members. Executive coaching can help the executive learn effective ways of dealing with these complex and significant board relationships.

“Rock, Paper, Scissors” is a decision making game of wits, speed, dexterity and strategy between players who are unable to reach a decision using other means. While this childhood game is a way of simplifying the decision making process, there is only one winner. We have found that successful senior executives are extremely good at managing multiple demands and resolving conflict so that there is not just one winner. However, we have also found that senior executives by the very nature of their position are often alone in making decisions. Further, the demands on them are greater than ever before as they have to deal with an increasingly diverse work-force with competing interests. Whether it is dealing with subordinates, peers or board relationships, the confidential relationship with an executive coach can help you rely on sound judgment based on unbiased, comparative information where more people than one wins and there is an enhanced desire to work together tomorrow.

C-Suite Churn and What it Means for Job-Seeking Executives

An article by Thomas Black (“HP, GM CEO exits buck ‘C-suite churn’ falling to five-year low”, August 16, 2010) in the Washington Post ( analyzes recent data on C-suite churn from Liberum, the executive employment data firm that I have mentioned in prior blogs. The conclusion mentioned in this article is despite the news of some recent high profile CEO departures, it is not thought that we will see a significant increase in the number of CEO’s leaving companies for
performance reasons. The idea is similar to what we have seen through our own research. But, Hugh Shields adds “the writer calls this drop a five year low.  In fact, it’s a much longer span of time than that.” Hugh reasons that the author bases his conclusions on the Liberum data, but “he does not account for the fact that the firm has only be in existence for five years and that is the extent of their data collection.” He suspects that “this is the lowest churn rate in decades.”

The author quotes a variety of sources reinforcing the idea that boards have become quite

conservative with respect to making CEO changes. Gail Meneley is quoted “directors prefer to shake up top management in good times and stick with “the devil they know” during a recession.” We see that there are a few trends that will affect CEO candidates:

  1. An emphasis on companies looking strongly at internal candidates rather than being enticed by the sirens call of “the grass is greener. ” Being an outsider is now a disadvantage.
  2. CEOs are retiring at a lower rate or being less willing to make a change than in prior years. There are fewer open positions.
  3. Boards that usually are reluctant to change a CEO for moderate performance reasons have become even more conservative because of the bad economy. Again, less opportunity to position yourself as being different.
  4. Recruiters say to us that companies are taking a much longer time to determine who they want to hire, such that they may take six months to reach a decision, about twice as long as in recent years, to ensure they make the right choice. They are using a “check off the boxes” approach to making a decision. We have seen otherwise highly qualified candidates, not get hired because he did not have something that would not even have been on the list in the past.

Finally, we believe that turnover will probably stay low into 2011 as the strength of the recovery remains in question. What does mean for an unemployed C-suite candidate? It is important to recalibrate your time frame and expectations. For many, this career transition period will be longer than in times past. For others, that job you have in your sights is really a mirage. So, we recommend two ideas: First, you need to diversify your target companies and industries. Our client data shows that over our 15 years, the majority of clients who stayed in a similar industry and functional responsibility were hired by a larger company than in their previous position. But, we believe that instead of looking at a similar sized or larger company, you should now consider a smaller firm and companies in related industries. Second, think differently. We have had three clients in the last year start their own firms. In each case they came to the conclusion that this was an ideal time to go after that dream. While you will want to invest a certain
percent of your time in researching and networking into the formerly “expected” job, you should consider spending at least a quarter of your time exploring these other options. You may find this to be time well spent. (by Daniel J. DeWitt, PhD)

A CEO Gets a Rare Second Act

Joseph Galli was a client of Shields Meneley Partners advisor, Gail Meneley, after he was terminated from his role as chief executive officer at Newell Rubbermaid, Inc. There is an article about Joe and
their work together in the February 3, 2009 Wall Street Journal titled “A CEO Gets a Rare Second Act” which was written by Joann S. Lublin.

When Joe left Newell he thought that he was immediately ready for another
CEO position. Joann points out “the lessons that propelled Mr. Galli to
the top of the corporate world proved less useful in selling himself to a
new employer. Instead, he encountered a paradox known to many
out-of-work CEOs: Though they are driven like few others to succeed, once they fail, many don’t get a second chance to run a public company.”

This article discusses Joe’s story and Gail’s involvement in helping prepare him for another role leading a company. While a client of Shields Meneley Partners, Joe completed a thorough assessment of his
drivers, needs, competencies … what made him successful and unsuccessful. They identified what type of corporate culture would be a “best-fit” for him to achieve success again. Gail and Joe worked through
what they considered to be his undoing — poor relations with fellow Newell directors. He says Gail helped him recognize that “boards want to feel they’re part of the [decision-making] process.” Gail says Joe
typifies failed CEOs who “believed they had all the answers.” Joe became CEO of Techtronic in February 2008. I recommend that you read this most interesting article. (by Daniel J. DeWitt, PhD)