BA have a newly promoted CEO. Appointed, presumably, due to his long-standing tenure and track record. He’s popular with staff. Something, allegedly, his predecessor wasn’t. I wonder what other evidence confirmed his suitability for this step up? Was there a rigorous system in place to identify his leadership qualities for this high-profile role? Let’s hope so. Not employing an evidence-based process has consequences. TSB have just announced their 6th CEO in nine years.
What can we learn?
Appointments made on instinct and gut feel are commonplace. But using these alone is fraught with danger. There are many supplementary tools and methods to help. Challenge initial thoughts with facts and knowledge. Gather evidence before deciding.
