Succession dilemma
Have you ever worked for a company that was run by visionary then taken over by an executor?
One of the most important questions to answer when you are managing succession of a company, an account lead, a manager is what type of leadership style would be the most effective given the state of the business and the future focus on the company. The dilemma facing many when an innovative leader leaves is strategic: Do we still want to be an innovative, risk taking company? Or should we now focus on execution of our core business?
Having witnessed this first hand my advice is to have eyes wide open when looking at succession: Innovation leads, in most companies, are replaced by executors. There are benefits and risks to this strategy (some are obvious). Uber will be a great case to watch. Travis Kalanick was an inventor. He was brilliant, but clearly he had faults that could not be overlooked. Now that he has resigned it will be important to understand how they replace him but also his senior board. The fear is that he will not be replaced by a revolutionary, but more of a manager of the brand and that the company will become obsolete by new entries that can replicate the tech and experience...and not pivot fast enough. More on this topic can be found on Steve Blanks site
(For the record - working for a visionary is much more interesting)
I