Hello from Hamburg,
In an exaggerated vision, political scientist Moritz Rudolph describes the working world of the future, in which machines increasingly take the upper hand over humans, as follows: "(The) muscle power (of humans) is no longer in demand. Neither will their administrative and organizational skills. Even as service providers, humans will take a back seat. They will have to limit themselves to three areas: A few engineers are noble assistants to the machines. They will be protected by a few bodyguards and doctors who will organize trouble-free operation. And then there are (many) people who either have nothing to do or cultivate a higher form of idleness by working as atmospheric technicians...". There is no longer a company management in this new world. An algorithm takes over strategic and operational decisions and, according to the bold thesis, does this better than any human could. So why do we still need management?
Intelligent machines, digital transformation, reorganization of markets - the upheavals we are currently experiencing are shedding new light on the demands placed on those who bear responsibility at the top of companies. John Chambers, long-time Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of Cisco, put it in a nutshell back in 2017: if a CEO does not understand the profound market changes in detail and does not reinvent himself every three to five years, he will not survive. Consequently, Chambers spent a lot of time with start-ups in order to better understand new and creative ideas. Is this a plea for more innovators and experts at the top of companies? And at the same time a rejection of the long-held premise that CEOs and CEO spokespeople should be generalist strategists whose main task is to put the right people in the right place and ensure that they work together optimally?
The latest research seems to confirm the rebirth of experts and operational innovators at the top of companies. A group of researchers led by Harvard professor Boris Groysberg conducted numerous interviews with CEOs and supervisory board members. The CEOs were and are directly operationally involved in innovation processes for new products and services in addition to overarching management tasks. They have a deep understanding of their products and services, their innovation potential and their markets. With their love of product detail and customer needs, they inspire their colleagues with whom they work as part of a team. This is evident in tech companies, which are currently experiencing particular leaps in innovation, as recently demonstrated by the excitement surrounding the Chinese AI company DeepSeek, which is showing the American top dogs of artificial intelligence how to build large language models much faster and cheaper. All CEOs in the tech industry have published technical papers, developed patents and thus personally driven the technological development of their products; led by Steve Jobs with 620 personal patents or a 3.2% share of all patents developed by Apple (up to 2018); closely followed by Jeff Bezos (Amazon), Bill Gates (Microsoft), Serge Brin, Larry Page (Google) and Elon Musk (Tesla).
But even beyond the tech giants and driven by the digital transformation of all industries, there seems to be a growing trend towards CEO profiles that are characterized by practical curiosity and a detailed interest in the product. Even sales without their own technological know-how seems less and less conceivable. Groysberg and his colleagues point out that passion for the product will also have an impact on succession planning. Supervisory boards should pay more attention to the candidate's performance as an expert and in production when filling management positions. The vision of the new world of work described above reinforces this trend: anyone who does not understand intelligent machines will not be able to lead a company whose future depends on a forward-looking approach to technological development. There is still a lot to do before managers are replaced by machines.
Have you observed a similar shift in the profile of managing directors in your environment, from strategists to experts? And from sales to product competence?
