In conclusion, one interesting slant on the situation is that with such rewarding incentive schemes for senior managers if they receive the sack, where are the personal incentives for them to excel whilst in the organisation? Although failure is not dealt with as in a more learning organisation, there still exist personal benefits. In some ways it is a win-win situation for CEOs. They pull in a huge salary if they succeed, and if they don't they still get handsomely compensated. GSK's CEO who infamously had an improved salary package recently voted down by shareholders after he asked for additional millions in bonuses to remain motivated, is one somewhat cheeky illustrative example. There are of course no standard prescriptive rules, as we have seen. WS Atkins and AWG both seem to have fanned the flames and reignited the row over rewards for failure, whilst Dixons although seemingly following suit are, on closer inspection, not quite so under the microscope - at least for now. The debate over payoffs for failing CEOs will no doubt continue for the foreseeable as different stakeholders grind their respective axes, but with growing concerns over issues of governance being bandied about perhaps severance deals will eventually become more regulated. Who knows for sure? One thing that is for certain is that the issue of perception is all-pervading here. One man's success is another man's failure, and the dividing line is purely subjective. How performance is judged, rewarded, condemned or congratulated is simply in the eye of the beholder(s); and that for certain will never change.…
