When a company's key financial metrics such as Net Profit After Tax (NPAT), Profit Before Tax (PBT), Revenue, Earnings Per Share (EPS), and debtor's days fail to meet expectations over a year or two, the spotlight inevitably falls on the CEO. The question arises: is this a case of misconduct or incapacity?

Identifying the Root Causes

A CEO's performance is influenced by a myriad of factors, both external and internal. Externally, political, economic, social, technological, environmental, and legislative changes can all impact a company's performance. Internally, factors such as employee performance, shareholder influence, and operational efficiencies play a significant role.

No-Fault Incapacity

In some cases, events beyond a CEO's control, such as the KZN riots and flooding, may have a significant impact on the company's performance. These are considered "no-fault" situations. Here, the CEO is not at fault for the non-performance but is expected to develop contingencies and provisions for future similar events. This may include obtaining specific insurance coverage, incorporating force majeure clauses in commercial agreements, and taking other proactive steps.

Misconduct and Negligence

On the other hand, if a CEO fails to act according to the Board's mandate to mitigate future disruptions, it may point to negligence and, consequently, misconduct. A CEO's failure to take necessary actions, despite clear directives, can be detrimental to the company's resilience and long-term success.

Incompatibility and values/culture Misalignment

Often, non-performance may stem from a deeper issue of incompatibility between the CEO and the core values and culture of the company. This misalignment can lead to decisions and strategies that do not resonate with the company's direction, leading to poor results. Such cases of incompatibility are being discussed at the National Economic Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC) and may soon be recognized under Schedule 8 as incapacity due to poor performance.

Moving Forward

It is clear that non-performance cannot continue unchecked. A thorough analysis is essential to understand the predominant root causes. Only then can appropriate measures be taken, whether it's addressing incapacity through strategic planning and risk management or dealing with misconduct through corrective action.

In conclusion, distinguishing between misconduct and incapacity is crucial for any organization facing CEO non-performance. It ensures that the response is fair, just, and tailored to the specific circumstances, ultimately guiding the company back to a path of growth and success. However, don’t wait until it is too late.