Talk:Corporate title/Archives/2012

Variations

This section is so wrong:

"Corporate titles are sometimes given more for prestige than out of any differentiation in job function. For example, at CIBC and BMO Financial Group, the position of Chief Operating Officer (COO) was created solely to facilitate the transition, as a means of grooming the future CEO before the current CEO retired. The division head (perhaps Executive Vice President or CEO of a division) is promoted to COO and takes over day-to-day and strategic planning, while the outgoing CEO is relegated to advisory duties. Once the new CEO formally takes power, the COO position is not replaced."

That is not about prestige. That is a proper use of the titles and a logical way to transition a new CEO. The COO is responsible for the operations, in the example above it gave this person experience at running the whole company. But the CEO is responsible for all strategic decisions. There is a difference between a CEO and COO/CAO/President. Most people do not know this, and may see it only as prestige, but that is incorrect.

This part of the section is also wrong:

"Executive Vice President is most frequently used to refer to a division head, however this position can also be know as Vice Chairman, or even President and CEO of the division, depending upon corporation structure, especially in the latter case when it is operated as a wholely-owned subsidiary instead of an internal division."

I have never heard of a Vice President being called a Vice Chairman instead. The role of Chairman is completely different than President or Vice-President. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.175.222 (talk) 16:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree. I believe that the titles Chairman and President are titles used in different perspectives? Chairman, Vice Chairman and variations are usually used in conjunction with Board titles i.e. Chairman, Vice Chair of the Board whilst President , Vice President and such derivatives are used in an executive capacity and mainly in international organisations such as Unilever, Proctor & Gamble, American Express.

Anecdotal experience suggests that organisations, irrespective of size who are single culture based will usually stick to one of the derivatives e.g. UK based organisations rarely use the term President and its derivatives. They usually stick to the terms Chairman, Vice Chair, Deputy Chair etc. whereas American based organisations who do not have a UK presence usually use President, Vice President and its derivatives. Perhaps the use of both terms i.e. Chairman and President suggest Anglo-American influence? For instance American Express, Unilever and Procter & Gamble use both variations whereas I am yet to see any UK organisation, solely based in the UK using both terms.

Sean