1. When a company is in obvious trouble, such as when it has been losing money or significant market share, a new CEO is expected to make changes that will put the company back on track. In such a case, the anxiety among employees and stockholders is not whether changes will be made, but rather, what types of changes will be implemented. When a company does not have significant obvious problems however, a new CEO may generates anxiety among employees and stockholders as to whether he or she will implement changes, and if so, what form those changes will take.
The hypothetical firm under discussion falls into the latter category: it is profitable, it has a history of success, and although it is not a leader in its field, it has a reputation for excellence. Each of the company's previous CEOs brought changes to the organization based on their managerial styles, and these changes have been largely successful. Thus the organization is familiar with the idea that new CEOs can bring strategic changes to the organization.
Before accepting the position, I would research the company to learn as much about it as I can. This research would include publicly available sources, as well as conversations with individuals who interact with the company. Do they pay their bills on time? What is their employee morale? What are the obvious strengths and weaknesses of the company, and what opportunities and threats do they face? Once I have learned the answers to these questions, I am likely to have an opinion about the direction that I think is appropriate for the company, or whether the company should continue on its present course.
If I accept the position, I would want to listen to my senior managers about their vision for the organization. These individuals have contributed to the current success of the company, and they may have strong ideas about the direction in which the company should head. Also, I prefer a consensus style of ...