Probably one of the greatest challenges facing any business is that of staffing and growth. Are you strategic and hire people in advance of the absolute need, or do you wait till the company is struggling to achieve its goals before you add to your pool? And even more so, do you hire people who are experts in their area (and therefore pay significantly more) or do you hire someone who will grow into their position? It becomes even more complex when there are family members who want a piece of the pie.
Many mid-market companies are family oriented. Some companies become a family affair, and as the business passes from one generation to the next, more and more of the family get involved in its operation. The decision of whether to hire relatives is complex and fraught with conflict. Will they solidly contribute to the betterment of the company, or did they climb aboard the gravy train just to have a comfortable ride? Sometimes the answer is obvious, sometimes it only becomes apparent on the heels of major company change.
The business had grown significantly since its inception. From a local brand, they had expanded not only across the country, but into Europe, Africa and South America. The owner, who was very family oriented, had hired many relatives to lead the various departments and divisions of the company. Each was independently run by the various family members, with overall direction and financial control by the company CEO. When the founder suddenly passed away, leadership was given to the number 2 son, who had previously been involved in the marketing of the company’s products. With the father’s financial controls no longer in place, the company had gotten into financial trouble.
When the patriarch passed away, there was a lot of scrambling for position. His wife named her most accomplished son as President. He had never previously had a role with that much responsibility, and the many family members took advantage of his inexperience by telling him that his father had promised significant raises for all of them prior to his passing. As a result of the other operational pressures he was facing, the new president agreed to the raises, putting a large additional financial burden on the company.
Before the loss of the founder, there were no plans made for who would direct the company when he was gone. Now the gap was painfully obvious. He hadn’t taken the time to train his son to take over in the event of his untimely death. The company needed to make some decisions about who was going to run the company not just for the short term, but in coming years, and future generations. The issue became whether the family was going to become a passive investor or remain active, managing the family’s primary asset.
Running a company that you’ve built from the ground up is difficult, and it doesn’t necessarily become easier over time. But making plans to exit can be even more difficult. These plans should be made over a period of years, not overnight. Usually though, it is some event that forces a change in management. Whether the CEO suddenly dies, or there is some other event that causes an abrupt change of direction, the result is still the same. The company hierarchy and operations are thrown into unfamiliar territory.
With a family-owned business, these changes impact not only the company, but the family dynamic as well. A relative that is well liked isn’t necessarily the one that should be making the decisions about how to operate the family’s livelihood. These are pragmatic decisions that need to be thoughtfully made. And the best plan is likely one that is laid out by the hierarchy of the family, many of whom depend on the company not just for their weekly salary, but for their long-term financial future as well.
Our people are unique CFOs. They are all operationally
based financial executives.
Created Custom For Your Company By an Experienced CFO