Connect with us

Business

Inside the Fortune 500 CEO pressure cooker: Surviving harder than ever and requires an ‘odd combination’

Published

on



Thompson, chairman of the Chief Executive Alliance and previously ranked as the world’s top CEO coach, and Loflin, Nasdaq’s Global Head of Board Advisory, joined forces to provide a 360-view of this loaded moment for leadership, from the C-suite and board perspectives, respectively. In a wide-ranging conversation with Fortune, they talked about the Shakespearean themes of leadership and turmoil and the feeling that “heavy is the head that wears the crown.”

For those aspiring to reach the top, Thompson shared the conventional wisdom he’d learned from his mentor, Marshall Goldsmith: “What got you here got you halfway there.” (Goldsmith had a New York Times bestseller in 2007 with What Got You Here Won’t Get You There.)

The transition from being a high-performing executive in a “swim lane” to having the “aperture of having a full enterprise” requires substantial new learning and skill development, Thompson argued, because no matter how great an executive you are or how prepared you think you might be, the stakes are existentially high. The risk that a CEO might “lose his or her head within the next year or so” is “easily like 20% or at the big brands It feels like it’s twice that,” said Thompson, who recently penned an essay on the subject of CEO “decapitation” for Fortune.

Adding to this pressure, Thompson and Loflin added, is the radical shift in board member expectations. Board members, who once might have been “golf buddies,” are now “really under the gun to perform.” They are “less patient” and expected to “actually deliver,” based on their subject matter expertise.

This environment demands nearly every candidate be ready to serve as a “peacetime in a wartime CEO,” Thompson said, capable of harvesting the best aspects of the company culture while also being “disrupting and breaking new ground.” An executive promoted from a functional role, such as a CFO, may possess the “gravitas of understanding the street and the shareholders,” but often lacks the breadth to “light hearts and minds” across the workforce, or do “ride-alongs with customers.”

The loneliness of the tower, and ‘relationology’

Fortune has been tracking this tenuous moment for leaders throughout 2025. Top recruitment firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas found 1,235 CEOs had left (or lost) their jobs through the first half of 2025, a stunning 12% increase from 2024 and the highest year-to-date total since Challenger began tracking CEO turnover in 2002.

Jim Rossman, Barclays’ global head of shareholder advisory, who’s been closely tracking shareholder activism for decades, similarly found record activist-linked turnover at the top for 2025. “It feels like what activists have done is basically [to hold] public companies to the standards of private equity,” Rossman told Fortune in a previous interview, as they have come to view the CEO “more as an operator, not somebody who’s risen through the ranks.” In other words: Results matter.

The intense environment contributes to feelings of isolation. As CEOs often note, being the boss is a lonely job where leaders are caught in the middle, with information they cannot share with reports but must share with the board, creating a huge information asymmetry, as Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella previously told McKinsey.

Carolyn Dewar, the co-leader and founder of McKinsey’s CEO Practice, previously told Fortune that “No one else in your organization or above you, like your board or your investors, see all the pieces you see.” She advocated for leaders to surround themselves with trusted advisors—“a kitchen cabinet” of sorts.

Similarly, Loflin told Fortune he’s fond of the concept of “relationology,” which he describes as “sort of a study of relationships.” He suggested leaders must develop a “portfolio of relationships of intimacy” that are “very context-relevant.” A leader’s effectiveness hinges on having fluency, for instance, when speaking to a CFO about analyst days, or working with a compliance team to keep the business safe or connecting authentically with union executives. Loflin said he’s often seen it being a “big surprise” to accomplished leaders that they have, say, seven different groups they need to engage and maybe as many as six new skills to really flesh out before they’re ready to take the enterprise to the next level.

This need for deep, context-aware connection also applies to personal life, Loflin added. The idea that a personal life and professional life can be entirely separate “undermines leadership and undermines the fabric of a company.” Critically, Loflin said, the chair must really know his CEO “at a deep level, like a Shakespearean level,” requiring a transparency that ensures appropriate accountability. After all, Loflin noted as one example, boards have to be mindful that a personal relationship that violates company policy can jeopardize corporate governance at the drop of a hat. The board really needs to know who their CEO is, maybe better than the CEO knows themselves.

The power and the privilege, the hubris and the humility

Loflin, who admitted to Fortune that he’s a bit of a Shakespeare nerd, noted the difference between a tragedy and a comedy is determined by “the vulnerability and the self-awareness of the protagonist,” and a tragic outcome results from a feeling he likened to “never recognizing whether I needed to grow or change.”

Thompson added that surviving as a CEO requires an “odd combination” of traits you might read in a Greek tragedy: hubris and humility.

The CEO must possess the hubris, or excessive pride, to believe they can be the best in their field, but also the profound humility that acknowledges they can’t do it alone.

The professional mandate is relentless, Thompson added, citing a key interview for the book from Qualcomm CEO Cristiano Amon: if you were the “same guy you were a year ago, you don’t deserve to be promoted.” Thompson said he thinks of hubris of being at “the edge of your competence, so rather than retreating, you actually should lean into that” to acquire the skills and help you need to keep growing as a professional.

For top leaders, Thompson said, the top job is not a prize to be won, but a “privilege to do this role.” Just as Olympic athletes must constantly improve, he added, leaders must recognize that breaking a record only attracts more competition.

Loflin urged boards and executives alike to move beyond a Wolf of Wall Street mindset and into “what it means to authentically care for and build the confidence and foster appropriate accountability.” He said that for many executives, admitting you have areas to improve on and get better at is a “special vulnerability.” He argued boards need more genuine, interpersonal affection—sometimes of the tough love variety—is needed to prevent a truly Shakespearean tragedy on their watch.

Loflin said he’d just had breakfast with a board director for a $30 billion company and the subject of love arose: “Do you love your management team?” The director said yes, definitely, almost like relatives. After all, they had been with the company over a decade and come to have deep relationships with other directors and their C-suite. Loflin argued that over decades of advising boards on corporate governance, he wishes more would adopt this sort of attitude.

“I don’t think it’s going to hurt anything in business because a good father has to talk to a troubled son, hopefully he’s mentoring when [the son is] getting himself in trouble.” After all, Loflin continued, “bad stuff happens, and I think some of these metaphors are important.” In other words, it shouldn’t be the Wolf of Wall Street, but the wolf—or the activist—is always at the door.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Pepsi to cut product offering nearly 20% in deal with $4 billion activist Elliott

Published

on



PepsiCo plans to cut prices and eliminate some of its products under a deal with an activist investor announced Monday.

The Purchase, New York-based company, which makes Cheetos, Tostitos and other Frito-Lay products as well as beverages, said it will cut nearly 20% of its product offerings by early next year. PepsiCo said it will use the savings to invest in marketing and improved value for consumers. It didn’t disclose which products or how much it would cut prices.

PepsiCo said it also plans to accelerate the introduction of new offerings with simpler and more functional ingredients, including Doritos Protein and Simply NKD Cheetos and Doritos, which contain no artificial flavors or colors. The company also recently introduced a prebiotic version of its signature cola.

PepsiCo is making the changes after prodding from Elliott Investment Management, which took a $4 billion stake in the company in September. In a letter to PepsiCo’s board, Elliott said the company is being hurt by a lack of strategic clarity, decelerating growth and eroding profitability in its North American food and beverage businesses.

In a joint statement with PepsiCo Monday, Elliott Partner Marc Steinberg said the firm is confident that PepsiCo can create value for shareholders as it executes on its new plan.

“We appreciate our collaborative engagement with PepsiCo’s management team and the urgency they have demonstrated,” Steinberg said. “We believe the plan announced today to invest in affordability, accelerate innovation and aggressively reduce costs will drive greater revenue and profit growth.”

Elliott said it plans to continue working closely with the company.

PepsiCo shares were flat in after-hours trading Monday.

PepsiCo said it expects organic revenue to grow between 2% and 4% in 2026. The company’s organic revenue rose 1.5%. the first nine months of this year.

PepsiCo also said it plans to review its supply chain and continue to make changes to its board, with a focus on global leaders who can help it reach its growth and profitability goals.

“We feel encouraged about the actions and initiatives we are implementing with urgency to improve both marketplace and financial performance,” PepsiCo Chairman and CEO Ramon Laguarta said in a statement.

PepsiCo said in February that years of double-digit price increases and changing customer preferences have weakened demand for its drinks and snacks. In July, the company said it was trying to combat perceptions that its products are too expensive by expanding distribution of value brands like Chester’s and Santitas.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Paramount rips Warner’s sale ‘process’ as it reveals 2-year-long pursuit and escalating bids before going hostile

Published

on



Paramount Skydance’s tender offer for Warner Bros. Discovery emerged from months of fitful courtship, a shifting media landscape, and a high‑stakes bidding war that ultimately pitted the studio behind “Top Gun: Maverick” against streaming giant Netflix for control of one of Hollywood’s crown jewels. The company’s tender offer regulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, filed hours after Paramount launched a hostile bid worth $108 billion (or $77.9 billion in equity), laid out a detailed chronology in which Paramount repeatedly tried to lure Warner Bros., to no avail. Netflix and Warner Bros. agreed a deal worth nearly $83 billion ($72 billion in equity) on Friday.

The filing revealed Paramount CEO’s last-ditch text message to WBD counterpart David Zaslav at roughly 4pm ET on December 4, the day before Netflix ultimately announced its deal, as previously reported by the Financial Times. Daivd [sic], I appreciate you’re underwater today so I wanted to send you a quick text. Please note when you next meet as a board we wanted to offer you a package that addressed all of the issues you discussed we [sic] me,” David Ellison wrote as he apparently felt his target slipping away.

“Also please know despite the noise of the last 24 hours I have nothing but respect and admiration for you and the company,” Ellison added. “It would be the honor of a lifetime to be your partner and to be the owner of these iconic assets. If we have the privilege to work together you will see that my father and I are the people you had dinner with. We are always loyal and honorable to our partners and hope we have the opportunity to prove that to you. Best, David.” Later that day, Paramount sent Zaslav a letter criticizing a “tainted” sale process.

Paramount told investors today that it continued to believe it was never taken seriously. “During the entirety of the sale ‘process’ undertaken by the Warner Bros. Board, representatives of Warner Bros. did not provide a single markup of a single transaction document, have a single meeting to go page-by-page through the documents, or engage in a ‘real time’ back-and-forth negotiation with Paramount or its advisors.”

Early outreach in 2023

In 2023 and 2024, Paramount’s predecessor, Paramount Global, and Warner Bros. held intermittent talks about a possible merger, but those conversations ended without a deal as Paramount Global moved instead to merge with Skydance, under the control of current CEO Ellison. After that transaction closed in August 2025, Paramount’s new leadership revisited the idea of combining with Warner Bros., concluding that a tie‑up could create a stronger, scaled competitor to streaming platforms and big technology companies, according to the SEC filing.​

The urgency increased in June 2025 when Warner Bros. publicly unveiled plans to split itself in two, targeting completion by mid‑2026, a strategy it continued to defend through early autumn. Paramount believed this breakup would destroy value and make any future full-company acquisition far harder, so it decided to move quickly, seeing a narrow window to buy all of Warner Bros. before the separation took effect.​

Paramount’s escalating proposals

By early September 2025, the filing noted, media reports surfaced that Paramount was preparing an offer, helping push Warner Bros.’ share price sharply higher from a pre‑rumor closing price of $12.54—it was trading at $19.46 by September 15, the day after Paramount offered $19 per share in cash and stock.​ (The New York Times reported on the secret bids from Paramount in October.)

Warner Bros. rejected that approach within days, saying the bid undervalued the company and that its own breakup plan promised better long‑term value. Paramount responded on September 30 with an improved offer worth $22 a share, primarily in cash, and went further on deal protections, including a $2 billion termination fee and a commitment to litigate to secure antitrust clearance, while also dangling roles for Zaslav as co-CEO and co-Chairman of the board of the combined company.​

Warner Bros. rebuffed this proposal as well, again calling it inadequate and insisting its planned separation remained superior, a stance that only hardened Paramount’s view that the board was underestimating the industrial logic of a combination. In October, Warner Bros. publicly announced a wider review of “strategic alternatives,” signaling that it would run a formal sale process and had received interest from multiple parties in both the whole company and specific assets such as its streaming arm.​

Paramount attempted to enter that process on more favorable terms, pushing back on an initial Warner Bros. confidentiality agreement that included a lengthy standstill, tight controls on financing contacts and waivers of potential legal claims about the sale. Its advisers negotiated for a shorter standstill, “most‑favored‑nation” treatment versus other bidders, and freedom to challenge the process if Warner Bros. ultimately retreated to its separation plan, underscoring deep mistrust over how the auction might be run.​

Due diligence and financing ramp-up

As the process unfolded, Paramount was granted limited access to a virtual data room, which it viewed as “sparsely populated” given the size and complexity of a potential deal. In mid‑November, Warner Bros. hosted an in‑person management presentation in California, while antitrust lawyers for both sides met to assess regulatory risks and lay out arguments that a Paramount–Warner Bros. merger would be pro‑competitive in a market dominated by tech‑backed streaming giants.​

Parallel to those talks, Paramount’s board set up a special committee of independent directors to vet a large equity infusion from the Ellison family and private‑equity firm RedBird. Paramount also locked in a $54 billion senior secured bridge facility led by Wall Street banks.

A bidding war with Netflix

On November 20, Paramount submitted another improved proposal, lifting its implied offer to $25.50 a share, heavily weighted to cash and backed by signed debt commitments and promised equity. That bid included a $5 billion regulatory reverse breakup fee and more aggressive litigation undertakings, signaling Paramount’s willingness to fight regulators if required to close the transaction.​ (Netflix committed to a $5.8 billion breakup fee in its winning bid, which Bloomberg reported is among the highest of all time.)

Even as Paramount sweetened its terms, public commentary suggested some influential Warner Bros. figures saw Netflix as a more attractive partner, particularly for its pure‑play streaming focus and global reach. During a particular November 13 interview on CNBC, WBD chairman emeritus John Malone questioned Paramount’s intervention and discussed the merits of a Netflix deal, adding to market speculation that Warner Bros. leadership might prefer a streaming‑first tie‑up over a legacy‑studio merger.​

Netflix deal and Paramount’s pivot to a tender

The process culminated on December 4, 2025, when Warner Bros. signed a merger agreement with Netflix that would see Netflix acquire Warner Bros.’ streaming businesses after a complicated internal reorganization and spin‑off of other assets. That deal offered cash and Netflix stock with headline value of about $27.75 per share but included adjustments tied to spin‑off net debt and a 21‑month outer closing date.​

Paramount responded the same day with what it calls its “Prior Proposal,” a merger agreement valuing Warner Bros. at $30 a share in straight cash, with what it argues are stronger regulatory commitments, a shorter outside date and no price haircut tied to balance‑sheet mechanics. When Warner Bros. nevertheless chose the Netflix deal, Paramount concluded that the board had opted for an “obviously financially inferior transaction with extraordinary regulatory risk and a longer timeline to a possible closing,” and decided its only route was to go directly to shareholders.​

Calls to Paramount, WBD, and Netflix to comment on the events as laid out in the filing were not immediately returned. We will update this post with any response.

Editor’s note: the author worked for Netflix from June 2024 through July 2025.

For this story, Fortune journalists used generative AI as a research tool. An editor verified the accuracy of the information before publishing.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Cursor internal AI Help Desk handles 80% of employees’ support tickets

Published

on



AI coding-assistant start-up Cursor isn’t just using artificial intelligence to help developers write code, it’s deploying AI across its own internal operations, CEO, Michael Truell, told the audience at Fortune’s Brainstorm AI in San Francisco.

Truell said the company had already automated roughly 80% of its customer support tickets with the help of the technology. He said the company had also implemented an internal AI-powered communication system that allows employees to query information across the organization. “We’ve actually done a lot of work internally on customizing that setup,” he said.

Cursor also uses AI for internal communications, he said. “We have a system where folks can ask any question about the company and get it answered by an AI,” Truell said, as well as an project with “a few forward deployed engineers internally embedded throughout, building custom tooling right now for operations, for sales and experimenting,” he said. 

Across the enterprise software landscape, some larger organizations are increasingly coming up against adoption challenges when attempting to integrate AI into workflows. 

Data silos—where information is trapped in disconnected systems—prevent AI tools from accessing the full context they need to be useful, and technical sprawl—the accumulation of disparate tools and platforms over years of growth— can create integration issues. Many organizations are finding they need more dedicated technical expertise to help tailor AI models to specific business needs.

Engineers are seeing productivity gains

Cursor, which is valued at $29.3 billion, said last month it had crossed $1 billion in annualized revenue and now has more than 300 employees. The company has seen rapid growth since it was founded by a team of four MIT graduates in 2022. The company’s AI coding tool, which first launched in 2023, has been popular with software who use it to help both generate and edit code. 

There has been some conflicting research about how helpful AI tools actually are for software engineering. A July 2025 study by the nonprofit research group METR found that experienced developers working on large, mature codebases actually took 19% longer to complete tasks when using AI tools such as Cursor and Claude, despite believing they had worked 20% faster. The researchers attributed the slowdown to time spent prompting AI, waiting for responses, and time reviewing generated code.

A recent study conducted by University of Chicago found that teams using Cursor’s AI coding assistant in large companies merged 39% more pull requests (PRs) compared to non-users. The research also showed that senior developers created more detailed plans before writing code and demonstrated greater skill working with AI agents.

“A lot of folks think that junior developers get the most out of AI,” Truell said. But “when these academics went in and looked at the data, it looked like senior engineers actually were more effective in using the tools and were accepting code at higher rates and were getting more value from that.”

Truell noted that this surprised him as well: “We want to dig into to understand exactly why that’s the case.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.