April 18, 2024

DealBook: Mack to Step Down as Chairman of Morgan Stanley

7:42 p.m. | Updated

Morgan Stanley’s chairman, John J. Mack, will step down at the end of year, paving the way for the company’s chief executive, James P. Gorman, to take on that role as well.

The bank announced Mr. Mack’s retirement late Thursday morning shortly after its board met by telephone to vote on the transition.

Revolving Door
View all posts

Mr. Mack, a former chief executive of the company, has been chairman since early 2010. He is expected to retain a senior advisory role. He is working on a book about leaders and his years on Wall Street, which is scheduled to be published next September by Simon Shuster.

Mr. Mack, a graduate of Duke University, is expected to join other corporate boards. He already serves on the boards of a number of nonprofit organizations and is chairman of the panel of economic advisers for Jon M. Huntsman Jr., a Republican presidential candidate.

The decision to have Mr. Gorman succeed Mr. Mack as chairman was widely expected.

Mr. Mack, 66, is one of Wall Street’s best-known figures. He worked at Morgan Stanley for years, rising from bond salesman to become the company’s president. After a long-running dispute with Morgan Stanley’s then-chief executive, Philip J. Purcell, he left the company in 2001.

He soon resurfaced at Credit Suisse, which named him chief executive of the Credit Suisse First Boston investment bank, and later co-chief executive of the parent company, the Credit Suisse Group.

At Credit Suisse, he lived up to his nickname “Mack the Knife,” drastically eliminating jobs and cutting costs. But the relationship, in the end, was ill-fated. At one point he proposed merging Credit Suisse First Boston with another investment bank. The Swiss bank’s board disagreed, and his contract lapsed in 2004.

In 2005, after an uprising at Morgan Stanley forced Mr. Purcell to step down, the board asked Mr. Mack to return as chief executive. He received a standing ovation when he walked into the trading floor on his first day.

Yet his record as Morgan Stanley’s leader was mixed. He made riskier bets after returning to the firm, giving it some of its former swagger, but he was unable to pull back in time in 2007 and 2008 as the New York bank sustained significant losses.

During the financial crisis, Morgan Stanley required $10 billion in emergency support from the federal government, as well as a $9 billion investment by the Japanese bank Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group to survive. Mr. Mack, however, received credit for negotiating the Mitsubishi deal, persuading the Japanese bank to move ahead with the partnership despite the difficult environment. Morgan Stanley repaid the government bailout money in 2009.

Mr. Gorman has been running the day-to-day operations of Morgan Stanley since 2010. He has been trying to revive the company’s fortunes, reducing risk and rebuilding units that were injured during the credit crisis.

He has received credit from analysts for his efforts, but Morgan Stanley’s stock, like that of other financial companies, continues to languish. Its shares closed Thursday at $16.59, up $1.11, but down from the $29.60 when Mr. Gorman became chief at the start of 2010. When Mr. Mack took the helm in 2005, Morgan Stanley’s shares were trading above $43.

Morgan Stanley’s move to combine the chief executive and chairman roles is likely to raise eyebrows among corporate governance watchdogs. They typically encourage companies to have a nonexecutive chairman, which they say gives the board a more independent voice.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=560267ce063b087d1d12abfbb638413c

Corner Office: Terri Ludwig: Leadership Doesn’t Rest on Your Title

Q. Do you remember the first time you were somebody’s boss? 

A. The first time I had what I would call a real job managing people was at Credit Suisse First Boston.  I was running the sales operation for the global foreign currency business.   

Q. How old were you?   

A. About 29. There were about six people reporting to me.   

Q. Was that an easy transition for you?

A. I definitely learned a fair amount of lessons. On Wall Street, and it’s probably the same in other industries, just because you’re the biggest producer you often get put in the management role.  But just because you’re a great producer doesn’t mean that you’re necessarily a great manager.  So I had to really learn how to manage people.  And it was a little challenging because I walked into a situation where I had some underperforming team members. That was the first time I had to fire people.  There were people who were significantly older than me.  And there were a lot of gender issues, too.

Q. What were some things you did to work through that?

A. One thing that built my credibility with them was that I didn’t stop producing. So you’re kind of leading by example, and sharing what’s worked, and asking others what’s worked for them. I’m also pretty straightforward, and I think they appreciated that.  Here’s the goal, here’s the accountability, so how can we achieve this together?   

Q. What about earlier in your life? Were you in leadership roles?

A. My jobs out of the gate were ones that tended to be about taking care of children.  I was a swimming instructor.  I taught gymnastics.  I taught at a Head Start center.  I do think that those influenced me.  Very early on, I loved working with kids.  I really wanted to see people be successful, and I think I was a pretty natural teacher and coach to people.   

Q. And where did you get that from? 

A. My mom was a seventh- and eighth-grade science teacher.  She was very influential to me — very supportive of what I chose to do. I had her for a teacher in seventh grade, too. I saw the way she taught. She had a passion for her students, and I also think she tended to gravitate to the kids in her classroom who had difficulty and were kind of hard to teach. She wanted to make sure that they were also preparing themselves for success. She did a lot of after-school work, too. She was incredibly dedicated. That had an effect on me. Fast-forward to today, and I’m trying to help create opportunities for people so they can fulfill their potential. 

Q. Tell me about your decision to shift to the nonprofit world from Wall Street.

A. It was definitely always my intention to figure out how I could make a difference in the world. You get to a point in your life where you say, I’ve had great success, it was terrific, but I really had a longing and a desire to make a difference.  And so I applied to the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard for its midcareer program to figure out how to apply the skills that I had learned in a meaningful way. 

For the first time in my life, I really didn’t worry about the academics. I didn’t have to be valedictorian.  I said let’s go and just have fun, and meet people and really understand some of the opportunities.  And the area I got very excited about was bringing what I had learned in the financial markets to a meaningful sort of social mission.

Q. How many people work at Enterprise?   

A. 500 people.

Q. How would you say your management style has evolved over time?

A. I think I’m more self-aware. When you become C.E.O. of a large organization, you become aware that you telegraph things that you may not intentionally telegraph.  So you make sure that you’re really telegraphing the information that you want, and it’s important to make sure you’re keeping that energy really positive. 

You also really have to think about your audience and how you’re communicating.  I grew up on a trading desk, so I’m a bullet girl  —  give me the high points, let’s make a decision, let’s have action.  But when we’re dealing with governmental partners and a lot of other partners, or even within Enterprise, there’s a healthy process. And you have to think about how to get the best result and the best outcome, and go through a process without letting it become an obstacle. 

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=fd7232c47f16d1cc176526ace35eb81c