Report comment

This is tricky but not impossible.

Successful implementation will rest on a number of variables including: a sound, universally understood and objectively applied performance framework; differentiation and understanding of the roles and responsibilites of the CEO, chair and board (not an issue for teachers, where I imagine performance in the class room is more clear-cut), etc. The proposal also begs at least three further issues for addressing.

First, ensuring there's a sound recruitment and selection process for CEOs including, among other things, avoiding appointing first-time CEs into known difficult jobs or very big organisations. There's little point establishing the register unless the basics are in place.

Second, ensuring there's an equally robust and sound process for appointing (and appraising) board chairs. If there is a stronger role for regulators in senior personnel issues then it has to be this because if there's one relationship that could precipitate failure it's that between the chair and CEO.

Third, understand that just because someone fails at being a CEO it doesn't mean they will fail as a senior manager (unless what precipitated their failure was a potential criminal act). In my experience as a former SHA CEO who 'moved on' CEOs, some realised that they hadn't enjoyed being a CEO and welcomed the opportunity to pursue their career at director-level, thereby not wasting their skills.

In short, for this to work successfully process will be important but perception will be crucial.