Chief executive officer

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  Chief executive officer. The title itself is a mouthful, and yet it traces back to 1782, when an ordinance of the Congress of the Confederation of the United States used the phrase to describe governors and leaders running the executive branches of each of the Thirteen Colonies. Today the role sits at the peak of nearly every kind of organization imaginable, from corporations listed on stock exchanges to charities, nonprofits, and even some government-owned enterprises. What does a CEO actually do? How did the title evolve from colonial-era governance into the defining fixture of modern business? And why has the role attracted admiration, controversy, and genuine scientific debate in equal measure? Those are the threads this documentary will follow.

• 2. A Title Older Than America

  ›

  The Oxford English Dictionary, in draft additions published online in 2011, traced the acronym CEO to Australia first, with an attestation from 1914. The first recorded American use of the abbreviation came much later, in 1972. The full phrase, however, had a longer life in political contexts before it became a fixture of corporate boardrooms. That migration from government language into the vocabulary of business shaped the duties the role carries today: a CEO still reports upward to a governing authority, just as those colonial-era governors reported to legislative bodies. The board of directors fills that oversight function in the modern corporation, charged with holding the top executive accountable for the organization's direction.

• 3. What a CEO Is Actually Paid to Do

  ›

  A board of directors sets the scope of a CEO's responsibilities, and that scope can be broad or deliberately narrow depending on what the organization needs. At the widest, the role wraps together active decision-making on business strategy, leading and motivating employees, managing day-to-day operations, and acting as the primary communicator between the boardroom and the outside world, including the press and the public. For a company, the driving objective is typically to maximize value, measured through profitability, market share, revenue, or another financial metric chosen by the board. For a nonprofit or a government body, the target shifts to achieving outcomes defined by the organization's founding mission, often set by legislation. The CEO of a political party adds a distinctive duty to this list: fundraising, particularly for election campaigns. Whatever the sector, the CEO is ultimately the person accountable for every major business decision, spanning operations, marketing, finance, and human resources.

• 4. The Architecture of Authority

  ›

  Some countries operate on a dual board system, where one executive board runs the day-to-day business and a separate supervisory board handles oversight, elected by shareholders. In that structure, the CEO leads the executive board while a chairperson leads the supervisory board, and the two positions must always be held by different people. The point is to prevent any single individual from accumulating unchecked power. In the United States, the structure tends to collapse those two layers: the elected board of directors plays the supervisory role, while the executive committee, made up of division heads and C-level officers who report directly to the CEO, handles operations. The California Corporate Disclosure Act offers a telling definition of who counts as an executive officer there: the five most highly compensated officers who are not also sitting on the board. In a partnership, the equivalent is a managing or senior partner. In a limited liability company, any member, manager, or officer can qualify.

• 5. The C-Suite and Its Lieutenants

  ›

  Beneath the CEO sits a layer of subordinate executives, each holding a defined area of responsibility. Among the most common are the chief operating officer, the chief financial officer, the chief strategy officer, the chief marketing officer, and the chief business officer. When the CEO also holds the title of president, the vice president often becomes the key subordinate category, and an organization may carry several vice presidents simultaneously, each owning a separate function such as finance or human resources. A more recent addition to this tier is the chief reputation officer, a public-relations-focused position. Anthony Johndrow, CEO of Reputation Economy Advisors, has argued that the role can be read as "simply another way to add emphasis to the role of a modern-day CEO, where they are both the external face of, and the driving force behind, an organization culture." Whether it stands alone or folds back into the CEO's own duties, the function it describes, managing how the world perceives the organization, has become central to the top executive role.

• 6. The Celebrity CEO

  ›

  Business publicists have been crafting the image of the exceptional executive for a long time. The practice stretches back at least to the era of Edward Bernays, who lived from 1891 to 1995, and his client John D. Rockefeller, who lived from 1839 to 1937. Corporate publicists working for Henry Ford took the same model even further. The result was a durable cultural archetype: the heroic CEO whose distinctive strategic choices single-handedly determine whether a company rises or falls. Scholars Guthey and colleagues have pushed back against that framing, arguing that such figures are not self-made but are instead produced through sustained media exposure until their actions, personalities, and private lives come to represent the tensions running through the contemporary business world. Research published in 2009 by Ulrike Malmendier and Geoffrey Tate added a harder edge to that critique: firms whose CEOs had won major awards subsequently underperformed on both stock returns and operating metrics. The celebrity frame, it turns out, may reward the wrong qualities in a leader.

• 7. Pay, Diversity, and Darker Patterns

  ›

  Executive compensation attracted serious scrutiny once the numbers became public. In the United States, the ratio of CEO pay to average worker pay stood at 20-to-1 in 1965. By 2000, that ratio had climbed to 376-to-1. Observers disagree on the cause: some point to genuine competition for rare talent, while others blame a failure of compensation committees to exercise meaningful control. Investors have responded by pushing for more direct say over executive pay packages. The diversity picture has also drawn criticism. In 2018, women held 5% of CEO positions at Fortune 500 companies. By 2023, that figure had risen to 10.4%. That same year, the Rockefeller Foundation awarded a grant to the consulting firm Korn Ferry to research strategies for helping more women reach the CEO level. Meanwhile, a separate line of research has examined what neuroscientist Tara Swart of MIT Sloan School of Management describes as a tendency for individuals with psychopathic traits to thrive in chaotic environments, sometimes by deliberately creating that chaos. The book Snakes in Suits, co-authored by researcher Robert D. Hare, explores this pattern. Scott Lilienfeld has cautioned that media attention to psychopathy in leadership has run well ahead of the available scientific evidence, and Emilia Bunea, writing in Psychology Today, noted that excessive alarm could discourage people from pursuing corporate careers or from raising concerns about difficult managers.

• 8. When the Top Spot Goes Wrong

  ›

  Some of the most documented controversies in modern business center directly on the CEO position. The MeToo movement brought down several prominent executives, including Harvey Weinstein of the Weinstein Company, Steve Wynn of Wynn Resorts Ltd., and Leslie Moonves of CBS. Elon Musk, CEO of both Tesla and SpaceX, faced a different kind of scrutiny. In 2018, during a trading day, he posted on Twitter that he was considering taking Tesla private at $420 per share and that funding was secured. Weeks later, Tesla announced it would not go private. The Securities and Exchange Commission investigated and charged Musk with securities fraud. Musk settled and stepped down as chair of Tesla's board while retaining the CEO title; both he and Tesla each paid a $20 million penalty to be distributed among harmed investors. That episode sits alongside the broader criticism that no industry-wide standard exists for evaluating CEO performance. Beyond the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which governs financial reporting and holds both the CEO and CFO accountable for public companies, there is no established framework for testing executive competency or aligning the executive team's performance with shareholder expectations, a gap that organizations such as the Executive Institute have proposed filling with standardized board review questionnaires.