Boardroom Volatility: Why CEO Turnover Is Accelerating—and What It Means for Institutional Investors

Introduction

In 2025, the boardroom is more turbulent than ever. Across global markets, boards are moving with unprecedented speed to dismiss chief executives, often in response to a volatile mix of geopolitical shocks, economic uncertainty, and technological disruption. For institutional investors, this new era of boardroom volatility presents both risks and opportunities. Understanding the drivers behind accelerating CEO turnover—and how to respond—has become a critical component of effective stewardship and value protection.

---

The New Wave of CEO Dismissals

Recent headlines underscore the scale and speed of this trend. In the first half of 2025 alone, several Fortune 500 companies have seen abrupt leadership changes (Kohl’s, Unilever, Sony Group, etc.), with boards citing everything from underperformance to strategic misalignment and reputational risk. According to a July 2025 Financial Times analysis, “directors are swiftly dismissing bosses” as they face mounting pressure from activist investors, regulatory scrutiny, and rapidly shifting market dynamics.^[1]

This is not an isolated phenomenon. Data from executive search firms and governance consultancies show that CEO turnover rates have reached their highest levels in over a decade. The causes are multifaceted:

• Geopolitical Uncertainty: Ongoing conflicts, trade tensions, and regulatory fragmentation have made global strategy more complex and risk-laden.
• Economic Volatility: Inflation, interest rate swings, and uneven post-pandemic recoveries have put pressure on performance and forecasts.
• Technological Disruption: The rise of AI, cybersecurity threats, and digital transformation have raised the bar for executive competence and adaptability.
• Stakeholder Activism: Investors, employees, and the public are demanding more from corporate leaders on ESG, diversity, and long-term value creation.

Boards, in turn, are under pressure to act decisively—sometimes preemptively—to protect enterprise value and signal accountability.

Governance Under Pressure: The Board’s Dilemma

For boards, the decision to remove a CEO is never taken lightly. Yet the current environment has shifted the calculus. The traditional model of “wait and see” is giving way to a more interventionist approach, where directors are expected to anticipate risks and act before problems metastasize.

This shift has several implications:

• Succession Planning: Boards must maintain robust, dynamic succession plans—not just for the CEO, but for the entire C-suite. The days of “heir apparent” models are fading; instead, boards are cultivating broader talent pipelines and contingency plans.
• Board-CEO Relationships: The balance of power is tilting toward the board. Directors are more willing to challenge, and even override, management when performance or alignment falters.
• Transparency and Communication: Abrupt leadership changes can unsettle markets and stakeholders. Boards must communicate clearly about the rationale, process, and future direction to maintain trust.

---

Risks and Opportunities for Institutional Investors

For institutional investors, accelerating CEO turnover is a double-edged sword.

Risks:

• Strategic Disruption: Leadership changes can derail long-term strategies, delay key initiatives, and create uncertainty for employees and partners.
• Market Volatility: Sudden CEO exits often trigger stock price swings, especially if the transition is perceived as reactive or poorly managed.
• Governance Gaps: Inadequate succession planning or lack of board oversight can expose companies to operational and reputational risks.

Opportunities:

• Catalyst for Change: New leadership can unlock value, drive strategic pivots, and address entrenched challenges.
• Enhanced Accountability: Active boards signal a commitment to oversight and responsiveness, aligning with investor interests.
• Engagement Leverage: Investors can use these moments to engage with boards on governance practices, succession planning, and long-term strategy.

---

Actionable Insights: Protecting Value in a Volatile Era

How should institutional investors respond to this new era of boardroom volatility? Buxton Helmsley follows certain best practices:

1. Demand Transparency: Insist on clear disclosure around CEO transitions, including the board’s rationale, the selection process, and succession planning.
2. Engage Proactively: Use regular engagement to assess board effectiveness, challenge complacency, and advocate for robust risk management.
3. Evaluate Board Composition: Scrutinize whether the board has the right mix of skills, experience, and independence to navigate complex challenges.
4. Monitor Performance Metrics: Track not just financial results, but also leading indicators of culture, innovation, and stakeholder engagement.
5. Support Long-Termism: Encourage boards to balance short-term pressures with long-term value creation, especially during leadership transitions.

---

Conclusion: The Future of Boardroom Leadership

The accelerating pace of CEO turnover is a symptom of deeper shifts in the corporate governance landscape. For institutional investors, the challenge is to move beyond reactive responses and become active stewards of boardroom effectiveness. By demanding transparency, engaging with boards, and advocating for best-in-class governance, investors can help ensure that leadership transitions are catalysts for value creation—not sources of risk.

As the boardroom continues to evolve, so too must the strategies of those who invest in and oversee the world’s leading companies.

Referenced Sources:

^[1] Financial Times, “Board-CEO ties are being put to the test,” July 7, 2025. Link

^[2] Spencer Stuart, “2025 CEO Transitions and Succession Planning Report.” Link 

^[3] Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance, “The Board’s Role in CEO Succession Planning.” Link

^[4] BlackRock Investment Stewardship, “Engagement Priorities for 2025.” Link