There’s an article in last week’s Financial Times about Philip Morris which prompts some interesting questions https://on.ft.com/3IO3d2j.  The Philip Morris CEO Jacek Olczak was explaining why, in spite of pressure in the early stages of the Ukraine war to shut down its operations in the country, it was continuing to trade.

Now the Russian market for tobacco products is large and lucrative, and the Russian government has put in place rules that mean that western companies leaving will take a significant financial hit.  Jacek Olczak’s view, in the FT article, is that he has a duty to his shareholders to deliver value. Leaving with a major loss would not be in the interests of shareholders (this makes the (debatable) assumption that the interests of shareholders are purely financial) and he is therefore unable to leave Russia unless he can do it without significant downside and currently can see no way of doing that.

This is one man’s and one companies’ dilemma, but it is a fine example of the wider issues that face senior leaders in difficult times.  Leading is never easy and always demands taking the hard decisions and then following them through. 

However, is when they are faced with a choice between two evils that Boards and CEOs are really tested. These are the decisions where, however much you consult, in the end it comes down to your own moral compass and your view of what is best for the company and all its stakeholders in the long term.  The rights or wrongs of the Philip Morris case can be debated, and it is not my intention to debate them here.  History will judge, as it judges us all in the long term.

It may mean standing up to shareholders, it may mean losing your job, it may mean, in extreme cases, putting yourself and your employees at risk.  For certain it will need reserves of courage and you will spend long sleepless nights thinking through the options.  Sometimes, as Jacek Olczak has done, you can convince yourself that you are stuck where you are, there is nothing you can do.  This may provide some short-term comfort but in the end a decision must be made.  It is a decision that only the senior leader can take, the great leaders make that decision and live with the consequences, the lesser ones evade it.