John Lewis’s next chairman could be part-time after outgoing chair Dame Sharon White asked the partnership to consider changes to the role.
According to the Telegraph, it comes amid speculation that candidates could be put off by the high-profile nature of the position, with White facing much scrutiny during her tenure at the retail stalwart.
Since she outlined her transformation plan back in 2020, she has had a global pandemic and a cost-of-living crisis to deal with, while just last month, White revealed her five-year turnaround plan would be delayed by two years.
Changes to the role could include considering whether the chairman needs to be a full-time position, following the group’s hiring its first chief executive earlier this year.
Back in March John Lewis hired turnaround expert Nish Kankiwala with his remit to handle more of the day-to-day management of the business.
Subscribe to Retail Gazette for free
Sign up here to get the latest news straight into your inbox each morning
On Monday White told the board that she will not seek a second term as chairman of the partnership, which also owns Waitrose – making her the shortest-serving chair in the partnership’s history.
She could stand down before that date if a replacement is found earlier, although White is expecting the process to be drawn out.
Earlier this year, White managed to narrowly survive a confidence vote when the partnership council, made up of more than 60 partners, said it did not have confidence in the business’ performance under White’s leadership but backed her future strategy.
READ MORE: Sharon White stands down: What next for ‘battered and bruised’ John Lewis?
The partnership reported a loss of £234m last year, and although losses narrowed in its recent half-year results, it was still in the red to the tune of around £60m.
Click here to sign up to Retail Gazette‘s free daily email newsletter
4 Comments. Leave new
Some harsh but valid comments. It is a brave move on her behalf, she could have asked for another 5_year contract and possibly got it (the Partnership always tried to help Partners at all levels), but the committee that appointed her also have some responsibility in this.
Many Partners raised the issue of her having no retail experience from the start, and the exit of some key Partners did not help. Why did they leave? Was it a clash of styles or personalities? Equally some of the new appointments in executive positions appeared to be one after another knee jerk reactions. And they were not cheap and I expect there are compensation packages due should these appointees “leave”.
I doubt that some of the proposed changes such as property developments and bringing in outsiders as investors, were decisions that she made solely on her own, other directors would have been involved.
More nonsense, what’s worse than a bad leader, a part-timer one! She didn’t have the right qualifications, skill or will – did a poor job and is now suggesting that people will be put of applying for the role because of the “high profile nature” which itself is nothing more than an admission that she has felt out of her depth in the role.
The business has suffered so much during her tenure, yes Partners are scoring high levels of happiness (because she panicked and gave them everything they demanded and more), but whilst moral is high off the back of record pay and benefits, actual job satisfaction is low because the business is failing due to underinvestment, reprioritisation of the Retail estate, commercial conflicts, poor shop-floor leadership (spending more time making Sur people are happy rather than selling), huge issues with out-of-stocks, crumbling infrastructure – the list is endless.
What JLP needs is a real Retail Leader who has grassroots experience of a turnaround Retail business, some vast Ecom experience and also brave enough to make braver decisions that might for once have to go against the cherished “principles” that are slowly suffocating the business.
I would like to know what record pay and benefits we received last year, I like a lot of my colleagues had a 2% pay rise against record inflation and cost of living issues and my pay will remain much the same until at least 2025 please get you’re facts right before posting
Record pay as in you are paid more than the previous year, is that not simple? Is 2% increase not an increase? I’m not talking about inflation or cost of living, it was clearly about pay. So in answer to your assertion – my facts are right.