After Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) annual meeting last week, chairman Morris Chang (張忠謀) unexpectedly announced his intention to retire in June next year. He also unveiled his succession plan, in which co-CEO Mark Liu (劉德音) is to step up to become chairman following Chang’s retirement, leaving co-CEO C.C. Wei (魏哲家) as the sole CEO.
Many people were initially surprised by Chang’s announcement, before it sank in that it had just been a matter of time — after all, Chang is 86 years old.
Moreover, the past few days have shown a growing consensus among investors and major clients that the company should smoothly transition from the “Morris era,” as both Liu and Wei have ably served as co-CEOs since 2013.
TSMC celebrates its 30th anniversary later this month. Under Chang’s leadership, the company has become a dominant “pure-play” foundry, leaving its competitors behind as it claims more than 50 percent of the market share worldwide. The company has become one of the most prestigious Taiwanese firms in terms of finances, long-term investments, business vision, talent cultivation and ability to innovate, while it also garners praise for its efforts in corporate governance and social responsibility.
Chang’s succession plan has two goals: He plans to leave a legacy behind, and he wants to ensure that TSMC’s governance structure will continue to make it a champion of the semiconductor industry.
The company’s dual-leadership model is a unique style of governance that holds Wei, the designated CEO, accountable to TSMC’s shareholders and Liu, the future chairman, responsible for navigating the firm’s long-term development. In the meantime, TSMC’s board of directors are tasked with helping to mediate between Liu and Wei should disputes arise and with retaining good corporate governance, which is crucial to the company’s sustainable development.
The announcement highlights how most Taiwanese companies have long been complacent about succession planning. In a 104 Job Bank survey released last week, about 86.1 percent of the companies polled are not prepared for any succession scenario — only 13.9 percent have thought about enacting a succession plan.
Studies have shown that an operational succession plan affects the efficiency and flexibility of business decisions, as well as management turnover during a company’s leadership transition. It also helps to lower volatility in a company’s stock price in the short term and assures its prospects and governance for the long term.
That a relatively low proportion of local companies are committed to succession planning poses a serious threat to corporate health — especially because many founding chairpeople are getting old and companies struggle to recover from a loss of leadership as they face rapid change in the economic environment.
Not having a feasible succession plan in place could have devastating consequences for companies — from a lack of cohesion among members of the management team to serious effects on the company’s reputation and a departure of experienced professionals, which is especially obvious in Taiwan, where most family business leaders still expect next-generation family members, rather than professional managers, to take over the business.
In TSMC’s case, it remains to be seen whether Liu and Wei will handle their new roles competently as the company faces challenges from expanding its mobile, high-performance computing, automotive and Internet of Things platforms and creates value-added services for customers.
Chang has laid down a clear plan to hand over the company reins to his hand-picked executives — which is his last and the most important contribution to TSMC.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS