It is a conversation that usually begins with a heavy sigh. A CEO or Board member reaches out, frustrated by a perceived lack of ROI on technology spend, a series of missed deadlines, or a general sense that IT is a “black box” that consumes capital without producing competitive advantage. The initial request is often framed as a technical or operational assessment, but the subtext is clear: they are looking for a justification to make a change at the top.
When leadership reaches this point, the instinct is often to “clean house” and start fresh with a new visionary. However, our experience conducting dozens of these assessments across various industries suggests that the CIO is not always the root cause of the friction. In a significant percentage of our engagements, jettisoning the CIO is actually not our recommended course of action.
Before you move toward a transition that will inevitably cost your organization months of momentum and significant executive search fees, it is vital to gain an outside perspective. Here is what we often find when we look under the hood.
The Coachable Leader
In many instances, a CIO has been promoted because of their deep technical expertise and their historical “heroics” in keeping systems running. They are brilliant engineers or project managers who have suddenly been thrust into a role that requires high-level strategic influence, boardroom diplomacy, and financial engineering.
If your CIO is falling short in these areas, they may not be a “bad” executive; they may simply be an “untrained” one. We often find that a CIO is doing 80% of the job exceptionally well, but the 20% they are missing—usually the “soft” skills of executive presence or strategic alignment—is what creates the friction with the rest of the C-suite.
In these cases, the ROI of coaching is far higher than the cost of a termination and a new hire. If the individual possesses the intellectual humility to grow and the core technical competence to lead, a structured development plan can bridge the gap. Retaining that institutional knowledge while upgrading the leadership capability is often the most efficient path forward.
The “Right Person, Wrong Seat” Dilemma
There are times when an assessment reveals that the individual in the CIO role is a talented leader but lacks the specific “flavor” of CIO expertise your current business cycle demands.
For example, a “Maintainer” CIO who is excellent at stability and cost control will often struggle when a company pivots toward a rapid digital transformation. Conversely, a “Transfomer” CIO who thrives on disruption may cause chaos in a steady-state organization that needs a period of consolidation.
Before firing the individual, it is worth asking if they possess the skills to succeed in a different capacity, or if the role itself has been poorly defined. Sometimes the “fit” issue is solvable by recalibrating expectations or shifting the reporting structure, rather than a total exit.
The Burden of an Underperforming Staff
A CIO is only as effective as the team they lead. We frequently encounter situations where a CEO is frustrated with the CIO, but the actual bottleneck lies two or three levels down.
A CIO may be highly strategic and aligned with the business, but if they are inherited a legacy team that is resistant to change, lacks modern cloud/AI skills, or suffers from a toxic culture, the CIO’s initiatives will stall. In this scenario, the CIO isn’t the problem—their reluctance to make tough personnel decisions is.
Our assessments often highlight these “anchor” employees who are holding the department back. Our recommendation in these cases is for the CIO to stay, but with a mandate to aggressively upgrade their own staff. If the CIO is willing to make the hard calls they’ve been avoiding, the organization can often turn the corner without a change in executive leadership.
Looking Upward: The C-Suite Disconnect
The most uncomfortable finding in an outside assessment—and perhaps the most important—is when the technology “failure” is actually a symptom of a broader C-suite misalignment.
Technology does not exist in a vacuum. If the CEO and the Board have not defined a clear business strategy, the CIO is forced to guess which initiatives to prioritize. If the CFO views IT strictly as a cost center rather than an investment in growth, the CIO will always be “underperforming” because they are being starved of the resources needed to modernize.
In many cases, the CIO is doing “okay” within the constraints they’ve been given, but the improvement steps are actually needed elsewhere. We have seen instances where the friction attributed to the CIO was actually caused by:
- Vague Business Goals: Asking the CIO to “innovate” without defining what winning looks like for the company.
- Shadow IT: Other department heads bypassing the CIO to buy their own software, creating integration nightmares that the CIO is then blamed for fixing.
- Cultural Resistance: A workforce that refuses to adopt new tools, leading leadership to believe the tools (and the CIO who bought them) are failures.
If the problem is systemic or cultural, hiring a new CIO is like putting a new driver in a car with no engine. The results will be the same, and you will be back in this exact position eighteen months from now.
Why the Outside Perspective Matters
The reason an objective assessment is so valuable is that it removes the emotional baggage that often accumulates between a CEO and a CIO. When internal communication breaks down, every missed email or delayed report is seen through a lens of confirmation bias.
An outside partner provides a “neutral third-party” view that can validate whether your frustrations are justified or if they are symptoms of a different problem. We provide the data and the “outside-in” benchmarks to show you how your technology function actually compares to your peers.
Sometimes, we do find that a change is necessary. Some CIOs have indeed lost the locker room, or simply do not have the capacity to lead in a modern environment. But when we can save a relationship, we do. The cost of executive turnover is measured not just in dollars, but in lost time, lowered morale, and strategic stagnation.
Getting a Clear View
Before you call HR or an executive recruiter, ask for a comprehensive assessment. You owe it to your organization to ensure that the “solution” you are considering actually addresses the problem you are facing.
If the CIO is the problem, you’ll have the data to back up the move and a clear profile of what you need in their successor. But if the problem lies in coaching, staff, or C-suite alignment, you’ll save yourself a world of unnecessary disruption.
