Academic

On the eve of anticipated IPO filing, General Motors announced $1.3 billion in profits ... and the resignation of it's CEO, Ed Whitacre. Obviously, changing the occupant of the corner office is not the normal way to tee up an IPO. Why would Whitacre leave now? 

Whitacre's version: "I believe we?ve accomplished what we set out to do. We?re going to have a smooth, seamless transition here."

No one is buying that line. A more plausible story is that GM's board of directors forced Whitacre's hand: "General Motors Co.?s board and bankers pressed Chief Executive Officer Ed Whitacre to either leave the automaker or commit to stay for years more to help them sell investors on the company?s initial public offering."

Apparently, while preparing for the IPO, Whitacre told the the investment bankers that he didn?t know how long he planned to remain CEO. For obvious reasons, this didn't go down well with the bankers, so Whitacre quit. For Gerald Meyers, the former CEO of American Motors Corporation, that's the bottom line: "Once he took the job, he didn't have any choice but to see it through, and he is not seeing it through. And I'm disappointed."

Actually, I think this move sends a nice signal about governance at GM: the board is on the job. 

Whitacre is expendable. He has been in charge at GM for little more than a year (or a little less, if you merely count his time as CEO). While the company seems to have made strides, this isn't exactly Apple and Steve Jobs. Most of the important moves were made in bankruptcy before Whitacre took the stage. So there is no reason to believe that another competent executive like Daniel Akerson can't mind the store. (And he really is just minding the store, as one of his main jobs will be to train a successor who can move the company forward.)

This move gives the company some degree of certainty with respect to management over the next several years, and the IPO investors will value that certainty. Whitacre's resignation does not suggest a company in turmoil so much as a company in transition. But we knew that about GM already. Perhaps most importantly, it suggests that the company's fortunes do not reside with one charismatic leader, but rather with an organization.

Of course, GM still needs to make cars that people want to buy. As an owner of three GM vehicles, I am somewhat optimistic about that, especially with the forthcoming Chevy Volt.