Copyright forbes
It’s a difficult time to be in business, and for many companies, the CEO’s position is becoming a revolving door. According to new data from executive search and leadership advisory firm Russell Reynolds shared exclusively with Forbes, 174 global CEOs left their positions just in the quarter. Average CEO tenure declined to 7.2 years in Q3—down more than a year from the average 8.4-year tenure reported just two years ago. Russell Reynolds notes that these results indicate a shift in board governance and investor activism—not necessarily stressed-out CEOs who want to get out of the hot seat. Boards and institutional investors are more closely monitoring CEO effectiveness, making changes earlier than they might have otherwise, and moving quickly if there are dips in company performance or strategic alignment. Many of those CEOs are being replaced by newcomers. Russell Reynolds found that so far in 2025, 88% of new CEOs appointed globally are first-timers. This could be for several reasons, the firm said. Considering the multifaceted challenges of business today, boards may be seeking new perspectives in the CEO’s seat. Experienced CEOs also may also be voluntarily passing on another post, given the extreme scrutiny and pressure that come with the job. However, Russell Reynolds noted, U.S. companies bucked the broader trend, reporting that more former CEOs returning to their previous roles to “steady the ship.” Globally, nearly three-quarters of new CEOs are internal hires. This trend is stronger among companies in the FTSE 100 and Nikkei 225, which saw almost all of their new CEOs moving up an internal succession ladder. U.S. companies made 69% of their hires internally. Russell Reynolds wrote that this shows boards are balancing companies’ needs: whether institutional knowledge and company culture or an outsider’s viewpoint is what’s needed at the moment. Many companies quickly added AI to their call centers, but maybe it’s not the best way to answer often-angry customer calls. I talked to Sam Dorison, CEO and cofounder of ReflexAI, about his company, which uses AI to train the humans that are employed in call centers and why humans should still be working the phones. An excerpt from our conversation is later in this newsletter. This is the published version of Forbes’ CEO newsletter, which offers the latest news for today’s and tomorrow’s business leaders and decision makers. Click here to get it delivered to your inbox every week. ECONOMIC INDICATORS Groceries at Curley's House Food Bank in Miami last week, days before Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits were set to expire due to the federal government shutdown. Joe Raedle/Getty Images The government shutdown continues, and is on track to be the longest ever if it keeps going until Tuesday. However, the big-picture economic costs of the shutdown are starting to surface for millions of Americans. Many more federal workers are missing paychecks and food benefits through the SNAP program have been suspended—though a judge has ordered the Trump Administration to tap emergency program funds to keep benefits flowing. The Congressional Budget Office reported last week that spending losses from the shutdown will cost the U.S. $7 billion to $14 billion in GDP so far. Meanwhile, the subsidy for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act has expired. Democrats have said Republicans’ failure to renew the subsidy is why they oppose reopening the government. Forbes senior contributor Joshua Cohen writes that without the subsidy, premium costs are rapidly increasing: up an average of 17% in states that run their own insurance exchanges, and an increase of 30% for states whose programs are managed by the federal government. Forbes senior contributor Bruce Japsen writes that companies that offered plans to millions of Americans through the Affordable Care Act are bracing for large losses of customers who can no longer afford coverage—like the two-thirds of customers UnitedHealthcare expects to lose. It’s little surprise that consumer confidence is continuing to drop, falling one point in October to a seven-month low of 94.6, according to the Conference Board. Actual data on the state of the economy is not readily available due to the government shutdown, but Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in an interview on CNN Sunday that he believes some sectors of the economy are either in recession or at risk of one. Bessent placed the blame on the Federal Reserve, which has slowly been rolling back interest rates—too slowly, in Bessent’s opinion. Last week, the Federal Open Market Committee cut interest rates by a quarter point for the second month in a row, setting baselines at between 3.75% and 4%. But the decision itself was mixed—10 governors voted for the reduction and two against, with one opposed wanting a half-point cut and the other wanting rates to stay the same. Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell said another rate cut was “not a foregone conclusion, far from it.” Markets dropped following Powell’s statement, but largely recovered in the days since. VALERIE MACON/AFP via Getty Images Kimberly-Clark announced plans to acquire Tylenol parent company Kenvue for $48.7 billion in a cash and stock deal. This deal would make consumer products giant Kimberly-Clark the world’s second-largest seller of health and wellness products, creating a company with $32 billion in annual revenue. Kimberly-Clark has a wide portfolio of brands, including Kleenex, Huggies, Scott and Cottonelle. Kenvue was spun off of Johnson & Johnson in 2023 and comprised the pharmaceutical manufacturer’s consumer brands—including Tylenol, Aveeno, Band-Aid and Listerine. Kenvue has had a difficult autumn since Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. issued a report in September claiming that the use of Tylenol during pregnancy is a cause of autism. Both Kenvue and many physicians and experts have refuted the report, saying it is based on weak and unproven evidence, and that Tylenol is safe for use during pregnancy, though President Donald Trump’s administration has doubled down on its claims, leading Texas to sue Johnson & Johnson and Kenvue, claiming the companies deceptively marketed a risky drug to pregnant women. Prior to the acquisition announcement, Kenvue’s stock had fallen more than 22% since September. Today, its stock is up more than 16%, while Kimberly-Clark stock is down more than 12% after announcing the deal. Kimberly-Clark says the deal is expected to close in the second half of 2026. HUMAN CAPITAL JONAS ROOSENS/BELGA MAG/AFP via Getty Images Online behemoth Amazon announced last week it’s laying off 14,000 corporate staff. Beth Galetti, senior vice president of people experience and technology, wrote in a blog post that the company is performing well but is seeking ways to “remove layers, increase ownership and realize efficiency gains.” This is just the beginning of big changes at Amazon because of AI. Forbes contributor Rachel Wells writes that internal strategy documents first reported on by the New York Times suggest that AI, robots and automation in general will replace 600,000 human jobs at the company by 2033. Wells writes that aside from administrative roles, the jobs most likely targeted by these layoffs include warehouse workers and order fulfillment operatives, as well as entry-level logistics, coding and customer service positions. Galetti’s blog post highlighted the disruptive nature of AI, noting its role in job losses. Forbes contributor Martine Paris points out that other big tech players have also cut positions this year, potentially due to new capabilities from AI. Microsoft’s headcount is down 15,000 employees, and Meta recently cut 600 jobs from its Superintelligence Labs division. Goldman Sachs has estimated that 6% to 7% of the U.S. workforce could be displaced by AI and automation, though several executives at the Paley International Council Summit in Silicon Valley late last month said the trajectory wouldn’t be just wholesale job cuts. Microsoft AI CEO Mustafa Suleyman said the technology is inherently disruptive, but Microsoft is continuing to hire—though many of those hires are to train AI. A study from the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School and GBK Collective shows that many CEOs have the same outlook, saying AI will not shrink their workforce or job opportunities. Forbes senior contributor Joe McKendrick reports that fewer than two in 10 executives predict job cuts as a result of AI. In fact, 40% expect AI to boost hiring of entry-level jobs, and a third expect AI to increase executive-level hires. TOMORROW’S TRENDS Using AI To Train A Human Call Center ReflexAI CEO and cofounder Sam Dorison. ReflexAI, Getty One of the first places many companies add AI is to their customer service call center. Sam Dorison, CEO and cofounder of ReflexAI, is bringing it there, but as a trainer—not replacing humans. Dorison said AI does a great job of handling repetitive tasks, and call center training tends to involve people going through the same simulations over and over again. I spoke with him about how he’s designed AI training and why humans are still needed in the call center. This conversation has been edited for length, clarity and continuity. For your training, where do you get the data that makes the simulations work and rates how well calls are being responded to? Dorison: You do not need to use any real data to configure simulations. We want to be very clear that it’s our job to serve our customers, not for them to serve us [by uploading their data to our system]. We’ve invested very heavily in a lot behind the scenes. If you think about designing a car, no one needs to tell you that a car has four wheels. But the question is: How big are the wheels? What suspension do you need? Is it a convertible? Is it an SUV? Is it gas? Is it hybrid? Is it electric? As you’re putting together simulations within the platform, you have a huge number of choices and it’s structured for you. It’s not just: Build a car. Good luck. The reason that’s so important is that when someone’s calling a call center, they’re not just upset. Are they frustrated versus angry? Those are two very different emotions. Are they angry because they had one bad experience with your brand, or they’ve had a series of bad experiences? The way that you interact with a customer that’s had one bad experience, you can explain that you’re sorry and that this is a rare occurrence. They’ve had four bad experiences with you over the last month, don't bother explaining to them that it’s rare. All that’s going to do is make them more furious. We walk our customers through [the complexities] you’re designing: Who is the person calling? What’s the situation? How are they going to respond to different types of things that your agents might say? You walk through that process and by the end of it, seven minutes later, you have a simulation that you can deploy to hundreds of people that feels very realistic to your particular center. For the last several years, it’s been harder to talk to a person when you call a customer support line. And nowadays, more companies are adding AI agents instead of having a human for the vast majority of calls. Why do you see that humans should be the ones taking the calls? First and foremost, not everything should be talk-to-a-human. I want a very clear website that can explain it to me. I want a very effective app for some things. I’m fine if I call and I have AI on the other end, and for some things I want a human. If you look at long-term customer retention and satisfaction, you’re significantly better off having them talk to a human. Those [calls] can still be done more efficiently and better. The other thing I would say is that as you have seen and embraced the rise of AI agents, for the things that you do need to talk to a human to solve, the human had better be good at it. If you navigate a phone tree to get to a human, the last thing you want is a human who can’t quickly understand what’s going on for you and be able to solve it. What do you think CEOs need to know about tools like ReflexAI? You have to be clear about what you expect of your team with AI tools, and it can’t just be: Find ways to use AI in work. This means [defining] what are the types of metrics that you want to move? What are the risks that you're willing to incur? If you’re not clear about what risks are acceptable, it’s going to be hard for your team to get excited to incur any risk. Increasing your level of precision and clarity—both on the outcomes you care about and the risks that the organization is prepared to accept—is one thing. The second thing is you have to find a way to put it into performance reviews and hiring. If you don’t, you should not be surprised if you don’t get anywhere. That means not just having a question on performance reviews about innovation, but it means telling people on January 1 that in reviews on December 15, you will answer the question: How have you implemented new AI tools to improve business outcomes by at least X percent? Let people know they’re going to be evaluated against it, because that’s what people are looking for. They care about that, as well as care about the business outcomes. The third piece is: you have to look for partnerships, too. That the ability to reinvent the wheel with AI is basically 100%. You can spend all of your time solving problems that have already been solved. If every organization sets out to do the same thing over and over again, don’t be surprised when your organization is slower than someone else, or that you have higher costs, versus if you can find strategic partners. For us, what’s important is that we can say to our customers: The problems that you have, we’ve thought about across the country, with lots of different types of organizations. It’s similar to a CRM. You can physically build your own CRM. Any organization can build it, just throw software engineering money at it. But why are you building your own CRM in this day and age? AI tooling is a similar world. It’s certainly hard to find AI engineers, but why are you spending all this money on your internal team when you can very rapidly use something that’s there, and let your team get back to their actual work? COMINGS + GOINGS Frozen food company Nomad Foods named Dominic Brisby as its new executive president and chief executive officer, effective January 1. Brisby most recently worked as the president of Europe and North America at Flora Food Group, and he is succeeding Stéfan Descheemaeker, who will remain as board director. Payments solutions provider Ingenico appointed Floris de Kort as chief executive officer, effective November 1. De Kort was most recently CEO of cross-border payments network Thunes, and will succeed Laurent Blanchard, who is leaving the firm. Auto financing company Credit Acceptance tapped Vinayak R. Hegde as its next chief executive officer and president, effective November 13. Hegde previously worked as consumer chief marketing officer for T-Mobile US and will succeed Kenneth S. Booth, who will transition to a board role. STRATEGIES + ADVICE There’s been a lot of controversy swirling around the decision to have Puerto Rican superstar Bad Bunny perform at next year’s Super Bowl, with many asking NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to change the Big Game’s halftime headliner. Most CEOs face this type of dilemma—though they’re often much less publicized. Here are some takeaways from how Goodell is handling it so far. There’s a new person formerly known as Prince: King Charles III’s brother Andrew, who was formally stripped of his title last week due to his previous association with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The monarch had to walk a tightrope to distance himself and the British throne from the scandal, and his decision-making process could be useful to CEOs navigating controversies brought on by others. Last week, the founders of which company became the youngest ever self-made tech billionaires? B. Bending Spoons See if you got the answer right here. Got a tip? Share confidential information with Forbes. Editorial StandardsReprints & Permissions
