I really enjoyed your blog post Mr. Bellamy. It reflects so much of the Deming philosophy which guided my consulting for thirty years. After reading your blog post, I asked my AI program the following question and received the reply as noted below.
Of these four CEO's at Unilever, who do you think would have the best performance ratings and who would be the best CEO? Polman, Jope, Schumacher, or Fernandez?
John, that is a fascinating comparison because each of these CEOs inherited a different Unilever with different challenges. I would evaluate them on five dimensions:
Shareholder returns
Revenue and profit growth
Strategic vision
Organizational leadership
Long-term positioning
Here is how I would rank them.
CEO Years Overall Rating (10) Comments
Paul Polman 2009–2019 9.3 Outstanding long-term strategic leader
Fernando Fernandez 2025–present Incomplete (currently ~8.8 potential) Too early, but promising
Hein Schumacher 2023–2025 7.4 Good restructuring CEO, limited time
Alan Jope 2019–2023 6.7 Strong values, weaker execution
1. Paul Polman — My Choice as Best CEO
If I were serving on Unilever's board, Polman would receive the highest performance rating.
Strengths
He inherited Unilever during the financial crisis and transformed it into one of the world's most respected consumer-products companies.
He:
strengthened premium brands
improved profitability
expanded in emerging markets
invested heavily in innovation
made sustainability part of corporate strategy
His famous Unilever Sustainable Living Plan became the benchmark for ESG before ESG became fashionable.
Critics argued he emphasized sustainability too much, but I think history has been kinder to him than many investors were at the time.
His weakness was that stock-market returns lagged some competitors for periods, creating pressure from activist investors like Nelson Peltz. Yet many of the brands and capabilities Unilever relies on today were strengthened during Polman's tenure.
My rating: 9.3/10
2. Fernando Fernandez — Highest Potential
This is the most interesting case.
He spent almost four decades inside Unilever, running Latin America, Beauty & Wellbeing, Supply Chain, Finance, and then became CEO. The board specifically cited his record of building fast-growing businesses, operational execution, and leadership development when appointing him. Analysts generally viewed the change positively despite its surprise.
Early indications suggest he is:
much more decisive
faster moving
less bureaucratic
highly data-driven
willing to make difficult personnel decisions
He has publicly emphasized eliminating mediocrity and accelerating decision-making.
The problem is simply that we don't yet have enough years of results.
Potential:
9–9.5
Current proven performance:
about 8.8
3. Hein Schumacher
I actually think Schumacher has received somewhat unfair treatment.
He came into an organization that needed restructuring.
He:
simplified the portfolio
began spinning off Ice Cream
reduced costs
improved operational discipline
But he was only CEO for about 20 months before the board replaced him with Fernandez, saying execution needed to accelerate.
Sometimes a board hires one CEO to stabilize a company and another to drive growth. Schumacher may have been that "transition" CEO.
Rating:
7.4
4. Alan Jope
Jope is probably the most controversial.
Personally, I think he was a thoughtful leader with genuine concern for people.
But CEOs are ultimately judged on results.
During his tenure:
sales growth disappointed
investors became frustrated
the attempted acquisition of GSK Consumer Healthcare failed
activist investors became increasingly influential
Many people believe he leaned too heavily into corporate purpose and ESG messaging while not delivering enough financial performance.
I don't think that's entirely fair—COVID complicated his tenure—but relative to expectations, he underperformed.
Rating:
6.7
If I were Chairman of the Board
My annual evaluations would probably have looked something like this:
CEO Leadership Strategy Execution Shareholder Value Overall
Polman A+ A+ A A A
Fernandez* A A A TBD A- (so far)
Schumacher A- B+ B+ B B +
Jope B+ A- B B- B
(*based only on the limited period available)
My Overall Ranking
Paul Polman — strongest proven CEO.
Fernando Fernandez — could eventually surpass Polman if execution matches his early promise.
Hein Schumacher — capable but not given enough time to demonstrate a full turnaround.
Alan Jope — respected leader whose financial results fell short of expectations.
Knowing your background in quality management and your long interest in W. Edwards Deming, I suspect one aspect of Polman's leadership would especially resonate with you. Like Deming, Polman often argued that a company should be managed as a long-term system rather than optimized for quarterly earnings alone. His emphasis on strengthening brands, employees, suppliers, and sustainability reflected systems thinking. Whether one agrees with every decision he made, that philosophy was unusually consistent for the CEO of a global public company.
In the context of the book I’m writing Polman is simply a very good example of someone trying to widen the frame with which the business should be judged. And as a result of the response he received and the challenges he faced holding that frame he demonstrates how difficult it is for people inside organisations to effect the kind of change many people would like to see.
Appreciate you taking the time to share your analysis of the leaders in this story.
You provided the inspiration with your well written analysis David. Good luck with your book. I used to tell CEO's working with me, somewhat facetiously, that they "must be willing to be martyrs." Some knew I was serious and some said "No way." I deem the ones that were willing as the CEO's that I was most successful with in my consulting. It takes courage to change any system.
I really enjoyed your blog post Mr. Bellamy. It reflects so much of the Deming philosophy which guided my consulting for thirty years. After reading your blog post, I asked my AI program the following question and received the reply as noted below.
Of these four CEO's at Unilever, who do you think would have the best performance ratings and who would be the best CEO? Polman, Jope, Schumacher, or Fernandez?
John, that is a fascinating comparison because each of these CEOs inherited a different Unilever with different challenges. I would evaluate them on five dimensions:
Shareholder returns
Revenue and profit growth
Strategic vision
Organizational leadership
Long-term positioning
Here is how I would rank them.
CEO Years Overall Rating (10) Comments
Paul Polman 2009–2019 9.3 Outstanding long-term strategic leader
Fernando Fernandez 2025–present Incomplete (currently ~8.8 potential) Too early, but promising
Hein Schumacher 2023–2025 7.4 Good restructuring CEO, limited time
Alan Jope 2019–2023 6.7 Strong values, weaker execution
1. Paul Polman — My Choice as Best CEO
If I were serving on Unilever's board, Polman would receive the highest performance rating.
Strengths
He inherited Unilever during the financial crisis and transformed it into one of the world's most respected consumer-products companies.
He:
strengthened premium brands
improved profitability
expanded in emerging markets
invested heavily in innovation
made sustainability part of corporate strategy
His famous Unilever Sustainable Living Plan became the benchmark for ESG before ESG became fashionable.
Critics argued he emphasized sustainability too much, but I think history has been kinder to him than many investors were at the time.
His weakness was that stock-market returns lagged some competitors for periods, creating pressure from activist investors like Nelson Peltz. Yet many of the brands and capabilities Unilever relies on today were strengthened during Polman's tenure.
My rating: 9.3/10
2. Fernando Fernandez — Highest Potential
This is the most interesting case.
He spent almost four decades inside Unilever, running Latin America, Beauty & Wellbeing, Supply Chain, Finance, and then became CEO. The board specifically cited his record of building fast-growing businesses, operational execution, and leadership development when appointing him. Analysts generally viewed the change positively despite its surprise.
Early indications suggest he is:
much more decisive
faster moving
less bureaucratic
highly data-driven
willing to make difficult personnel decisions
He has publicly emphasized eliminating mediocrity and accelerating decision-making.
The problem is simply that we don't yet have enough years of results.
Potential:
9–9.5
Current proven performance:
about 8.8
3. Hein Schumacher
I actually think Schumacher has received somewhat unfair treatment.
He came into an organization that needed restructuring.
He:
simplified the portfolio
began spinning off Ice Cream
reduced costs
improved operational discipline
But he was only CEO for about 20 months before the board replaced him with Fernandez, saying execution needed to accelerate.
Sometimes a board hires one CEO to stabilize a company and another to drive growth. Schumacher may have been that "transition" CEO.
Rating:
7.4
4. Alan Jope
Jope is probably the most controversial.
Personally, I think he was a thoughtful leader with genuine concern for people.
But CEOs are ultimately judged on results.
During his tenure:
sales growth disappointed
investors became frustrated
the attempted acquisition of GSK Consumer Healthcare failed
activist investors became increasingly influential
Many people believe he leaned too heavily into corporate purpose and ESG messaging while not delivering enough financial performance.
I don't think that's entirely fair—COVID complicated his tenure—but relative to expectations, he underperformed.
Rating:
6.7
If I were Chairman of the Board
My annual evaluations would probably have looked something like this:
CEO Leadership Strategy Execution Shareholder Value Overall
Polman A+ A+ A A A
Fernandez* A A A TBD A- (so far)
Schumacher A- B+ B+ B B +
Jope B+ A- B B- B
(*based only on the limited period available)
My Overall Ranking
Paul Polman — strongest proven CEO.
Fernando Fernandez — could eventually surpass Polman if execution matches his early promise.
Hein Schumacher — capable but not given enough time to demonstrate a full turnaround.
Alan Jope — respected leader whose financial results fell short of expectations.
Knowing your background in quality management and your long interest in W. Edwards Deming, I suspect one aspect of Polman's leadership would especially resonate with you. Like Deming, Polman often argued that a company should be managed as a long-term system rather than optimized for quarterly earnings alone. His emphasis on strengthening brands, employees, suppliers, and sustainability reflected systems thinking. Whether one agrees with every decision he made, that philosophy was unusually consistent for the CEO of a global public company.
Thanks John,
What an interesting exercise.
In the context of the book I’m writing Polman is simply a very good example of someone trying to widen the frame with which the business should be judged. And as a result of the response he received and the challenges he faced holding that frame he demonstrates how difficult it is for people inside organisations to effect the kind of change many people would like to see.
Appreciate you taking the time to share your analysis of the leaders in this story.
You provided the inspiration with your well written analysis David. Good luck with your book. I used to tell CEO's working with me, somewhat facetiously, that they "must be willing to be martyrs." Some knew I was serious and some said "No way." I deem the ones that were willing as the CEO's that I was most successful with in my consulting. It takes courage to change any system.