For over a decade, Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg ended with weekly meetings.
The symbolism of the ritual was clear. This was to show that Meta’s Chief Executive Officer, Zuckerberg, and Chief Operating Officer, Sandberg, are at the top of the company and have a close relationship with each other.
But when 52-year-old Sandberg said he would resign from Meta on Wednesday, she embodied the implicit change in the tech giant. Zuckerberg no longer has a clear second place.
While Zuckerberg nominated long-time executive Javier Oliván to take over Sandberg’s job when he resigned, the importance of the Chief Operating Officer role at Meta, formerly known as Facebook. Has dropped. Instead, Zuckerberg, 38, has four executives of the same size.
A person who takes responsibility and responds to his major decisions.
Mr Zuckerberg made a structural change because he wanted to strengthen his control over all divisions of the company, three people near him said. Zuckerberg has always been an undisputed boss and dominated the company’s voting power, but when he was a young businessman and needed to help the company grow, he was Sandberg. I shared power with him. But with over 18 years of experience under his belt, people said he wants to use all his power and be more clearly identified as the only leader in Meta. ..
The top four adjutants are Chief Technology Officer Andrew Bosworth. Nick Clegg, President of Global Affairs. Chief Product Officer, Chris Cox. Oliván, who was responsible for growth, said in a Facebook message that Zuckerberg was leaving Sandberg on Wednesday.
Each of the four men has primary responsibilities. Mr. Craig is the public face and ambassador of Meta, and Mr. Bosworth is pushing the company into the so-called immersive world of Metaverse. Cox oversees Meta’s app family (Instagram, WhatsApp, Messenger, Facebook), and Olivan is responsible for analytics, infrastructure, and growth.
But while Zuckerberg was focusing on developing Facebook products, none of them were as powerful as they used to be when Sandberg was running all of his business effectively.
Zuckerberg hinted at Wednesday’s power shift in him Facebook post. “There are no plans to replace Cheryl’s role in existing structures,” he said. “It makes sense for Meta to integrate products and business groups more tightly, rather than doing all business and operations. We have reached the stage where we are. ” Functions organized separately from our products. “
RA Farrokhnia, Professor of Business in Colombia and Business in Colombia engineering The school said the change in management structure makes sense as Meta invests in Metaverse and Sandberg moves away from the social networking model he has built and advocated for many years.
“To move in this direction, we need a more decentralized, more traditional governance structure,” says Farrokhnia. “Multiple people get together and the total parts are much larger.”
A Meta spokesman declined to comment and refuse to provide interviews with executives.
For years, Zuckerberg and Sandberg had a clear responsibility, and employees often called them “Sandberg side” and “Mark side.” Mr. Sandberg had a lot of autonomy to run the business, policy and legal teams, and Mr. Zuckerberg was in charge of the engineering and product teams.
It began to change in 2020 after Facebook dealt with scandals containing privacy, false information and other toxic content on the platform. Zuckerberg told the team that he would like to apologize and devote more time and attention to the innovative products the company is designing.
Since then, Zuckerberg has taken on more control over the public messaging and policy making that Sandberg was processing. He also brought in employment with public policy expertise and promoted long-standing executives who adhered to his vision.
The three executives he promoted were Bosworth and Cox, who have been with the company for 16 years, and Oliván, who joined the company nearly 15 years ago. They were one of Zuckerberg’s earliest new hires and helped build the earliest version of Facebook.
Known internally as Javi, 44-year-old Olivan joined Facebook as responsible for international growth and steadily increased his rank. Although not a common name, he oversaw the rapid expansion of Facebook and was closely involved in maintaining the company’s technical infrastructure.
Bosworth, 40, is considered an enthusiastic and sometimes reckless cheerleader for Zuckerberg’s vision. In January he was promoted to the next Chief Technology Officer. He oversees the Virtual Reality Lab and the Augmented Reality Lab. These labs manufacture products like the Quest virtual reality headset at the heart of Zuckerberg’s Metaverse drive. He and Mr. Zuckerberg are also close friends on vacation together.
Thirty-Nine Cox, who became Chief Product Officer in 2005, is often described by employees as the heart of the company. He left Facebook in March 2019, but returned in June 2020, causing speculation that Zuckerberg might have signaled him as his successor.
During Cox’s absence, some of his team were reassigned to report directly to Zuckerberg or other executives, and two senior meta-employees who have worked together since Cox’s return. Said. They said he hadn’t taken on such a vast role as the thousands of engineers he once reported to him.
Craig, 55, joined the company in 2018 after a career in British politics, including serving as Deputy Prime Minister. Sandberg hired him to take over Facebook’s pesky political affairs globally. This was once her job. Over time, he has become the de facto head of state of the company, dealing with the World Government and advocating meta at the regulatory level. In February he Promotion Report to Mr. Zuckerberg and become president of global issues.
At Meta, insiders have long speculated who could be Zuckerberg’s successor if Zuckerberg left. Mr. Sandberg’s imminent departure has now shortened the list and left no clear answer.
“For years, people other than Cheryl could be Mark’s successors,” said Katie Harbus, director of public policy at Meta, who left the company last year. “It makes sense for Mark to want a choice of potential successors.”
“It can be dangerous to concentrate on just one person,” she added.
