高管的职业生涯到底有没有终结的一天？抑或他们只是又换了新东家，重新披挂上阵？

    但有一点可以确定：如果高管或董事会成员打算退出——不论出于何种理由——他们通常不会被贴上“问题”成员的标签。实际上，他们的职业生涯只会受到极少的负面影响，通常都会再次出现在商界，重操旧业。

    最近，雅虎公司（Yahoo）CEO卡罗尔•巴茨，以及美国银行（Bank of America）部门负责人萨利•克劳切克与乔•普莱斯等多位高管相继离职，这系列变动这由得使人们心生疑问：这种循环是否还会继续延续下去？

    相熟的商业大佬相互提携、相互扶掖向来不是什么新鲜事。无论称他们为高管阶层，或是商界精英，数十年以来，一小撮企业高管们来来回回、跳来跳去，始终占据着报酬丰厚的岗位。

    各公司的董事会哥们义气盛行，只管象征性地制定行政决策——除非出现问题，否则没有人会过多地关注董事会，而外界则始终在揣测董事会内的人际关系。是什么造成了这种现象？

熟人好办事

    达特茅斯塔克商学院（Dartmouth's Tuck School of Business）教授悉尼•芬克斯坦解释道：“这里面牵扯到方便程度的问题。填补董事会的一个空缺，通常会有五位专家级候选人物，而最终被选中的可能是来自同一乡村俱乐部的会员。仅此而已。”

    芬克斯坦表示，高管与董事会成员要花大量时间在一起共事，因此，选择熟悉的人更简单一些。但芬克斯坦认为，风险在于（相对于公司利益），“董事们可能更关心友情和人情。”芬克斯坦著有《成功之母》（Why Smart Executives Fail）一书。

    斯坦福大学（Stanford）最近一项名为“红字：公司经营不善是否会牵连高层？”（Scarlet Letter: Are the CEOs and Directors of Failed Companies 'Tainted'?）的研究称，在公司内部的“抢椅子”游戏中，通常会为其他公司的高管和董事会成员留出机会，即便他们曾经就职的公司已经声名狼藉。

    保险业巨头美国国际集团（American International Group）的前任董事，包括美国自然历史博物馆（American Museum of Natural History）馆长艾伦•富特和莫尔森公司（Molson Co.）前CEO马绍尔•A•科恩等，均全身而退，转而成为其他大型上市公司的董事会成员，其中不乏摩根大通（JP Morgan Chase）与在线经纪商TD Ameritrade等公司。

    而贝尔斯登公司（Bear Stearns）、雷曼兄弟公司（Lehman Brothers）、美联银行（Wachovia Bank）和华盛顿互惠银行（Washington Mutual）等虽已倒闭，但它们的董事却摇身一变，成为威瑞森（Verizon）、陶氏化学（Dow Chemical）、惠普（Hewlett Packard）和耐克（Nike）等大型企业的董事。 

    Do executive careers die? Or do they just get recycled?

    One thing seems certain: When executives or board members head for the exit -- for whatever reason -- they often don't get tagged as tainted. In fact, they regularly pop up again on the corporate landscape in similar jobs with little apparent damage to their careers.

    A string of recent executive departures -- Yahoo (YHOO) CEO Carol Bartz to Bank of America's (BAC) division presidents Sallie Krawcheck and Joe Price, to name a few – raises the question of whether this cycle will continue.

    Rinsing and recycling familiar business leaders is far from new. Whether you call it the executive class or the corporate elite, a narrow band of execs have been hop-scotching to and from well-paid perches for decades.

    Boards replete with buddies rubberstamp executive decisions -- but no one pays attention until something goes wrong, and outsiders delve into board connections. What gives?

Familiar feels comfortable

    "There is a comfort level issue here," explains Sydney Finkelstein, professor at Dartmouth's Tuck School of Business. "You could find five experts for a board opening, and one's from the country club, and that's that."

    Finkelstein says that executives and board members have to spend a fair amount of time together, and it's easier with a known quantity. The risk, however, says Finkelstein, author of Why Smart Executives Fail, is that "directors might be more concerned about friendships and connections."

    In the game of corporate musical chairs, room is often made for even those from disgraced companies, according to a new Stanford study, called "Scarlet Letter: Are the CEOs and Directors of Failed Companies 'Tainted'?"

    Former directors of the insurance giant American International Group (AIG), like Ellen Futter, president of the American Museum of Natural History, and Marshall A. Cohen, former Molson Co. (TAP) CEO, for example, escaped unblemished and have migrated to the boards of other major public companies, including JP Morgan Chase (JPM) and TD Ameritrade (AMTD).

    Directors of defunct companies like Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Wachovia Bank and Washington Mutual have resurfaced on the boards of corporate behemoths like Verizon (VZ), Dow Chemical (DOW), Hewlett Packard (HPQ) and Nike (NKE).