If you ask most people what they think makes a great CEO, they will likely have some preconceived ideas. Strategic, maybe a workaholic and someone who knows their organization through and through.

While those things may be true, no two CEOs are the same. And in fact, CEOs may not be what they are perceived as.

Ask yourself, ‘Is a CEO someone who has a clear vision for their organization? Are they persistent? Can they take no for an answer? And have they worked their way up from the bottom rung of their organization’s corporate ladder?’

Some would say yes, but I believe that sometimes the best CEOs are not what you’d think they might be.

The best CEOs are not visionary

While on maneuvers in the Alps, a lieutenant sent several soldiers from his company on a reconnaissance patrol. Then it started to snow. A few days later, with the snow still falling and the patrol still not back, the lieutenant feared he had sent his men to their deaths.

But eventually the soldiers returned, explaining that they had gotten lost. They told their lieutenant they’d given up hope until one of them found a map in his pocket.

Once the snowstorm abated, they set off and, thanks to the map, they found their way back to the camp. Glancing down at the map, the lieutenant, to his surprise, saw that it wasn’t a map of the Alps … but of the Pyrenees.

This is a well-known story. It is said that on hearing, one executive said: “It’s an interesting story – but it would have been even better if the soldier who had the map had known it was the wrong one and had still managed to bring his patrol back to camp.”

The question is, can a firm be successful when its CEO has a vision, even if that vision is misguided? A classic survey of 200 firms in the Journal of Applied Psychology provides some insights to offer an answer to this question. They are:

1. A firm is 50 percent less likely to go bankrupt when its CEO has communicated a vision, even if that vision is not implemented in the end.
2. Sales growth doubles when the company’s CEO has communicated a vision, again, even if that vision does not come to fruition.

Having a vision gives a firm impetus. It helps to spot opportunities that might otherwise have gone unnoticed if the company had remained static. This is true regardless of the ‘quality’ of the vision. Being stuck to one vision could actually hold an organization back. So how persistent does a good CEO have to be?

The best CEOs are not persistent

Andy Grove, former CEO of Intel, described his job as follows: “None of us have a real understanding of where we are heading. I don’t… But decisions don’t wait for that picture to be clarified.

“You have to make them when you have to make them. I think it is very important for you to do two things. One, act on your temporary conviction as if it was a real conviction; and two, when you realize that you are wrong, correct course very quickly. And try not to get too depressed in the journey…

“If you are depressed, you can’t motivate your staff to extraordinary measures. So you have to keep your own spirits up even though you well understand that you don’t know what you’re doing.”

Managers are generally surprised to hear this story from Grove – the renowned CEO. Even he didn’t know where he was heading. He was always changing direction, and was aware he didn’t know where he was heading and didn’t tell his staff.

A memorable study in the Journal of Management helps to explain this reaction. Researchers presented managers with four scenarios:

●      In the first scenario, the CEO persisted with the same strategy and was successful.
●      In the second scenario, the CEO tried out several strategies and was ultimately successful.
●      In the third scenario, the CEO persisted with the same strategy but was unsuccessful.
●      In the fourth scenario, the CEO tried out several strategies but was ultimately unsuccessful.

How did the managers rate these CEOs?

Unsurprisingly, the successful CEOs were considered better than the unsuccessful ones. More interestingly, the CEOs who succeeded by persisting with the same strategy were always rated higher than the ones who succeeded after trying out several strategies.

In some cases, higher ratings were given to CEOs who persisted with the same strategy but failed than to CEOs who tried out several strategies and succeeded.

This study suggests that we are impressed by CEOs who are visionaries (they come up with a unique and winning strategy) but who are also persistent (they stick to that strategy through hell or high water).

So managers are surprised when CEOs as renowned as Andy Grove explain that they are neither visionary nor persistent. Yet in a world where it is increasingly difficult to predict what will ‘work’, his trial-and-error approach is the best.

Being persistent can be a good thing. It can help you to progress, to remain confident in turbulent times. But being persistent can also become overly stubborn if you’re not careful. Being open to change and opinions from other people within your organization is actually what will make you a better CEO.

The best CEOs are not always homegrown

There are two options for a new CEO: homegrown CEOs or outsider CEOs. Homegrown CEOs are the ones who come up through the system. They have a lot of experience, a lot of knowledge about the organization and go through a tough selection process to become CEO of firms where they have already worked.

Outsider CEOs have less experience or knowledge of that particular organization than homegrown ones. They are propelled to the top of firms without ever having worked there, bringing an outsider’s perspective with them, which can cause some tension.

But which type of CEOs get the best results? Despite what you may think, the answer is the outsiders. To succeed, a firm needs an ambitious strategy that differs from its competitors. Outsiders are often better than homegrown CEOs (who tend to be much more conservative) at constructing that kind of strategy.

But beware: outsiders are also the ones who get the worst results. They either achieve outstanding performance or lead a company to bankruptcy. Although a firm can’t succeed without an ambitious, differentiating strategy, it’s still a very risky step. Homegrown CEOs may give more average performances, but it’s a safer choice.

So should a firm opt for a homegrown CEO or an outsider?

It all depends on the context. If the firm is in dire straits, it’s probably better to bring in an outsider. If the firm is in good financial health, it should choose a homegrown CEO. They may not be as exciting, but they won’t lead the firm down the road to ruin. In summary, it’s riskier to put a business in the hands of an outsider than a homegrown CEO, but sometimes that’s a risk worth taking.

So when you are considering your next CEO, be open-minded. The research shows that the best CEOs are not who you’d think, so bear that in mind. Or if you think that you wouldn’t make a good CEO due to not being persistent enough, remember that can be a strength just as much as a weakness.

There are fine lines, but the next great CEO could be you.

Opinions expressed by The CEO Magazine contributors are their own.