Emma Walmsley took over as CEO of GSK plc in 2017. Last week she collected $16 million in total pay. It’s inconceivable that such a disastrous male CEO would have survived for so long. A piece in today’s Financial Times by a woman says “she struggled to win investor confidence for her efforts to reinvigorate the UK drugmaker.” She demonstrably failed to improve the company’s fortunes and struggled to win investor confidence? Might the two be linked, or is it the fault of the patriarchy?

In March 2017 the share price of GSK plc was £1,707.51. Today, it’s £1,536.85, a drop of 11.1%. GSK has long been a FTSE100 company. Since March 2017 the value of FTSE100 companies as a whole – including GSK plc – have risen by 30%.

A piece in today’s Guardian fails to mention what a disaster Walmsley has been. The start of the piece takes up the remainder of this blog piece:

“The pharmaceutical group GSK has announced the surprise departure of its chief executive, Emma Walmsley, after eight years in the top job.

Walmsley, who has run the FTSE 100 company since 2017, will step down from the board at the end of this year, and remain at the business until her notice period ends on 30 September 2026.

She said in a statement: “2026 is a pivotal year for GSK to define its path for the decade ahead, and I believe the right moment for new leadership.

“As CEO, you hope to leave the company you love stronger than you found it and prepare for seamless succession. I’m proud to have done both – and to have created Haleon, a new world-leader in consumer health.

“Today, GSK is a biopharma innovator, with far stronger momentum and prospects than nine years ago.”

—————————-

If you’d like email notifications of our new blog pieces, please enter your email address in the box near the top of the right-hand column and click ‘Subscribe’.

We shall shortly be posting this piece on our X channel.

Our YouTube channel is here.