The management change at Arya Sasol on October 6th has raised questions about the decision-making of Mohammad Shariatmadari and the management team of the Persian Gulf Holding, rather than indicating managerial reforms. In this change, Mohammad Reza Heydarzadeh has stepped down, and Hossein Panahian, the chairman of the board and deputy for finance, investment, and shares of the holding, has temporarily taken over management responsibilities until a new head is appointed.
This shift is part of the transfer of Arya Sasol's management to the Persian Gulf Holding. Shariatmadari announced in the September assembly of "Fars" that after the management period of the party affiliated with the Ministry of Defense ends, the authority to appoint the CEO, financial manager, and commercial manager will be transferred to the other party. This explanation highlights the holding's responsibility in the quality of selection and the manner of management transfer: when the time for change was known in advance, why is the company now being run with temporary management?
The Role of the Chairman in Changes
The first question is about Panahian's relation to the management performance that has now changed. The chairman of the board is not outside the company's decision-making structure. If the holding cites financial, administrative, or managerial inefficiency as the reason for Heydarzadeh's removal, it must explain how the board's performance was evaluated and what role its chairman played in overseeing the CEO's decisions.
This question does not automatically attribute the CEO's misconduct to the chairman; the issue is accountability regarding supervisory responsibility. One cannot question the past management's record to justify a change while remaining silent about the board's share in that record. Transferring executive responsibility to the chairman is defensible only if the basis for this choice, the performance evaluation, and the scope of his mission for shareholders are clear.
If the change is merely the result of a periodic shareholder agreement, another question arises: what operational necessity required the CEO to step down before a successor was ready? The end of the management period was not a sudden event. The gap between announcing the transfer of authority and its execution provided an opportunity to select a manager, hand over responsibilities, and introduce an executive plan. Temporary management without a declared end time increases the risk of important company decisions being stalled.
Managerial and Technical Challenges
Hossein Panahian's published background includes being the CEO of Iran Mercantile Exchange, Bahman Investment Company, and Future Development and Planning Company. His educational qualification is also introduced as a PhD in Financial Management. This resume is primarily shaped in financial management, investment, and capital market.
But the main question remains: how has this experience been aligned with the daily management of a petrochemical complex? Managing production, maintenance, feedstock supply, process safety, development projects, and coordination of operational units are responsibilities beyond investment management. The holding must specify which industrial experience of Panahian or what combination of operational managers supports this choice.
Another point is Panahian's insistence on holding multiple positions. In 2023, media criticized his presence in various companies, stating that Panahian was the chairman of the board of Amir Kabir Steel, a main member and vice-chairman of the board of Mehr Petrochemical Company, and a main member and chairman of the board of Afagh Khalij Petrochemical Parks Company. This issue is repeated today with Panahian's simultaneous presence in the management body of the holding and Arya Sasol.
Maintaining the simultaneous responsibility of the holding's financial deputy, Arya Sasol's board chairman, and temporary company management raises serious questions about managerial focus. A company with public shareholders should not bear the cost of position congestion and unclear management prospects. For employees, contractors, and shareholders, knowing the final decision-maker and the duration of his mission is part of organizational stability.
This decision also places Shariatmadari's appointment record in the spotlight for accountability. Evaluating managers by the number of issued decrees is not possible; the criterion is the outcome of decisions in production, profitability, project progress, and cost control. The holding must publish the record of its appointed managers and the reason for their change or retention to show what issue the shifts have resolved.
In the same context, the arrest of Mohsen Biglarbeigi, Shariatmadari's advisor, is another clear sign that Shariatmadari's appointments have resulted in the damaging consequences of rent-seeking and political collusion. The issue is not just about appointments. The result is not due to one or several shifts in the holding's subsidiary companies. It is a series of appointments that have led to the companies' losses. Therefore, publishing the reason for change, board evaluation, successor selection criteria, and responsibility transfer plan is necessary. Without these answers, the CEO change is subject to criticism that the seats have been shuffled, but the decision-making and accountability mechanisms remain the same.
