Would not argue with the first bit. Definitely needed in the Premiership but once elsewhere in the league structure then it's debatable IMHO.
For me it's all about added value. I have no idea what the current wage is, but if we have a CEO who for sake of argument is costing £100K in wages and generating additional extra costs in hotel bills or car hire or anything else because he/she is not locally based, then a cost/benefit analysis is warranted. If that person brings in more than their cost and can help others to work more efficiently, and therefore more cost effectively, promote the club in a positive light and engage with fans, then that to me justifies the position regardless of what we might think of the person. If, however, the plans to generate sustainable revenue never materialise, or they alienate others in the organisation due to autocratic methods, cause lower efficiency because of this, ignore local and fan relationships that took nigh on 30 years to develop and establish, and make no overt contribution to the bottom line then its a no-brainer! We don't need the latter.
I have my own opinion on this regarding our current CEO, but I can't back that up with hard data showing which camp he falls in. I want him to be in the first one because that would be a revenue generating situation and god knows we need that right now, but with high profile failures like the concert and the ongoing saga of the battery farm, and numerous examples of lack of engagement with individual fans or groups, my fear is that is not the case.
We have had only 3 official CEOs I believe. MS, YC, and SG. That speaks volumes if we look at their records and fan opinion on each of their tenures.
Prior to that we had a team manager and a stadium manager reporting to the board. John Sutherland may not have had the title but was a defacto CEO in my opinion, and was the epitome of what was needed at the time. I have no idea about his leadership style, but he ran the stadium, managed the staff, also did security and other matchday duties so wore many hats over the course of a typical week. Hospitality was left to those who could sell it, similarly with marketing, and other areas. There are also plenty of other people around the club who do, or have, worn many hats over the years - mostly successfully, with only the odd exception. Even though some of the faces change from time to time, we have always had a core of good people.
We have been lucky in the past with directors or chairmen being local and putting in - in some cases - more hours at ICT than they did in their own companies. If we have competent businesspeople on our board, then should the unthinkable happen and we drop to the 3rd tier, I personally would be hoping some of them would step up to get us back on track organisationally, thus reducing the need for some senior personnel who may be drawing a wage we simply can't afford now and definitely not in the lower tier. We will still need the day-to-day staff that make the place tick over and do so much of the heavy lifting, but we may not need a CEO or any other 'executive' roles.
If the existing staff don't have capacity to take on additional duties if we were to drop down, then supplement (not replace - that would be foolish) the existing day-to-day staff with volunteers as we did in past. However, for that, you do have to communicate, engage, build trust, and not look down your nose at them as if you stepped in horse***t or are suspicious as to why they volunteered.