The board may come off looking pretty bad after all is said and done. It is reasonable to fire a CEO if there is a strong disagreement on strategy and directio

The board may come off looking pretty bad after all is said and done. It is reasonable to fire a CEO if there is a strong disagreement on strategy and direction but it seems unreasonable to do so without adequate planning and preparation. The typical approach is to let the CEO know they are being replaced, line up a successor (even if temporary) and arrange an orderly transition (message key partners, customers, etc). This avoids the narrative getting away from you ("omg, the product is just mechanical turk, about to go bankrupt, have some serious accounting issues, CEO did crimes, etc"). These bad vibes have a way of persisting and can cause a loss of trust with key stakeholders (previously overlooked issues now get revisited with a more jaundiced eye) The way the action was taken (suddenly and with accusations) gives the appearance of personal animos rather than measured, sober judgement. Of course, there might still be good reason for taking this approach but so far, it is not looking good.