Hindsight is so easy. By definition, it’s correct – 20/20 in fact, as the old saying goes, so I take neither credit for nor pride in analyzing and assessing the key events that have transpired at the Liz Claiborne Corporation since Bill McComb became CEO in November 2006. I also take no pleasure in telling this somewhat tragic story. Those of us who grew up in business with this company, including the many people I talked to while writing this article, remember its heyday. We recall the days when its management could do no wrong, from the designer herself dressing the exploding population of professional women in the Eighties, to Paul Charron skillfully crafting a portfolio of 40 brands that grew sales to $5 billion and promised to take the company into the new century and beyond.

However, this story, which is still being played out, must be told. It contains strategic and tactical perspectives that are applicable and relevant to all businesses, and that every CEO and Board member should keep in mind when steering a corporation through good times and bad.

To the casual reader, the headline “Is the Liz Claiborne Board Missing In Action?” might suggest that I place the blame of Liz Claiborne Inc.’s precipitous and rapid sales and earnings decline solely on the Board’s shoulders. Nothing could be further from the truth. Whatever the outcome in a company, the “buck” always stops on the CEO’s desk. The article tracks and highlights the significant and cascading series of events that, in my opinion, cut sales in half, caused four straight years of net losses, and resulted in a stock price and market capitalization that are mere shadows of their former selves. It explains how many of the wrong decisions made at the wrong times were due, from my perspective, to a combination of CEO inexperience in the apparel and retail industries and his arguable lapse in keeping or hiring executives who did.

To the casual reader, the headline “Is the Liz Claiborne Board Missing In Action?” might suggest that I place the blame of Liz Claiborne Inc.’s precipitous and rapid sales and earnings decline solely on the Board’s shoulders. Nothing could be further from the truth. Whatever the outcome in a company, the “buck” always stops on the CEO’s desk. The article tracks and highlights the significant and cascading series of events that, in my opinion, cut sales in half, caused four straight years of net losses, and resulted in a stock price and market capitalization that are mere shadows of their former selves. It explains how many of the wrong decisions made at the wrong times were due, from my perspective, to a combination of CEO inexperience in the apparel and retail industries and his arguable lapse in keeping or hiring executives who did.

However, there are two “bucks” in any public company. The other buck, the one that stops on the Board’s conference room table, is its duty to shareholders. At each major decision-making juncture, the Board’s apparent unanimous support was puzzling. Thus, I headlined the article questioning its “whereabouts,” because at the very least, I wondered how its members could reside over such a prolonged, continuous and steep decline of the business without taking some drastic corrective action.

Many businesses hid their woes behind The Great Recession, and indeed, some of them were legitimately exacerbated by the crisis. However, in the case of Liz Claiborne, as measured by three other major corporations within its peer group – VF Corporation, Phillips-Van Heusen and Polo Ralph Lauren, the company descended deeper and faster into the recession than its peers, and continued its decline to this day, even as the other three paralleled the economic recovery and continue on an upward growth trajectory.  Therefore, it’s reasonable that one could question the strategic decision making at Liz Claiborne.

So, what’s the end game? How does it play out? Will the company stabilize revenues and profitability with its four direct brands, which include Kate Spade, Lucky Brand, Mexx and Juicy Couture, and find a path for profitable growth? Will JC Penney be successful with the flagship Liz Claiborne brand, and exercise its option to acquire it in five years? Will strategic buyers end up “cherry picking” the company?  Or, will a private equity firm see it as an acquisition opportunity?

There’s another story here, and that’s how bloody difficult this business can be. To all of you in the trenches day in and day out, running companies or parts of companies, dealing with intensifying competition, consumer fickleness, technological changes, and economic headwinds, my hat’s off to you.

And as always, have a good read.