Who will run Bombay House next? Harsh Goenka has two names

The chairman of Tata Sons occupies one of the most unusual corporate positions in India.

Tata Sons, along with being a holding company, is the custodian of a group spanning steel, automobiles, technology, power, aviation, hotels, consumer businesses and much else. Above it sit the Tata Trusts, which own roughly two-thirds of Tata Sons and represent the philanthropic purpose and values from which the group derives much of its identity.

The chairman of Tata Sons therefore has to wear several hats. He is the keeper of Tata culture and values, the bridge between the Trusts and the operating companies, an allocator of capital across a vast portfolio, a selector of a few big strategic initiatives, and inevitably an important interface with governments in India and abroad.

It is a job that requires managerial competence, but also judgement, diplomacy and institutional sensitivity. With N. Chandrasekaran deciding not to seek another term when his tenure ends in February 2027, the search for his successor has begun. Under Tata Sons’ articles, the chairman is selected through a five-member committee.

What should that committee look for? I would put five attributes at the top. First, unquestionable ethics and an instinctive compatibility with Tata values. Second, experience of managing complexity and understanding a portfolio of businesses competing for capital and management attention. Third, a demonstrable record of performance and capital allocation. Fourth, stature: the Tata chairman has to command respect among CEOs, governments, investors and employees. And finally, age.

Ideally, the candidate should be somewhere between 55 and 60 giving him or her enough runway for at least five meaningful years.

Likely contenders

The temptation will naturally be to look at the extraordinary pool of Indian-origin chief executives running global corporations.

One interesting possibility is Vimal Kapur, 60, chairman and CEO of Honeywell. An engineer, Kapur has spent virtually his entire career at Honeywell and today runs a highly diversified industrial technology company with businesses cutting across automation, aerospace, energy and advanced materials. His industrial background and understanding of technology make him unusually relevant to the Tata portfolio. Another name is Laxman Narasimhan, 59. He has worked at PepsiCo, led Reckitt and subsequently became CEO of Starbucks. His experience combines consumer businesses, global brands and organisational transformation. He is currently not running a large operating company, which makes him more accessible than several other global candidates.

Shantanu Narayen is an outstanding leader but, at 63, perhaps slightly beyond the ideal age bracket for what could become a long tenure. Nikesh Arora, 58, is more intriguing. He was a senior Google executive, became president and chief operating officer of SoftBank and today is chairman and CEO of Palo Alto Networks. He brings technology, investing, global markets and strategy in abundance. Arora’s intensely performance-driven style might require greater adaptation to the understated, consensus-oriented Tata culture.

And while Satya Nadella and Sundar Pichai would obviously appear on any fantasy list of Indian-origin corporate leaders, I find it difficult to imagine either leaving their present positions for Bombay House.

That brings me to candidates operating within India.

Here, Anish Shah stands out immediately. At 56, he is Group CEO and MD of Mahindra, which makes his present job structurally closer to Tata Sons than almost anybody else’s. He oversees a federation spread across automobiles, farm equipment, financial services, technology, real estate, hospitality and several other businesses across more than 100 countries. Under his leadership, M&M’s market capitalization has increased twelve-fold since April 2020. Shah also combines Indian experience with a substantial international career at GE Capital, Bank of America and Bain. Most importantly, he already understands what it means to be the professional custodian of a purpose-led, promoter-associated Indian business group rather than simply the CEO of a single corporation.

Gopal Vittal, 59, would be another formidable candidate. After leading Bharti Airtel as MD and CEO for 13 years, he moved into the role of executive vice-chairman in January 2026, overseeing Airtel and its subsidiaries. He has managed an enormous consumer and technology business through ferocious competition, massive capital expenditure and constant regulatory change. He understands government, Africa and emerging markets, and spent nearly two decades at Unilever before Airtel. That combination of consumer instinct, technology, regulation and institution-building makes him an interesting possibility.

There will undoubtedly be other names. The five-member committee would be failing in its duty if it did not cast the net widely, but I’d be surprised if they find someone else equally worthy.

The home advantage

Within the Tata ecosystem itself, T.V. Narendran remains the most natural internal contender. A Tata lifer, he is widely respected across the group and has run Tata Steel with a steady hand through global cycles, European restructuring and significant strategic shifts. His long international exposure, understated personality and deep cultural alignment with Tata make him almost archetypal of what the group often values in its senior leadership.

Alongside him sits Saurabh Agrawal, the Tata Sons’ chief financial officer and executive director, who has been central to capital allocation decisions and virtually every major group investment in recent years. However, his close association with the Chandra era may make him a less acceptable choice in a succession context. Other internal names such as K. Krithivasan, Shailesh Chandra, Ajoy Chawla, and R. Mukundan are respected within their domains but have more limited group-wide exposure at this stage.

Neville Tata, at just 33, will clearly be groomed for a significant future role within the broader Tata ecosystem, but the chairmanship of Tata Sons would be far too early; he would be a far more plausible candidate after more operating experience.

The Tata factor

Yet after considering all these candidates, two names seem to me to occupy the sweet spot—Anish Shah and T.V. Narendran. Narendran, 61, has one enormous advantage: he is already embedded in the Tata system. He has also served as president of CII and chairman of the World Steel Association, giving him considerable exposure to government, global industry and public policy.

The argument for Shah is equally powerful. He is younger, has successfully managed a diversified federation, understands capital allocation, has international experience and has presided over an extraordinary period of value creation at Mahindra. If Tata were looking primarily for an external professional capable of running a complex Indian conglomerate, I would put him at the top of the list.

The next chairman must rebuild and maintain complete trust between Tata Sons and Tata Trusts, particularly with Noel Tata now occupying such an important position as chairman of Tata Trusts. The events surrounding Chandrasekaran’s departure have made that relationship even more important. Tata Trusts’ controlling ownership gives it an inevitably central role in the group’s governance.

A global outsider or an external professional may bring new thinking, but the learning curve around understanding the Tata ethos, manoeuvring through Tata’s unusual ownership structure and its deeply embedded culture is substantial. Narendran starts with that knowledge already in his bloodstream.

There is also another model worth considering. Perhaps the time has come to separate institutional stewardship more clearly from executive management. Noel Tata could provide overarching chairmanship of both the Tata Trusts and Tata Sons (I’m sure the legal eagles can find a way to make that happen) while a professional CEO runs Tata Sons, drives performance, allocates capital and coordinates the operating companies. Such a structure would need careful governance and very clear boundaries, but it could align ownership, values and management rather neatly.

Much will happen before February 2027, and speculation is an occupational hazard whenever Bombay House changes guard. But if the committee’s brief is to find someone around 60, steeped in Tata values, with an impeccable reputation, a strong operating record, government credibility and the ability to manage both businesses and relationships, the shortlist may ultimately be much shorter than it first appears.

My final two would be Anish Shah and T.V. Narendran.

And by a nose, I would back Narendran.

The author is chairman, RPG Group.