N Chandrasekaran’s to step down as Chairman of Tata Sons 

His legacy will be that of the tireless professional who rewired an institution 

N Chandrasekaran’s decision not to seek another term as chairman of Tata Sons marks the end of one of the most consequential chapters in the modern history of the Tata Group. It is also an unusually revealing exit: not the result of a completed succession plan, but of a six-month boardroom deadlock that has exposed tensions at the very top of India’s most storied business house. 

Chandrasekaran, who joined the Tata Group in 1987 and rose through the ranks of Tata Consultancy Services, said on Wednesday that he had completed 40 years of professional life with the group. His current term as chairman ends on February 20, 2027. He has now asked the Tata Sons board to decide on a successor soon, arguing that the group needs clarity as several strategic projects remain at critical stages of execution. 

The immediate trigger is a disagreement over his reappointment. The Sir Dorabji Tata Trust and Sir Ratan Tata Trust had unanimously recommended extending his tenure by another five years. The proposal was subsequently recorded and recommended by the Tata Sons Nomination and Remuneration Committee and the board. But when it came before the board on February 24, one member did not support it. Chandrasekaran chose to defer the decision rather than force a vote without unanimity. Six months later, there is still no resolution. 

That is where the story becomes bigger than one chairman. 

The outsider who became an insider 

Chandrasekaran was never a Tata family scion. He was a professional manager who spent three decades at TCS, becoming its CEO and managing director in 2009. Under his leadership, TCS strengthened its position as India’s most valuable company, establishing the credentials that eventually took him to the top of the wider group. 

His elevation to Tata Sons chairman in 2017, after the tumultuous Cyrus Mistry episode, represented a deliberate return to managerial continuity. Chandrasekaran’s mandate was not merely to run individual companies. It was to make the sprawling conglomerate work more like a coherent institution. 

His answer was the “One Tata” philosophy, built around simplification, scale and synergy. 

From consolidation to ambition 

Perhaps the defining characteristic of Chandrasekaran’s decade was ambition. The Tata Group under him did not simply protect its legacy businesses. It aggressively pursued new areas of growth. 

The acquisition of Air India in 2022 was perhaps the most symbolic. Bringing the national carrier back into Tata ownership was both a commercial bet and a restoration of a historical connection to JRD Tata, who had pioneered Indian aviation. Chandrasekaran spoke then of building a world-class airline that would make Indians proud. 

The group also pushed deeper into electronics, semiconductors, digital businesses, electric mobility and advanced manufacturing. Tata Electronics and its semiconductor ambitions are part of a much broader attempt to position the conglomerate for India’s next phase of industrialisation. 

But Chandrasekaran’s legacy cannot be reduced to acquisitions and new businesses. His tenure was also about making Tata a more globally integrated enterprise, while maintaining the institutional culture associated with the brand. 

A complicated final chapter 

There is an unavoidable irony to his departure. Chandrasekaran’s decade at the top coincided with enormous expansion, but his final year has also exposed some of the group’s most difficult challenges. 

Air India’s transformation remains unfinished and expensive. Chandrasekaran has said the airline’s turnaround could take five to 10 years, with legacy systems, supply-chain constraints and workforce issues complicating the revival. TCS is confronting the disruption posed by artificial intelligence. Jaguar Land Rover has faced a major cyberattack. And the group is navigating questions around governance, Tata Sons’ future structure and its relationship with Tata Trusts. 

The disagreement with Tata Trusts chairman Noel Tata therefore comes at an awkward moment. The Trusts collectively control about 66% of Tata Sons, making their relationship with the operating leadership fundamental to the group’s stability. 

Chandrasekaran’s exit also leaves the Tatas confronting an uncomfortable question: what comes after the professional-managerial model that has defined the group for nearly a decade? 

His legacy will ultimately be judged not by the manner of his departure, but by what he leaves behind. He inherited a conglomerate recovering from a bruising leadership crisis and leaves one that is larger, more globally ambitious and significantly more diversified. 

Yet he also leaves unfinished bets and, now, a succession problem. And that may be the most fitting measure of Chandrasekaran’s tenure. He transformed Tata from a collection of powerful companies into something closer to a coordinated global enterprise. The next chairman’s challenge will be ensuring that the institution he helped reshape remains greater than the personalities competing to lead it.