The media is eagerly waiting to jump into the void created by Merrill Lynch (NYSE: MER)'s succession struggle. And its decision this morning to let CEO Stan O'Neal retire and to appoint Alberto Cribiore as interim non-executive chairman is a good one. I think the board should figure out how Merrill should change its corporate strategy before picking a new leader. And I would recommend that it resist pressure to be forced into picking the leadership team before that new strategy has been hashed out.

If I was in Merrill's boardroom, I would be encouraging a debate about the following questions: Why does Merrill need to change its strategy? Why is it important to pick the new strategy before choosing a new leadership team? Shouldn't the board just hire a new CEO and ask the CEO to figure out the strategy?

Here's where I come down on these questions:

• Merrill needs to change its corporate strategy. Merrill is really three companies -- the successful wealth management part supported by 16,000 brokers and $2 trillion in assets under management, the corporate banking part in which Merrill is a middling player, and the volatile fixed income part that forced Merrill to take an $8.4 billion write down. Merrill should decide which of these will be attractive businesses for its shareholders over the next five years and find a way to sell or close the ones that can't earn their cost of capital.