So, here's something interesting. We've heard of the golden parachutes some ousted executives have, assuring them cushy severance packages to tide them over after the door hits them on the way out. But did you know that part of their exit deal might be a place to hang their proverbial hat?

The aptly named "Perks Watch" feature in today's New York Times reports that Richard D. Parsons, who exited his post as Time Warner Inc. (NYSE: TWX) CEO in 2007 and vacated the chairman role last year, still has the benefit of Time-Warner-supplied office space. A $776,000 benefit, to be specific.

As mama to two unruly and willful little boys and possessor of a fairly good temper, I struggle with the advice from experts re: spanking. "They" say that spanking "slows mental development and hinders achievement." Naturally "they" are not saying such things while faced with a four-year-old who looks you right in the eyes and throws his Percy the tank engine toy at his baby brother's head. Anyway.

The experts are up in arms because of a statistically insignificant survey released claiming that most CEOs were spanked as children. In other news, most CEOs were raised in the 40s, 50s and 60s. File that one away in the "do you understand the relationship between cause and effect?" cabinet.

While I look hard to find the reason USA Today felt it necessary to release this bit of trivia as "news," I'm nonetheless interested in the whole topic. And I'm wondering: should we reinstate spanking for CEOs? No, not as a parenting tactic for future CEOs (my son breathes a sigh of relief), but as a measure to reign in some of the bad behavior of CEOs in the boardroom today.

If they're going to act like children, why not treat them as such? Maybe a good wooden spoon hanging over the conference table at Hewlett-Packard Company (NYSE:HPQ) might have kept Patricia Dunn from listening to that feasibility study on whether planting spies at the Wall Street Journal was a good idea. Or could it have dissuaded Steve Jobs from accepting the plan to back-date stock options at Apple Computer, Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL)? Maybe if Sumner Redstone was afraid of a good strapping he'd reduce his salary at Viacom, Inc. (NYSE:VIA) a bit more.

It's at least worth a try!

Things had been going well for Sony's shareholders after the appointment of Howard Stringer as the new CEO. But, then things started to fall apart, again.

Sony Corporation (ADR) (NYSE:SNE) makes the batteries for the laptops from companies like Dell, which as you know are being recalled due to overheating and fires. Sony is also being damaged by concerned that its new PlayStation 3 will launch late. To complicate the competitive landscape, Microsoft has been updating its XBox gaming system and upping its marketing spending. Sony's shares have dropped from about $53 in late April to $39 yesterday.

Under Mr. Stringer it would appear that little has improved, despite the initial optimism of his appointment. The recent bad news could also hurt the company financially, with the battery recall cost hitting as much as $500 million.

Sony is not longer viewed as the engineering powerhouse it once was, introducing innovative products virtually every year. That mantle seems to have passed to Apple Computer, Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL).

With Sony on a spiral down, perhaps Apple will learn something about the road ahead.

Douglas McIntyre is a partner at 24/7 Wall St.

Bill Ford was booted after five years heading up Ford Motor Corporation (NYSE:F). Bristol Myers Squibb Co. (NYSE:BMY)ousted CEO Peter Dolan only a few days later; his tenure was also five years. Around the same time, it was announced that PepsiCo, Inc. (NYSE:PEP) CEO Steven Reinemund was stepping down to be replaced by up-and-comer Indra Nooyi. His time in the boardroom? Also five years. Jack Stahl was ousted as Revlon, Inc. (NYSE:REV) CEO after ... four-and-a-half years last Monday.

I think I see a pattern. If you're not cutting the cheese (and how) after the end of the fourth annual report under your tutelage, well then, it stands to reason you'll be shown the door. Or, ahem, suddenly find yourself needing to "spend more time with your family."

Michael Dell follows that pattern. Recently, he was faced with criticisms for his successor as CEO of Dell Inc. (NASDAQ:DELL), Kevin Rollins. Rollins' time at the helm? A bit more than two years. It's not enough, Dell said, and affirmed his support for his long-time right-hand man. Dell's troubles, he said, were not yet attributable to him.

Sumner Redstone, though, gave Viacom, Inc. (NYSE:VIA) CEO Tom Freston only eight months. In a move that affirmed Redstone's "eccentricity" (which in this context is a nice way of saying "impetuous" or "hot-tempered"), Mssr. Redstone blamed all his company's troubles on a man who'd only been CEO for less than a year ... hardly enough, you'd think, to evaluate his performance (or for his leadership to have any real impact on the company's stock price).

Is five years enough? Too much? Too little?

Hamilton College. Virginia Military Institute. Knox College. Lausanne University. Quinnipiac University. CUNY. Baylor. Augustana. Bates. Kettering. Bowdoin. Duke. Rollins.

That isn't a list of backup colleges for a high school senior whose chief extracurricular activity was "pep squad." No, it's a list of the alma maters of the CEOs of the top 500 companies in the U.S., in terms of revenue. And the big finding here?

It doesn't matter where you go to college.

Although, as the Wall Street Journal points out, Harvard helps (nine of the 500 chief executives graduated there), there's no overwhelming trend. CEOs went to public colleges, technical schools, and not-very-well-known universities all over the planet. If you went to a college or university more prestigious than ITT Tech? Chances are, it's on the list. My alma mater, Washington and Lee University, is there, as well as several schools I rejected in my quest for a good ranking in U.S. News & World Report.

In my analysis of leaders great and not-so-great, the college you attend can open doors, it can get you a job in the first place. But becoming a CEO isn't about getting a job (you'll find precious few results for "CEO" in a Hotjobs search), but about keeping it, and really? College doesn't teach you that. I'd be more interested in a work history study of the top few hundred CEOs; do they come from management consultants? Famous management training programs like those at GM, Procter & Gamble, Coca-Cola, Intel? In my opinion, college is a wonderful experience and (should you be a high school senior) you should go to the best one you can convince to take you. But Harvard does not make the CEO.

My best girlfriend from business school, Jaime, just announced that she was quitting her job as a management consultant and taking a position at PepsiCo in the corporate strategy department. Evidently she's not the only smart, financially savvy woman PepsiCo values; today, the beverage giant announced that current CFO Indra K. Nooyi would be taking over as CEO effective October 1, when current chief Steven Reinemund steps down from the position "to spend more time with his family." He'll be retiring in May, and will continue as Chairman of PepsiCo's board until then.

Indra will join 10 other women currently in the CEO position at Fortune 500 companies (by market capitalization, she'll be the second-most important, behind Patricia Woertz at ADM). Analysts seem to be roundly thrilled, calling Nooyi a "star" (Citigroup's Bonnie Herzog) and marking this promotion as an indication there is "enough to keep Ms. Nooyi interested at Pepsi" (Bank of America's Bryan Spillane).

I see it as no coincidence that a valued friend would move to the company at the same time an obviously brilliant woman takes over the CEO role. This can only mean good things for Pepsi. Investors seem to be cheering, too, and have sent the stock up 57 cents to $63.90 so far today, within pennies of a 52-week (and, in fact, all-time) high.

Sarah Gilbert has a Wharton MBA and worked in investment banking for several years, then at a series of increasingly edgy startups before finding her calling, producing blogs for AOL. She doesn't own stock in Pepsi.

Every time we write a critical post about Time Warner or Microsoft, or expose a negative fact, rumor or analysis, the refrain renews: fire the CEO! Dick Parsons, that lucky guy, gets the brunt of our readers' anger. He's screwing up Time Warner, you've told us time and time again, he should go. So say you of Microsoft's Steve Ballmer, he of the explosive personality, sweaty armpits, and billions in inexplicable operating expenses. Sometimes it's Jeff Immelt of GE, or even well-loved figures like Meg Whitman of eBay.

But usually, it's Dick. Today is no different. With 2nd quarter earnings coming out next Wednesday, and everyone wondering about the company's plans with its AOL unit, Joan Lappin from Gramercy Capital Management demands in the pages of Fortune, "Save Time Warner, Fire Parsons."

It's nothing new, but it's worth evaluating her reasons for the radical battle cry. She argues that Parsons is all about politics (in fact, he's rumored to be angling for a 2009 run for New York City mayor), a skill that helped him avoid perishing in the "shark tank" that has been Time Warner's boardroom for the past decade and earned him credit as being a "Teflon Don," but has failed miserably to maintain Time Warner's legacy as a creative, entrepreneurial culture where good managers were rewarded "generous financial incentives for producing solid earnings growth." Fire Parsons, she says, and maybe that creative culture can be revived.

I honor her passion, and agree that the creative, entrepreneurial company always wins over the political shark tank. But who, Joan, is positioned to take the helm from him? That question must be answered before anyone brings out a block and starts chopping.