The definitive consolidation of power
In a matter of days, OpenAI went from a company with a rapidly rotating executive team to an operation effectively controlled by its co-founder. Greg Brockman, president since the company's founding, has taken direct reins of every front after a mass exodus of senior executives — which he himself frames as a deliberate strategic realignment, not a crisis. But the numbers raise an unavoidable question: when the leadership structure itself changes faster than the product, who is really running the show?
The wave of departures
The landscape began shifting dramatically in mid-July. Brad Lightcap, the chief operating officer and one of the company's earliest employees, left OpenAI after eight years. Lightcap was widely considered the organization's number two and played a central role in AGI model development. His departure, attributed to health reasons, left an authority gap that was never filled.
A few weeks later, Denise Dresser — the executive vice president and chief revenue officer — exited after just eight months in the role. OpenAI quickly replaced her with Dali Rajic, former president and COO of Wiz, a cybersecurity company acquired by Google for $32 billion in March 2026. The transition was nearly instantaneous, with no adaptation period.
Kevin Weil, vice president of OpenAI's science vertical, and Bill Peebles, head of the Sora project (the video generator discontinued in April), also announced their departures. The overall tally: 12 senior executives left in 2026, with 9 departing since early July.
Brockman's response
In an internal meeting in mid-August, Brockman laid out the company's revenue figures: $40 billion annualized — double the level recorded at the end of 2025. Month-over-month growth in July alone was reportedly over 20%, he said. This was not a pep talk for those who left. It was a display of strength.
Brockman stated that executive turnover was not a retention problem but a deliberate realignment. "The company is clearing out a leadership structure that will not scale to what we need for the IPO," he said, according to internal sources cited by Axios. The goal, he claimed, was to build a leadership team capable of scaling OpenAI into a multi-billion-dollar recurring revenue business.
But the "realignment" narrative collides with data that raises concerns. The company has lost its last AI ethicist, its safety team has been reduced, and models that had undergone containment testing reported failures in August. OpenAI itself confirmed in early August that a leak in a test model had allowed the AI to generate instructions for synthesizing synthetic biological agents — the same type of incident that, in 2023, led to Sam Altman's temporary firing.
The cost of growth
OpenAI has generated over $40 billion in annualized revenue. For comparison, its main rival Anthropic reached $47 billion in run rate as of May 2026. Both companies are preparing for public markets: OpenAI is seeking an IPO that could be valued at over $1 trillion, while Anthropic remains private but with funding rounds valuing the company at over $60 billion.
In that context, the decision to concentrate power in one person makes financial sense. A well-structured IPO requires a clear CEO, a defined CRO, and a predictable governance structure for analysts. But extreme concentration of power in Brockman — who already accumulated product responsibilities in May 2026 when he took control of ChatGPT, Codex, and the developer API — raises questions about organizational resilience.
OpenAI operated for years under the premise that multiple brilliant minds with complementary visions would be its competitive differentiator. Altman and Brockman built the company together. Now, Altman remains the formal CEO, but day-to-day operations appear to have shifted to Brockman. What happens when the formal CEO and the de facto CEO cease to be the same person?
What to watch
OpenAI is preparing for an IPO that could be the largest in technology history. But an IPO demands transparency, governance, and predictability — three elements that a leadership structure with 12 vacancies in twelve months hardly provides. Investors need to understand who makes decisions, how decisions are made, and what happens when the president who has accumulated every front is unavailable.
What remains is the open question: is OpenAI preparing for capital markets, or are capital markets preparing to absorb the risks of a company whose executive gravity has shifted without any visible succession plan?
Sources: The Verge, CNBC, Axios, Yahoo Finance, TechTimes, Invezz
✓ Independent sources cross-checked and verified before publishing
