Harley-Davidson's Boardroom Battle: A Clash of Egos or a Necessary Overhaul?

The boardroom of Harley-Davidson has become a theater of war. The century-old motorcycle icon, once synonymous with Americana and rebellion, now finds itself at the center of a bitter fight between its CEO, Jochen Zeitz, and its second-largest investor, H Partners. The stakes couldn’t be higher: the company’s stock has plummeted 45% over the past year, its market value shriveled to $2.7 billion, and its future hinges on whether this clash of wills leads to meaningful change—or further decline.

The Spark: A Resignation and a Rhetorical Bombshell

The conflict erupted in April 2025 when Jared Dourdeville, a Harley board member representing H Partners (which owns roughly 9% of the company), resigned. His April 1 resignation letter accused the board of fostering a “cultural depletion” and enabling “remote work policies” that hindered Harley’s transformation. But as revealed in Harley’s SEC filing, Dourdeville’s public outburst masked a more personal grievance: his preferred CEO candidate had been rejected during a March leadership review. The board, including Zeitz and Presiding Director Tom Linebarger, chose to keep the CEO seat vacant rather than appoint any of the three finalists—a decision that triggered Dourdeville’s tantrum.

Harley’s filing painted Dourdeville’s demands as hypocritical. For three years, he had consistently backed board decisions, including voting for the very directors he now sought to oust. His sudden focus on “corporate culture” rang hollow, given his silence on such issues during his tenure. The company framed the dispute as a power play, not a genuine effort to fix Harley’s woes.

The Investor’s Playbook: H Partners’ Motives and Market Realities

H Partners has doubled down, demanding the removal of Zeitz, Linebarger, and longtime director Sara Levinson at the May 14 shareholder meeting. Their push isn’t just about leadership—it’s about survival. Harley’s struggles are stark:
-
- A 43% decline in stock since April 2022, outperforming only a handful of automotive peers.
- Anemic sales of its LiveWire electric bikes, which failed to offset declining demand for its iconic cruisers.
- A branding misstep in 2023 with the “Harley’s gone woke” marketing campaign, which alienated its core, older demographic.

H Partners argues that Zeitz’s vision—a pivot to electric vehicles and younger riders—is too slow and out of touch. They want a CEO who can accelerate innovation while reconnecting with Harley’s traditional base. But critics question whether the firm’s demands are truly about strategy or about installing a leader who bows to activist investors.

A Pattern of Conflict—and the Costs of Inaction

This isn’t Harley’s first rodeo with activist investors. In 2020, Impala Asset Management launched a proxy battle over governance issues, though the pandemic intervened, softening the clash. The 2025 fight, however, feels more existential.

Harley’s reliance on legacy cruiser models has left it vulnerable. While rivals like Indian Motorcycle and electric newcomers gain traction, Harley’s attempts to modernize have stumbled. The LiveWire division, once hailed as the company’s future, has struggled to compete on price and range. Meanwhile, younger riders—critical to long-term growth—remain elusive.

H Partners has raised valid concerns: Harley needs an affordable entry-level motorcycle and a clearer brand identity. Yet the timing of their push suggests opportunism. Dourdeville’s resignation letter, written days before a board meeting to address his grievances, smacks of theatrics. And while H Partners claims to want a CEO who can “reignite passion,” its real power move may be to install a pliant board.

The Road Ahead: Shareholder Meeting as a Crossroads

The May 14 shareholder meeting will decide Harley’s governance trajectory. If H Partners succeeds in ousting Zeitz and his allies, it could signal a shift toward activist-driven leadership—a path that risks prioritizing short-term gains over sustainable innovation. Conversely, a vote of confidence for Zeitz might allow Harley to continue its cautious pivot to electric, though the market has already spoken: patience is running thin.

Investors must ask: Can Harley thrive under its current leadership, or does it need a shakeup to survive? The answer will depend on whether the board’s strategy aligns with market realities—or if it’s too entrenched to adapt.

Conclusion: A Crossroads for Iconic Brands in a Disruptive World

Harley-Davidson’s battle reflects a broader truth: even legendary brands must evolve or perish. While H Partners’ demands highlight real issues—stagnant innovation, missteps in branding—their motives are mixed. Shareholders must scrutinize whether the firm seeks genuine change or merely control.

The data is damning: Harley’s market cap now rivals that of a mid-sized tech startup, and its stock has underperformed the S&P 500 by 30% over five years. To rebound, it needs more than a CEO change—it needs a cultural and strategic overhaul.

The May meeting is a referendum on leadership, but the real test lies beyond it. Can Harley rediscover its rebellious spirit—or will it become a relic of a bygone era? The answer will determine whether this boardroom battle is a turning point or just another chapter in its decline.

In the end, the boardroom’s clash isn’t just about egos—it’s about whether Harley can outrun its past. The clock is ticking.