Yeah, I find this extremely weird. Doesn't sound like a super idea.
If the investigator finds the board was wrong, it makes the new CEO an enemy of the board. If the investigator finds Sam Altman did bad things, it makes Microsoft look bad and incompetent for hiring him; MS is OpenAI biggest client.
And if, as is likely, the investigator finds some blame here and there, and nothing conclusive, nobody's better off and a lot of time and energy was spent learning nothing.
If the board was in the wrong then they are already an enemy of the new CEO and he just doesn't know it yet. Investigation finds out if that's the case for the new CEO.
The investigation isn't going to find anything. The investigation is going to find that everyone acted properly, this was just one of those things and there's nothing anyone could have done. Here's a video. On the telephone call he's telling DeNiro the results of the investigation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBzfY8ABR9E
The board aren't going to be able to hire someone who is both an effective and experienced CEO and willing to completely ignore their misconduct. If it turns out the actions of the board weren't reasonable, it's hard to see how it can survive in it's current form.
Emmet Shear presumably had very little to do with the prior events, but if he's going to salvage the company, he needs to control the narrative around the governance. That means either publicly justifying the boards actions or changing the board.
If the investigator finds the board was wrong, it makes the new CEO an enemy of the board. If the investigator finds Sam Altman did bad things, it makes Microsoft look bad and incompetent for hiring him; MS is OpenAI biggest client.
And if, as is likely, the investigator finds some blame here and there, and nothing conclusive, nobody's better off and a lot of time and energy was spent learning nothing.
What good can possibly come from this?