CEO power seems to be a double-edged sword: Agency-theoretic research views CEO power as ultimately detrimental to the firm, whereas the strategic leadership literature highlights the instrumental role of CEO power in getting things done. These competing perspectives motivate a lively debate in the organizational literature on the performance consequences of CEO power. To extend this line of inquiry, we examine the CEO power–firm performance relation during industry turmoil and delve into the role of three critical situational exigencies—managerial discretion, market competitiveness, and technological innovativeness. Predictions are tested on publicly traded Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 1500 firms in the United States using archival data over 20 years. Implications for further research and practice are discussed.