WPP chief executive Sir Martin Sorrell is facing opposition from some boardroom colleagues over the advertising group’s succession planning and his management style.

Two of the non-executives of WPP, which Sorrell has built into the world’s second-largest marketing-services group, with a market value of £7.9 billion, want him to improve the level of consultation with his fellow directors.

Christopher Mackenzie, a former GE executive, and Paul Spencer, a former boss of Royal & Sun Alliance’s UK operations, are understood to have raised objections to elements of WPP’s corporate governance. Neither man could be reached for comment this weekend.

One board member said: “Some of (the directors) feel (they) are not quite in the loop on everything that is going on.”

The source said the directors wanted to be provided with greater financial information ahead of potential deals.

“Both of them want things done by the book,” said one ally of Sorrell. “But when you have a board of 13 or 14 people, can you really expect the chief executive to be on the phone for two hours keeping them informed about every little deal?” Succession is an issue at WPP and the board has declined to identify publicly the individual to succeed Sorrell. The recent appointment of Tro Piliguian, North American chairman of WPP unit Ogilvy & Mather, to the post of chief operating officer, has not allayed concerns that Sorrell has no heir apparent.

Sorrell, the former finance director of Saatchi & Saatchi, has built WPP into a global advertising giant through a series of daring acquisitions.

Despite the concerns, he still retains huge board support. His chairman, Philip Lader, said: “I don’t deny that there may be some who want more or less of something, but that is healthy for a board.”

Lader said the company annually reviewed succession for both WPP and its subsidiary companies but never publicly identified the people who were concerned. Lader said he did not support the approach of naming individuals and said the list of potential candidates often changed.

Lader also countered criticism that some new board members may feel isolated by the lack of financial information they were given in some bid situations. He said it was very hard always to give the board a “play by play” brief on how deals were progressing when the terms were continuing to change.

Some board members were believed to be unhappy with the way WPP had linked up with Hellman & Friedman in the battle to take over Aegis. The link-up was later abandoned.

Lader conceded: “There may have been one director or two that may have preferred more detailed information at various points.”

Times Recommends

• Lies and cover-up at MG Rover exposed by report
• High oil prices push manufacturing costs up
• Primark founder steps down as chief executive