Nike executives are known for saying it takes 20 years to become an insider at the notoriously insular sneaker company. William D. Perez, who was hand-picked by Phillip Knight, the founder and father of Nike, as his successor and the company’s chief executive, lasted only 13 months. He will be replaced by Mark Parker, who has been at the company for more than 25 years.

Mr. Knight, Nike’s charismatic founder, rarely talked with executives at national chains that sold his shoes. In one of Perez’s first gestures on the job, he visited the headquarters of several chains, upsetting Nike’s sales staff. Mr. Knight has said that Mr. Perez failed to “wrap his arms around this place” and that he was put in “a situation where the cultural leap was too great.”

But several former executives say that the abrupt resignation, which Mr. Knight effectively ordered, was more about the inability of Mr. Knight to accept his role as chairman, and no longer as acting chief executive. The founder is unwilling to give up the identity that he has established in his way of running the company.

Perez quarreled with Nike executives over several issues, but at the heart of the disputes was his unwillingness to adapt to the culture, which prizes product innovation and the sanctity of the Nike brand. As an example, Perez believed that the company had saturated the high-end sneaker market and should grow by introducing more exclusive lines to lower-end retailers. Some executives felt this strategy “cheapened the brand.” On the positive side, Perez was credited with trimming expenses during his tenure at Nike and cultivating sales of the brand in China.

Perez’s short tenure at Nike sheds some light on the cult of personality around Phillip Knight, who has become an icon at Nike. Even though he stepped down as chief executive in 2004, he has remained a dominant figure, keeping executives on a short leash. Those who challenge the Nike way of doing things find themselves sidelined or forced to leave.