The good news is, it’s not like Howard a vital part of day to day operations, so maybe it’s not a big deal?

The bad news is, what can he actually do if “the culture” is slipping? And will he really be able to detect that? Will he be travelling around constantly to the subs, talking to managers and listening to employees? If not, I don’t really see how he will keep track of anything going on inside Berkshire.

This weekend, I happened to re-read Buffett's (Warren, that is) letter on "Berkshire – Past, Present and Future" that accompanied the 2014 Annual Report, and I thought he explained his thinking on this issue well:

To further ensure continuation of our culture, I have suggested that my son, Howard, succeed me as a non-executive Chairman. My only reason for this wish is to make change easier if the wrong CEO should ever be employed and there occurs a need for the Chairman to move forcefully. I can assure you that this problem has a very low probability of arising at Berkshire – likely as low as at any public company. In my service on the boards of nineteen public companies, however, I’ve seen how hard it is to replace a mediocre CEO if that person is also Chairman. (The deed usually gets done, but almost always very late.)

If elected, Howard will receive no pay and will spend no time at the job other than that required of all directors. He will simply be a safety valve to whom any director can go if he or she has concerns about the CEO and wishes to learn if other directors are expressing doubts as well. Should multiple directors be apprehensive, Howard’s chairmanship will allow the matter to be promptly and properly addressed.

Berkshire Hathaway: PDF document

So, no, Howard likely will not be traveling around to the subs, talking to managers, or listening to employees. Instead, he will listen to the other directors in case of emergency.