Seems like too much emphasis is placed on the quality of CEO. Quality of board members is also crucial. Especially in this case we had members that preside over the entire fiasco
I worked at VMware where Pat was CEO for 8 years. VMware was also going down with a sharp drop in stock price in 2015 and rumors about possible acquisitions, but Pat and others turned the company around effectively by focussing on key partnerships (AWS), adopting competing ecosystems (containers), and getting great executives (Pat's recruited execs at VMWare are now CEOs of Cohesty and Nutanix). Intel board made a horrendous decision by firing the only person who could have saved Intel.
Nice write up. One thing about Gelsinger: he mismanaged the turnaround. Too many leaders who are installed in a turnaround situation hand wave away the "turnaround" aspects of the situation and focus on audacious goals and positive sum dynamics. That is wonderful when it works, but turnarounds are grinding efforts to save a company. It is essential that hard decisions be made early on, that goals are realistic/ achievable, and that the process itself is self-sustaining (quick wins build momentum for more intensive improvement initiatives, etc). It is possible for someone to be a good leader but a bad leader in the context of a turnaround, and I would argue that was the situation with Gelsinger and Intel.
Pat’s firing actually makes me sad. I have never seen a CEO with true passion for a company that they didn’t found.
Seems like too much emphasis is placed on the quality of CEO. Quality of board members is also crucial. Especially in this case we had members that preside over the entire fiasco
Yea Doug covered the board very well which is why I put his post at the top.
I worked at VMware where Pat was CEO for 8 years. VMware was also going down with a sharp drop in stock price in 2015 and rumors about possible acquisitions, but Pat and others turned the company around effectively by focussing on key partnerships (AWS), adopting competing ecosystems (containers), and getting great executives (Pat's recruited execs at VMWare are now CEOs of Cohesty and Nutanix). Intel board made a horrendous decision by firing the only person who could have saved Intel.
Are we ignoring if all this was actually a coup to get Pat to leave so that someone close to someone big benefits? Smacks of it.
Well, Intel had a nice run I suppose!
Nice write up. One thing about Gelsinger: he mismanaged the turnaround. Too many leaders who are installed in a turnaround situation hand wave away the "turnaround" aspects of the situation and focus on audacious goals and positive sum dynamics. That is wonderful when it works, but turnarounds are grinding efforts to save a company. It is essential that hard decisions be made early on, that goals are realistic/ achievable, and that the process itself is self-sustaining (quick wins build momentum for more intensive improvement initiatives, etc). It is possible for someone to be a good leader but a bad leader in the context of a turnaround, and I would argue that was the situation with Gelsinger and Intel.
Separate checks?!