[deleted]
Meg Whitman to be named new HP CEO
11–20 of 83 posts
Re: Meg Whitman to be named new HP CEO
#12"While Mr. Apotheker is going, his strategy, including consideration of spinning off H.P.’s personal computer business from other parts of the company, will remain in place." ha ha ha WHAT "OK, let's hire this enterprise software guy, then get mad when he restructures the company around enterprise software, then fire him but make his successor implement the plan the enterprise software guy put together! Can't fail!"
It sounded like it was more of a presentation issue. He doesn't present well. They didn't say anything about not liking his ideas. "He's just not CEO material" is what I got out of the article.
Aren't "presentation issues" about the easiest thing they could have assessed in advance before they hired him? It's not like he was some anonymous behind-the-scenes VP somewhere -- he was the CEO of a major company in their space.
Of course, if you're right, this fits in nicely with the NY Times' article from this morning, which basically said that the HP board hired Apotheker without meeting him, because the board members all couldn't stand each other and didn't want hang out together long enough to vet him.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/business/voting-to-hire-a-...
These people, it's amazing.
Re: Meg Whitman to be named new HP CEO
#13"While Mr. Apotheker is going, his strategy, including consideration of spinning off H.P.’s personal computer business from other parts of the company, will remain in place." ha ha ha WHAT "OK, let's hire this enterprise software guy, then get mad when he restructures the company around enterprise software, then fire him but make his successor implement the plan the enterprise software guy put together! Can't fail!"
The board wouldn't have hired Apotheker in the first place if they didn't approve of the direction he was going to take HP.
I would guess that his firing, is due more to the way he went about it [1] and his overpaying for Autonomy.
[1] That is: going public with the general plan too far in advance of having the details ironed out. Which arguably did real damage to the hardware division's sales and the process of trying to find a buyer for it.
Re: Meg Whitman to be named new HP CEO
#14I am just a dumb developer, so I am probably not quite getting the subtle management logic at play here, but what's with random incompetents being appointed CEOs and paid millions of dollars to make things worse or at least not much better? (Bartz at yahoo, Apotheker at HP)It seems like a systemic inefficiency to me. (btw this is a genuine question, not snark. I'd appreciate anyone versed in how boards etc work enlightening me)
On that note aren't the legions of VPs that infest such companies supposed to be a "bench" for selecting a CEO from in an emergency? If you have half a hundred (or more!) VPs and none of them can step up and be CEO in troubled times, why pay them millions of dollars?
Also, why exactly Meg Whitman? Just because she happened to be available and doesn't have another job? (Isn't that telling about her desirability as a CEO?) How long before they look far yet another saviour on a white horse?
Re: Meg Whitman to be named new HP CEO
#15What do people think of Meg Whitman's record at eBay? She ran for governor on her record as CEO there, but eBay has always seemed to me like a terribly-led company, sitting on its laurels as first-mover and squandering opportunities to move into new markets while startups chip away at its core business.
"a terribly-led company, sitting on its laurels as first-mover and squandering opportunities to move into new markets"
As a former employee of that behemoth, I can only say: you hit the nail on the head.
Re: Meg Whitman to be named new HP CEO
#16I am just a dumb developer, so I am probably not quite getting the subtle management logic at play here, but what's with random incompetents being appointed CEOs and paid millions of dollars to make things worse or at least not much better? (Bartz at yahoo, Apotheker at HP)It seems like a systemic inefficiency to me. (btw this is a genuine question, not snark. I'd appreciate anyone versed in how boards etc work enlig…
Because the board in older companies usually consists of people with MBAs from expensive schools who just don't get technology (hint: it's not about cutting costs, it's about building technology).
Re: Meg Whitman to be named new HP CEO
#17What do people think of Meg Whitman's record at eBay? She ran for governor on her record as CEO there, but eBay has always seemed to me like a terribly-led company, sitting on its laurels as first-mover and squandering opportunities to move into new markets while startups chip away at its core business.
I agree. The ebay site looked like a throwback to the 90's until a couple of years ago. On top of that it was very slow. Not only startups were chipping away at their business but also Craigslist and Amazon.
The Skype acquisition was simply botched, as someone else mentioned. It is incredible that someone would screw up the legal due diligence on a multi-billion dollar deal.
Also she obviously used the Ebay IPO to get herself appointed on the board of directors of Goldman Sachs.
Re: Meg Whitman to be named new HP CEO
#18I am just a dumb developer, so I am probably not quite getting the subtle management logic at play here, but what's with random incompetents being appointed CEOs and paid millions of dollars to make things worse or at least not much better? (Bartz at yahoo, Apotheker at HP)It seems like a systemic inefficiency to me. (btw this is a genuine question, not snark. I'd appreciate anyone versed in how boards etc work enlig…
I was with you until you mentioned Bartz as an example. She was actually really good as the head of Autodesk. Yahoo has languished, but at least she didn't make any company killing decisions like Fiorina or Apotheker.
Re: Meg Whitman to be named new HP CEO
#19Well, the least you can say is she won't be as bad as Carly.
Re: Meg Whitman to be named new HP CEO
#20I am just a dumb developer, so I am probably not quite getting the subtle management logic at play here, but what's with random incompetents being appointed CEOs and paid millions of dollars to make things worse or at least not much better? (Bartz at yahoo, Apotheker at HP)It seems like a systemic inefficiency to me. (btw this is a genuine question, not snark. I'd appreciate anyone versed in how boards etc work enlig…
I was with you until you mentioned Bartz as an example. She was actually really good as the head of Autodesk. Yahoo has languished, but at least she didn't make any company killing decisions like Fiorina or Apotheker.
[deleted]