Thread regarding Cisco Systems Inc. layoffs

@2czj+1i3ZqMji

From a CFO perspective, the BUs are in completion with each other for OPEX. The CFO will provide more OPEX to BUs with a higher ROI.

That's Business 101.

The fact that there hasn't been an Engineering leader since the 90s that actually delivered a coherent development strategy that encompassed all of the Engineering organization isn't the CFOs fault.

Of course, John Chambers was the root cause of the impotence of the company's Engineering leaders. For some reason, he thought he was capable of making complex Engineering decisions so he constantly overruled the Engineering leadership.

And what's his excuse for not fixing that? Instead of doing just that, TN chose to spend his time arguing UI colors and graphics.

Google "Parkinson's law of triviality” to find out why the color of something gets so much attention.

While you’re at it, Google the “Dunning–Kruger effect.” It will put much of the “work” at Cisco in perspective.

"That he’s quit is, IMO, a damning indictment of all that is wrong in the BUs."

And what's his excuse for not fixing that?

It's a good question. I think the issue in the BUs is systemic*. When did we last have an engineering leader that really got a grip of them and made them play nicely together rather than 'competing'? I know why DG was pushed out, I wonder if TN is going because he realises he cannot win.

• I think the root of the BU problem was when KK took over as CFO. She understood the cost of everything and the value of nothing. In some respects, she did a good job but when it came to funding innovation and product development, not so much. She effectively set the BUs up in competition with each other. That's not worked out so well and will have a prolonged negative effect on the business. Unfortunately, the new CFO, (who is so anonymous I can never remember his name) doesn't look like the guy to fix those problems.

"That he’s quit is, IMO, a damning indictment of all that is wrong in the BUs."

And what's his excuse for not fixing that? Instead of doing just that, TN chose to spend his time arguing UI colors and graphics.

I wonder how much OPEX Davidson is being told he must cut in the newly combined organization

Re the comment “TN was leading a $30+ billion business. He left to lead a $384 million business. Let that sink in.”

Man I would go lead a popsicle stand if it meant I didn’t have to deal with MM every day.

MIG has been crushing their earnings, but how has EN&C been doing over the last year??

TN was leading a $30+ billion business. He left to lead a $384 million business. Let that sink in.

Metals, Linksys 2.0 with a mgmt gui..

Um…but isn’t it true? We should have one org for all networking.

Um, not really. SP and Enterprise requirements are surprisingly different. Sure, there’s been some crossover products, such as the ASR9xx range and SME of the metro Ethernet products before that but, generally, different markets.

If you want a really good example, look at the history of private 5G in Cisco and the turf-wars between MIG and WINBU.

Integrate Meraki!

One of Cisco’s smarter decisions was not to integrate Meraki. I might not like the subscription model but Meraki’s management platform is light years better than Cisco’s. Anyone want to go back to Works or Prime? Cisco’s track record of management platforms is dire (something the IOT BU would do well to remember in it’s relentless push of IOT Ops Director: I hate to tell you but that baby is ugly).

The only reason TN got the EN gig was to engineer a reverse takeover of Cisco aka the ‘Merakification’ of Cisco.

That he’s quit is, IMO, a damning indictment of all that is wrong in the BUs.

Integrate Meraki!

Um…but isn’t it true? We should have one org for all networking.

The comment is true. We be much better alignment and agile for code loads and smu.