Intel needs a new business model.
The old one isn't sustainable.
21 replies (most recent on top)
Definitely needs to be someone from outside of Intel and someone who combines past (successful) CEO experience, relevant technical experience / credibility and broader external market knowledge and connection to the tech ecosystem.
Probably the bigger (BOD-level) question is whether Intel needs to be broken into multiple parts.
The CEO of a lean and mean but customer-responsive foundry business should be different than one for present day Intel.
Number 1: External, as any internal hire will have decades long experience and vision clouded by relationships and missplaced trust in other longtime intelers promises. As ruthless as BK seems he still trust people like Sohail, Ann and others in TMG and see the collateral situation of it now! Intenal like BK simply can't and won't probe and ask the necessary and required questions as it would be untrusting so the hard data and reality never comes out. BoD is terrified of making an HP, Apple, Yahoo like mistake. Better the safe and likely failure versus the bold and IBM like Gerstner like hire.
Number 2: Someone with nothing to gain but only wants to do right. Hires like Yahoo, HP and others were aspiring crazy ambition driven for the corner office so they will say what the BoD wants to hear versus what needs to be done.
Number 3: they asked me and I declined so intel is totally screwed. They are past the tipping point and there is no other savior
Anyone who really has 1 and 2 isn't stupid enough to take the job. Former executives like Splinter, Gelsinger who went external and might have the guts to do blood letting know enough won't bother now
Sorry intel is going like Kodak another iconic who couldn't adjust to the changing landscape due to insular, denial and arrogance.
It's been discussed in the past, but who (or what qualities and characteristics) would make a good new Intel CEO?
This would be an incredibly difficult job with a high likelihood of failure as there are tremendous internal and external forces working against Intel.
@L3wSMsh-1rej. Well said, was similar as you and find the new job refreshing. Sad to see mybex employer and many good ex colleagues trapped on the Titanic.
@1gug I'm sure that's what Kodak, Blackberry, Circuit City, Blockbuster, Sports Authority, and many others all said in the past (with various revenue $)
Agree with posters here. What happened in 2015 and 2016 was shameful: Intel turned on itself. Instead of admitting failure in product oferrings, or the way customers are treated, or failure to stick to a vision (see HBS video of Renee James talking about the data center), Intel defined the crisis as a cancer within- people that had to be targeted and told to leave. In TMG, managers were told that our problem was velocity due to non-performers. Suddenly, my management started to grade me on expectations that were not part of my job description. A typo on a PowerPoint became a big deal. My employees were dragged into 1/1s with my manager asking for dirt on what I wasn't doing right-- they would immediately come to me very worried, saying they felt a certain response was expected and the boss would get upset when it wasn't given. In the end, it was very disconcerting to take the fall for the corporation's strategic mistakes. I took VSP and was employed elsewhere within 4 months. The Intel golden age is indeed over, but it will be an ugly slide to the bottom.
@1gug - Back to kool-aid drinking, shill.
BK = sicko. I'm shocked so many employees still follow this moron's lead.
"Intel is beyond saving"
What is wrong with you people? Intel is a 50 billion dollar corporation. Intel is going nowhere.
x86 still in contraction mode
CEO is late to every trend and then piles in thinking intel will be a leader.
The core competence of being a leader for Moore's law is squandered in 2017
Any question?
I understand that it seams as though that would be what's going to happen. But anybody have any specifics on when? I mean like some sort of proof not just opinions? Just wondering. .
I agree with other posts that Intel is beyond saving. It will never be the company it was. At best it can survive in mediocrity. When it passed up mobile, that sealed its fate. Now it doesn't have what it takes to compete and given its SJW bent, never will.
R.I.P. Intel
Greatness left when Grove handed the reins over to Barrett. It's been downhill ever since. Pretty much 20 years of anemic, below-trend growth. The stock price has been range-bound for two freaking decades. To think anything will change is just foolish. There's too much bad culture to overcome. Greatness will almost certainly occur elsewhere.
@L3wSMsh-1ygo most certainly big cuts in manufacturing as TMG is the biggest cost and headcount center!
Fbc is there any specifics like time frames , and is anything in mfg going to be affected?
The string of the three stooges of CRB, PSO, and the worst of them all BK all but assures who ever succeeds them will have a company looking like Kodak or Blackberry right before they went unde.
No saving possible for this company as it is well past the tipping point on the way failure and a HBR case study of the three stooges failure.
If Intel really wants to see where everything went south, they need to look at the year 2000. That's the year Intel went from great....to being everyone else!
@fbc - I agree. Company is beyond saving. I was also able to glean many things I didn't like behind closed doors in management meetings. So glad I was able to jump ship with a good VSP.
Things are going to have to get a lot worse before they start to get better.
Everyone knows that the cancerous cells of VPs and spineless managers have already spread to every corner of the entire organization. it's too late. the company had already started its fast descend since 2016. Trust me, I see things behind closed doors that many of you do not. Mark my word.
If Intel needs it's Swamp drained, then you need to include BoD, and the 300 VP's as well