4 ms·

Whats the advantage or strategy behind having someone from Marriott?

jrandm 7y ago
I can't speak for them, but I'd imagine an international hotel chain would have some unique views on things like travel trends.
- goatherders 7y ago
  I doubt it has anything to do with travel trends anymore than GSk being there has anything to do with pharma. These are business executives whose specific domain of expertise is business, not travel or pharma or banking, etc.
  - dave5104 7y ago
    They can also represent the enterprise software needs for those industries.
    - DonHopkins 7y ago
      Yes, but probably quite incompetently. And the Marriott board member probably knows how to make mediocre cup of coffee with the machine in their hotel room, but would be insulted if you asked them to make you a cup. But Microsoft has other experts who are competent to speak about those things (both enterprise software and good coffee), fortunately.
- david-gpu 7y ago
  ...which are immediately relevant to the interests of Microsoft because...?
  - jrandm 7y ago
    As a software giant Microsoft's products intersect most parts of most economies. A hotel chain has its own technology needs and has views of the technology needs of its customers. Whether a high-placed member of Marriott has specific insights to Microsoft I don't know, but I don't think it takes much imagination to fill in hypothetical reasons the person could be helpful.
dlp211 7y ago
Nothing. It's a way for the C-class to give each other more money.
- Marsymars 7y ago
  I always find this paper kind of funny, showing that academics on corporate boards are correlated with both higher company performance and lower CEO compensation: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2226411 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2226411
dahart 7y ago
Boards serve in part to guide networking and policy for executives, and some are required to be external. It makes complete sense to have executives from other large corporations like Marriott. Marriott doesn't seem to stand out as any further away from software than any of the other board members, so maybe I'm not understanding your question; what about Marriott specifically caught your eye?
- spsful 7y ago
  He would probably like to know why it makes sense to hire these external heads. If you were talking about the most outlandish of these board members, why would you say they deserve to be on the board? (I'm genuinely asking here as I don't know why myself)
  - dahart 7y ago
    Boards are required, and there are different kinds of board members, some of them are are appointed and/or voted in by shareholders. So it's not exactly a question of being "deserving". While Microsoft is probably going to have some sway, this process is not necessarily about Microsoft picking people to guide their development strategy, or picking people who are in their best interests. This is sometimes shareholders putting in people who can (among other things) - 1) oversee the corporate governance, make sure the company is playing fair with their stock, 2) put in people who are successful and can guide the company toward business success, 3) create a network for hiring & replacing executives when they leave for any reason. That said, having diverse input from other large businesses seems like it's always going to be an advantage.
nradov 7y ago
Marriott is a typical example of the type of large corporate customers who buy a lot of Microsoft products and services. Having customers on the board is one way to help validate market strategy and gain insight into future IT purchasing trends.
refurb 7y ago
You often see people sitting on boards from entirely different industries. One reason might be having a entirely different perspective on your business. When you have a board that entirely from the same sector, you end up with a lot of group think.

I can't speak for them, but I'd imagine an international hotel chain would have some unique views on things like travel trends.

goatherders 7y ago
I doubt it has anything to do with travel trends anymore than GSk being there has anything to do with pharma. These are business executives whose specific domain of expertise is business, not travel or pharma or banking, etc.
- dave5104 7y ago
  They can also represent the enterprise software needs for those industries.
  - DonHopkins 7y ago
    Yes, but probably quite incompetently. And the Marriott board member probably knows how to make mediocre cup of coffee with the machine in their hotel room, but would be insulted if you asked them to make you a cup. But Microsoft has other experts who are competent to speak about those things (both enterprise software and good coffee), fortunately.
david-gpu 7y ago
...which are immediately relevant to the interests of Microsoft because...?
- jrandm 7y ago
  As a software giant Microsoft's products intersect most parts of most economies. A hotel chain has its own technology needs and has views of the technology needs of its customers. Whether a high-placed member of Marriott has specific insights to Microsoft I don't know, but I don't think it takes much imagination to fill in hypothetical reasons the person could be helpful.

dlp211 7y ago

Nothing. It's a way for the C-class to give each other more money.

Marsymars 7y ago
I always find this paper kind of funny, showing that academics on corporate boards are correlated with both higher company performance and lower CEO compensation: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2226411 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2226411

dahart 7y ago

Boards serve in part to guide networking and policy for executives, and some are required to be external. It makes complete sense to have executives from other large corporations like Marriott. Marriott doesn't seem to stand out as any further away from software than any of the other board members, so maybe I'm not understanding your question; what about Marriott specifically caught your eye?

spsful 7y ago
He would probably like to know why it makes sense to hire these external heads. If you were talking about the most outlandish of these board members, why would you say they deserve to be on the board? (I'm genuinely asking here as I don't know why myself)
- dahart 7y ago
  Boards are required, and there are different kinds of board members, some of them are are appointed and/or voted in by shareholders. So it's not exactly a question of being "deserving". While Microsoft is probably going to have some sway, this process is not necessarily about Microsoft picking people to guide their development strategy, or picking people who are in their best interests. This is sometimes shareholders putting in people who can (among other things) - 1) oversee the corporate governance, make sure the company is playing fair with their stock, 2) put in people who are successful and can guide the company toward business success, 3) create a network for hiring & replacing executives when they leave for any reason. That said, having diverse input from other large businesses seems like it's always going to be an advantage.

nradov 7y ago

Marriott is a typical example of the type of large corporate customers who buy a lot of Microsoft products and services. Having customers on the board is one way to help validate market strategy and gain insight into future IT purchasing trends.

refurb 7y ago

You often see people sitting on boards from entirely different industries. One reason might be having a entirely different perspective on your business. When you have a board that entirely from the same sector, you end up with a lot of group think.