4 ms·

Tim Cook is also an industrial engineer, and this is easily available information. My point is more that you don’t want people focused on business and profits

Tim Cook is also an industrial engineer, and this is easily available information. My point is more that you don’t want people focused on business and profits instead of people who have deep knowledge in the area and passion for the product. Accountants and business majors are better at managing insurance companies, banks, etc, because they understand the space. Engineers are better at managing engineering companies for the same reason.

tidepod12 6y ago
Tim Cook has a bachelor engineering degree but he hasn't been involved in engineering work since the 90s. He's been the head of operations, making business decisions like closing down factories and outsourcing production, since his days at IBM. He is a supply chain wonk, which is why he got an MBA (supply chain management is a core part of business school teachings). This is also easily available information. Cook has been "focused on business and profits" for decades, and yet you act like he is an example of a great "engineer" in charge.
- brokencode 6y ago
  Believe it or not, managing the supply chain is a specialty of industrial engineering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_engineering#Sub-disciplines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_engineering#Sub-dis...
  - tidepod12 6y ago
    >Although it has the same goals as supply chain engineering, supply chain management is focused on a more traditional management and business based approach gasp, there's that evil "business" word again
- orwin 6y ago
  I've always been impressed with production engineers, cause they always find a way to explain to us (software/electric/electronic engineers) the issues with the marketing/commercial/supply chain side and explain to the executives/MBAs that, no, adding 10 people to a 5 people team won't make the team go 3 time faster. In big consortiums projects they are pretty much a glue imho. Having a production engineer as an exec is probably the best way to run a successful team if you project involve multiple field of knowledge (as Apple probably does). Tim Cooks understand tradeoffs, and this understanding should be expected of any top exec. Is it often the case?
  - bumby 6y ago
    Once upon I time I worked in a process engineering gig. Literally every problem started by trying to explain no, just adding more people to a bad process won’t magically fix things. And yet, that was always the knee-jerk reaction to those owning the process. I think it’s because a bad process has the people constantly reactively fire-fighting they naturally feel short-handed
danaliv 6y ago
You need both. I've worked at places that were all subject-matter and no business expertise. Companies like that fail.
mrkramer 6y ago
> My point is more that you don’t want people focused on business and profits instead of people who have deep knowledge in the area and passion for the product. But isn't focusing on business and profits also focusing on safety of your products since you want to make sure your planes don't crash and passengers come to their destination alive and unharmed.
- nytgop77 6y ago
  (1) what is the timeframe you look at? (I want LOTS of money THIS year, because I NEED a yacht THIS year to have a party with celebrities. How do you convince person like me to invest money in developing safety solutions?) (2) profit = selling price - production\development cost - expected downsides of accidents(penalties, tarnished image). "Expected downsides of accidents" can be reduced by reducing risk, but also in some other creative ways (blackmailing, lobying, promoting the right candidate, marketing, rebranding, migrating to different markets, insurance, coverups. And lets not forget deals with friends: If I can win 5billion, I can allow my self to split it 100 ways and still end up with a nice big yacht).
- justinclift 6y ago
  > But isn't focusing on business and profits also focusing on safety of your products ... In practical terms, it doesn't appear to work out that way.

tidepod12 6y ago

Tim Cook has a bachelor engineering degree but he hasn't been involved in engineering work since the 90s. He's been the head of operations, making business decisions like closing down factories and outsourcing production, since his days at IBM. He is a supply chain wonk, which is why he got an MBA (supply chain management is a core part of business school teachings). This is also easily available information. Cook has been "focused on business and profits" for decades, and yet you act like he is an example of a great "engineer" in charge.

brokencode 6y ago
Believe it or not, managing the supply chain is a specialty of industrial engineering. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_engineering#Sub-disciplines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_engineering#Sub-dis...
- tidepod12 6y ago
  >Although it has the same goals as supply chain engineering, supply chain management is focused on a more traditional management and business based approach gasp, there's that evil "business" word again
orwin 6y ago
I've always been impressed with production engineers, cause they always find a way to explain to us (software/electric/electronic engineers) the issues with the marketing/commercial/supply chain side and explain to the executives/MBAs that, no, adding 10 people to a 5 people team won't make the team go 3 time faster. In big consortiums projects they are pretty much a glue imho. Having a production engineer as an exec is probably the best way to run a successful team if you project involve multiple field of knowledge (as Apple probably does). Tim Cooks understand tradeoffs, and this understanding should be expected of any top exec. Is it often the case?
- bumby 6y ago
  Once upon I time I worked in a process engineering gig. Literally every problem started by trying to explain no, just adding more people to a bad process won’t magically fix things. And yet, that was always the knee-jerk reaction to those owning the process. I think it’s because a bad process has the people constantly reactively fire-fighting they naturally feel short-handed

danaliv 6y ago

You need both. I've worked at places that were all subject-matter and no business expertise. Companies like that fail.

mrkramer 6y ago

> My point is more that you don’t want people focused on business and profits instead of people who have deep knowledge in the area and passion for the product. But isn't focusing on business and profits also focusing on safety of your products since you want to make sure your planes don't crash and passengers come to their destination alive and unharmed.

nytgop77 6y ago
(1) what is the timeframe you look at? (I want LOTS of money THIS year, because I NEED a yacht THIS year to have a party with celebrities. How do you convince person like me to invest money in developing safety solutions?) (2) profit = selling price - production\development cost - expected downsides of accidents(penalties, tarnished image). "Expected downsides of accidents" can be reduced by reducing risk, but also in some other creative ways (blackmailing, lobying, promoting the right candidate, marketing, rebranding, migrating to different markets, insurance, coverups. And lets not forget deals with friends: If I can win 5billion, I can allow my self to split it 100 ways and still end up with a nice big yacht).
justinclift 6y ago
> But isn't focusing on business and profits also focusing on safety of your products ... In practical terms, it doesn't appear to work out that way.