4 ms·

It is pretty standard to have a new CEO change up the previous lieutenants. Helps cut down on people who are still entrenched to the "old" ways. If the new pe

by ragnot 5y ago

It is pretty standard to have a new CEO change up the previous lieutenants. Helps cut down on people who are still entrenched to the "old" ways. If the new people are actually better or not isn't really relevant. Loyalty is the only thing that matters at that level.

taurath 5y ago
Still less than a week after the previous CEO steps down, especially unexpectedly, is incredibly fast.
- aliswe 5y ago
  sometimes a CEO is elected/employed only to execute these kinds of changes ...
  - ksec 5y ago
    And for good reason. The new incoming CEO would have little to no relationship with any employees. Right now the CEO, quote > Two executives, head of engineering Michael Montano and Dantley Davis, will step down as part of the reshuffling. Reads to me more like power play.
- meepmorp 5y ago
  The guy was CTO, so it's not like he doesn't know the people involved. Is it surprising that he may've already had a plan in mind?
underwater 5y ago
I once had a leader come in and commit to not making radical changes, that he was going to listen and learn and then make adjustments accordingly. That was so refreshing and I really respected him as a result. It feels like more often than not execs who come in and immediately change things are just pattern matching approaches they've seen previously without actually understanding what they're trying to change. A classic example is Marissa Mayer's attempts to Googlify Yahoo. You can't change a business model or a culture by doing a reorg. It's literally cargo cult behaviour.
- ragnot 5y ago
  It's not about changing the business model or culture. It's ensuring that the CEO can survive and has allies he can work with. I hate to break it to you, but execs who come from the outside (i.e. non founders) rarely care about the long term future of the company. What do they care about? The stock options they were granted. The notch in their resume. And of course the money. Relatively short term plays. Surrounding themselves with familiar people cuts down on the tremendous political burden the job bears and allows them to get to those short term profits in an easier way.
  - astrange 5y ago
    Parag has been a Twitter engineer for the last 10 years. Reorganizing away from a functional structure is a weird choice, though.
    - ragnot 5y ago
      Perhaps. Or perhaps over those 10 years he was keeping a list and had some scores to settle. I've found execs "in the game" (so to speak) rarely forget.
      - kbos87 5y ago
        …or perhaps he’s coming to the situation with a deep and accurate understanding of what is broken at Twitter?
- 1123581321 5y ago
  I admire that as well, and would work hard to provide that kind of person with a lot of information, but there are people who would take advantage of the bought time to work against the eventual decisions, and that approach also doesn’t curry as much favor when urgent changes are perceived to be needed.

by ragnot 5y ago

taurath 5y ago

Still less than a week after the previous CEO steps down, especially unexpectedly, is incredibly fast.

aliswe 5y ago
sometimes a CEO is elected/employed only to execute these kinds of changes ...
- ksec 5y ago
  And for good reason. The new incoming CEO would have little to no relationship with any employees. Right now the CEO, quote > Two executives, head of engineering Michael Montano and Dantley Davis, will step down as part of the reshuffling. Reads to me more like power play.
meepmorp 5y ago
The guy was CTO, so it's not like he doesn't know the people involved. Is it surprising that he may've already had a plan in mind?

underwater 5y ago

I once had a leader come in and commit to not making radical changes, that he was going to listen and learn and then make adjustments accordingly. That was so refreshing and I really respected him as a result. It feels like more often than not execs who come in and immediately change things are just pattern matching approaches they've seen previously without actually understanding what they're trying to change. A classic example is Marissa Mayer's attempts to Googlify Yahoo. You can't change a business model or a culture by doing a reorg. It's literally cargo cult behaviour.

ragnot 5y ago
It's not about changing the business model or culture. It's ensuring that the CEO can survive and has allies he can work with. I hate to break it to you, but execs who come from the outside (i.e. non founders) rarely care about the long term future of the company. What do they care about? The stock options they were granted. The notch in their resume. And of course the money. Relatively short term plays. Surrounding themselves with familiar people cuts down on the tremendous political burden the job bears and allows them to get to those short term profits in an easier way.
- astrange 5y ago
  Parag has been a Twitter engineer for the last 10 years. Reorganizing away from a functional structure is a weird choice, though.
  - ragnot 5y ago
    Perhaps. Or perhaps over those 10 years he was keeping a list and had some scores to settle. I've found execs "in the game" (so to speak) rarely forget.
    - kbos87 5y ago
      …or perhaps he’s coming to the situation with a deep and accurate understanding of what is broken at Twitter?
1123581321 5y ago
I admire that as well, and would work hard to provide that kind of person with a lot of information, but there are people who would take advantage of the bought time to work against the eventual decisions, and that approach also doesn’t curry as much favor when urgent changes are perceived to be needed.