4 ms·

There are two types of turnarounds: 1) The place is burning to the ground, and if we don't fix it we'll run out of money. 2) We are wasting money and losing

There are two types of turnarounds: 1) The place is burning to the ground, and if we don't fix it we'll run out of money. 2) We are wasting money and losing our value* at an unacceptable rate. Each of these requires someone different. The first requires someone decisive more than anything else. The second requires a combination of strategic thinking and discipline. The irony is Ballmer probably could have done the first type of turnaround well. Of the names frequently mentioned, some seem to be good at technology strategy, some seem to be good at discipline. I don't know of any who are good at both. IBM was in situation #1 when Gerstner took over, so his primary value was decisiveness. Over time he was able to switch to strategic vision and discipline. * - I am purposefully vague on value. It could mean shareholder value, it could mean intangible brand value, it could mean market strength, it could mean value to employees...

chiph 13y ago
Someone like Winston Wolfe [1] would be a good choice for #1. "I solve problems" Alan Mulally of Ford would be a good choice for type 2. He's a strategic thinker, works within the system, and has done a great job at Ford getting them to build good cars again. He had the luxury of time to make his changes work, something that Microsoft, with it's cash hoard, does as well. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANPsHKpti48 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANPsHKpti48
- mathattack 13y ago
  Would Mulally be able to make the technical decisions required? Could he point the company in the right way? Gerstner was able to get away with being a non-technical CEO because job one was being decisive. When he moved strategically, it was to become a services company. He didn't need vision on the industry. Mulally is also 68. How long would he stick around? By all means I think Alan Mulally is one of the world's top CEOs. But is the right CEO for Microsoft?

chiph 13y ago

Someone like Winston Wolfe [1] would be a good choice for #1. "I solve problems" Alan Mulally of Ford would be a good choice for type 2. He's a strategic thinker, works within the system, and has done a great job at Ford getting them to build good cars again. He had the luxury of time to make his changes work, something that Microsoft, with it's cash hoard, does as well. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANPsHKpti48 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANPsHKpti48

mathattack 13y ago
Would Mulally be able to make the technical decisions required? Could he point the company in the right way? Gerstner was able to get away with being a non-technical CEO because job one was being decisive. When he moved strategically, it was to become a services company. He didn't need vision on the industry. Mulally is also 68. How long would he stick around? By all means I think Alan Mulally is one of the world's top CEOs. But is the right CEO for Microsoft?