12 replies (most recent on top)
BK is a foul stain on Intel's history and reputation. If he still had any semblance of honor or respectability left, he should tender his resignation immediately. But we all know he does not. It's gonna take a real hit to the stock price or financials to get the cowardly BoD to do something.
Simple. Lisa Su is nothing short of a genius, check out her bio and CV. FakeNews Krzanich is a phony opportunist and a total fraud, who should be pushing wafers as a fab monkey at best.
Why can't we have real leaders such as Lisa or Jensen and instead stuck with a lying, incompetent POS?
Article is spot on. BK was a good manufacturing guy with one focused task - crank as many as x86 processors using economies of scale "copy exact". Before before he became CEO, he had never managed a P&L, never made ANY business decisions, hardly met any customers, never made a gutsy product decision. So the results of his leadership are not surprising. On top of that, selling as many shares as possible with insider trading accusations. it has never happened in our Intel history. Amen !!
I don‘t know... „CEO of Intel“ looks freakishly good on BK‘s CV.
Lisa Su line up her CV and compared to BK’s any question which company has a qualified leader and full of promise as long as they get the resources and the one with the 🤡 that has squandered all of its
Enderle is not a lightweight. Highly respected. Agree strategy change is needed, but intels problems have always been culture and not the (endless) strategy discussions and uncounted billions invested. Example - With every reorg is a new strategy put in place to show predecessor was the problem. Nothing. Has staying power. Kind of trump like and not effective. bK made culture 1000x worse. That why intel is doomed
I think nails it - there is no focus. BK's reign has been all about the next shiny object. While that may seem like a strategy to venture in to new businesses and diversification, there was NEVER a comprehensive approach to those vectors. NTG was a small group with lots of power to get things done on a small scale, but they never, ever coordinated with the rest of the orgs to think through the larger support and growth issues. And then all of a sudden BK was off to the next big thing. That's BK's MO. It will not change.
And while Enderle's column was good, he needs a thesaurus to figure out a new word for 'effort' in the second paragraph.
Another thing to consider is how intel went about new thrusts like Itanuim, Knights ..., Clear, McAfee, mobile Aps, tablets and now AI, IoT, Autonomous Cars, and very new growth fad.
And how can we forget BK projects like drones and charging bowls.
Intel needs to go back and figure out core competence and competive strength and leverage them smartly and with courage/preservative. What has doomed intel more than anything is the arrogance of their approach to everything.
I see nothing in BKs approach currently that suggest anything that caused prior failures not to repeat.
Intel and management team can learn a thing or two from the cultural and focus of Samsung and Huawei as well as the other direct competitors or indirect ones like TSMC, nvidia, Apple, AMD and even Google and Amazon that are killing it.
Psst it all starts from visionary BoD and CEO 😱
A lot of what the article is saying about Intel‘s culture is absolutely spot on. What the article (like many people here) is getting wrong is the idea that losing market share to AMD is something Intel would worry about. But in fact, as the article suggests (without drawing the correct conclusions), Intel is giving up that playing field to a certain extent on purpose.
Intel missed the mobile revolution, and the management is now driven by the fear of missing the next big thing, so Intel gives up the constantly shrinking PC business in favor of moving into other fields. That might look ridiculous to some people, but those are the same people who ten years ago would have ridiculed Intel for moving into the mobile business and who now criticize Intel for not having done so.
Let‘s face it: The PC business is dying. The server business looks great right now, but the growth potential is limited. An Intel that competes primarily with AMD in these fields is not long-term sustainable, at least not with the current size and revenue. So yes, Intel‘s culture is focked up, BK is a despicable human being, but from a strategy perspective, Intel is doing the right thing by stepping out of the PC comfort zone.
The list of intel senior people who have left is far longer than Paul.
Let’s not forget that that before we had Sanders at AMD against the legendary original three at Intel. Amazing that AMD survived and at times was kicking intel. But those days are back again with BK.
Doesn’t the problem start with BoD who paraded a bunch of candidates in and choose BK in the end?
The BoD needs an activist to initiate the required change then the BoD can romance BK and then intel might have hope again, better not wait to long as a wildfire is brewing to blow up in 2019.
Excellent article. Here is a short segment that is quite interesting:
Wrapping Up: The Importance of the Right CEO
I’m writing this at an AMD press/analyst event, the kind of event that Intel used to dominate but has apparently defunded under Krzanich. This is an event showcasing accomplishment and advancement, and is highly supportive of Moore’s Law (which came out of Intel). In contrast, Intel is mostly focused on trying to keep from having to recall parts affected by the new exploit “sideload-analysis.” AMD’s CEO is at the heart of the effort to keep customers safe, while Intel’s CEO has appeared to go dark once his massive stock sale was disclosed.