Slashdot Mirror
Major Microsoft Re-Organization
Robert Scoble writes "Microsoft is unveiling a major reorganization today to help get Vista out the door. Some of the major changes include the appointing of three new officers to the three major divisions. The Microsoft Platform Products & Services Division will be led by Kevin Johnson and Jim Allchin as co-presidents; Jeff Raikes has been named president of the Microsoft Business Division; and Robbie Bach has been named as president of Microsoft Entertainment & Devices Division. In addition, the company said Ray Ozzie will expand his role as chief technical officer by assuming responsibility for helping drive its software-based services strategy and execution across all three divisions."
- Johnson
- Allchin
- Raikes
- Bach
- Ozzie
Take the first letter of each name and you get Jarbo. I think they were going for Jar-Jar,but couldn't quite pull it off without ESRA reshuffle just prior to rolling out a major product launch. I think this bodes poorly. The Street may think this is very proactive and a good move, but I've seen these things from the backend often enough I think it'll only be a matter of time before they're circled like wagons with a bin lid over each's arse end.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
This reminds me of a Dilbert Cartoon
--
Wally to PHB: I don't understand how the new reorganization will help us "focus on our core business." Did our core business change? Or are you saying that *every* reorg prior to this was a misdirected failure?
PHB: Wally, when a car gets a flat tire, what do you do?
Wally: Well, if I'm you, I rotate the tires and drive home.
--
I think that pretty much says it all.
Yeah, it's just adding extra bureaucracy, rather than looking at the real problems.
I still can't work out why nobody at MS doesnt look at their nearest (and very much growing) competitors: Apple, Google and Linux aren't innovative because they hire more managers, they're innovative because they let the designers design, the coders code and the corporate bullshitters sit at home unemployed.
cmd-q.co.uk - some sort of stupid fucking internet bullshit
Many small start up companies succeed because they do nothing but what they do best. That was why MS succeeded at first, (among other things).
But they lose that when they add management. Some people think that its inevitable that such a thing happens to large companies, but I give you a counter example: Pixar.
Pixar has become the number one name in computer animated movies, and have had at least half a dozen box office toppers. But they continue to produce quality and quantity quickly because they have relatively few mangement positions which do their jobs well, and there are fewer seperations between ideas and implementations.
That is the problem that needs to be addressed, not only in MS, but in other companies like Yahoo and even some non-profit projects.
FanFictionRecs.net
Chair-man.
Tip your waitresses! I'll be here all week!
Suggested reading for Microsoft Management:
1 835959/103-6695899-7729413?v=glance
The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering, by Fred Brooks. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/020
You've got a project at risk, scheduling and production issues, so the fix is to re-organize and add executive and middle-management incentives, as in:
If they meet incentive goals, the 120 or so vice-presidents will receive an eye-popping $1 million in salary a year, and general managers, the next level down, will get $350,000 to $550,000, according to a high-ranking source. But the rest of the staff is paid at market rates. -- Business Week
Granted, this upcoming train wreck will provide a certain amount of entertainment, but it will be pretty unpleasant to work through. Over a year of Death March time so your boss can get the Big Bucks. Eccch.