Slashdot Mirror
Forbes Now Thinks Carly Saved HP
Justen writes "It's been nearly a year and a half since Carly Fiorina was fired as CEO and chairman at HP. Now, Forbes is saying Mark Hurd and HP today are reaping the success of the strategies she developed and decisions Carly made. 'Fiorina's demise was chalked up to bad execution of bad strategic moves, most notably the 2002 Compaq acquisition. But Hurd has always said there was nothing wrong with Fiorina's strategy. He seems to be hewing close to it. He rejiggered the org chart but said he'll keep the company together instead of breaking it up along premerger lines, as Fiorina's loudest critics suggested doing.' Forbes adds that HP's revenues, profit, and market share have held steady or improved since Hurd came aboard, but asks: 'Whose results are these? You could make a case that they are as much Fiorina's as Hurd's. The effects of strategic moves like buying Compaq stretch out over years.' So, which is it? Did Carly kill the HP way? Or did she save what was left of it?"
rejiggered is a word.
It describes when a white farm owner reassigns the black slave workers to different areas of the farm.
I guess HP is a modern farm, with the 'white' superior managers and directors, etc, and the 'black' slaves, i mean, employees underneath get shat upon from above.
I knew this would happen.
It was the same with Gil Amelio at Apple. He inherited a company that was going downhill fast, made the necessary changes and was sacked before his changes really took effect. When Jobs took over, a lot of the things he is given credit for were started by Amelio. Having said that, Amelio would never have gotten Apple to where it is today, only Jobs could have done that, but he does deserve the credit for what he did do, and which he doesn't generally get.
Same goes with Fiorina. She offended a lot of people at HP. But by all accounts they needed to be offended, and get a kick up the backside to boot. That's just what happens when someone comes along and makes necessary waves. Often they get sacked, but their changes stick. It's just business.
"by that I mean people who don't sit on slashdot all day wondering why everyone else isn't building robots" DECS
That's been my observation too -- when women get into positions of power, they act like little tin gods -- much more uniformly so than do men. But look at even the lower levels, anywhere women are in competitive positions, such as sales/marketing; the level of backbiting and other sneak-biting behaviour makes what competitive men do pale by comparison.
:)
I've also noted that as a rule, women in professional positions tend to be by-the-book, inflexible, and even if the customer knows WAY more than they do, you can't teach 'em anything.
There are exceptions, but such are my observations -- and mind you, I *used* to be all for total gender equality. But after a few more decades of experience, I decided we had it right the first time.
Carly, Hillary, Feinstein, and Boxer... those oughta be enough examples to scare the gender egalitarian out of anyone
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Sure there are exceptions to this. Oprah seems to hold it together well enough. And there are some male tyrants too (like Bill Mayer). But the pattern is still unmistakable.
It's a shame too. Because there probably are plenty of sane women out there who might not do this. But it's going to be damn hard for them to ever make it because of the antics of far, far too many of their fellow women who go power-mad the second they get any.
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Why the hell did we let one run HP into the ground?