Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft CIO Stuart Scott Gets Axed
avjt writes "Microsoft has terminated its CIO Stuart Scott for 'violation of company policies'. They won't elaborate. Now what do you think this guy has done?" Ya know, I'm positive someone reading this story knows the answer to the mystery... and they could post it anonymously and be totally fine because there will be a hundred other totally wrong guesses and it would be completely impossible to distinguish the two ;)
Time to google for articles where he said something good about Linux...
Got fed up with Vista and installed $SOME_DISTRO instead. :-)
:-(
Somehow this is gonna cost me karma...
Someday, I'll have a real sig.
Taco said in one of his write-ups, comments will (very rarely) be removed for legal reasons.
Whichever post dissapears after MS sends an email threatening legal action. That is the reason... Everyone, ready your screenshots!
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
When filling out a form, under the section that said 'DO NOT WRITE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE' he wrote 'OK'
He bought a Sony Playstation 3, then looked for help setting it up via Google on his Linux based computer.
balmer run out of chairs to toss! so he moved onto the management, which is a smart move they are thick as wood anyways
He was baggin' Belinda.
he deemed himself the "chief indecent officer", came to work naked, and refused to let anyone not notice his lack of clothes lolololol
Got caught playing with his Wii
... telling Apple how to implement a Blue Screen Of Death in MacOS X.
Stuart L. Scott's middle name is Linus.
Usually, at levels this high, executives who misbehave are quietly asked to resign. The fact that his termination was this public and graceless tells me he did something pretty egregious, because Microsoft apparently wants to not just get rid of him but warn other corporations not to hire him. Misappropriation of corporate funds, in some way, seems the most likely candidate to me.
Please note I'm not informed at all, just speculating.
...often the reality is much simpler and mundane... What are you doing bringing reality into this? We're trying to film the nerd equivalent of 90210 here, and you barge in with your 'reality' like it actually means something!A test came back negative -- his body was NOT composed of pure evil, which of course violates MS company policy. Subsequent tests confirmed it, although he is appealing to the World Anti-Doping Agency. Floyd Landis was unavailable for comment.
Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
I know several people who currently work at Microsoft. It's not because he installed linux or owns an ipod or some such silliness, since I know these people have done those things. I would imagine that it's actually something more serious, like an inappropriate work relationship (still thinking it's not something they would fire you for, at the CIO level) or divulging info to a competitor or inappropriate use of company funds.
[b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
Hey, I like how you just copied a post directly off the story site! That's the spirit of re-use in action.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
He told Clippy to, and I quote, "Get Bent".
More likely he side-stepped some chair related punishment. That's grounds for dismissal at MS I think.
Seriously though, I think considering his level it's possible that it could be in relation to some kind of trading of MS stock. Either himself or someone he knows.
But for someone at CIO level to get canned it was either something that borders, or is just straight up illegal that MS is trying to keep under wraps primarily because it would damage their reputation, whether it was something tacitly approved by them or completely unknown to them. Or, possibly, they had it out for him and used some minor infringement as the basis for letting him go. Something like "Sorry, the company limit on gifts from vendors and suppliers is $50, and that widget was clearly $51 after tax!"
Either way I'm sure he has some majestic golden parachute that will help ensure that neither he nor his family could potentially go hungry for the next 5 generations if they're marginally competent at managing money, provided he never talks about it...of course.
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." -Albert Einstein
Terminating him seems a bit harsh - couldn't they just have sacked him?
Pamela Jones!
Sean Ellis
Follow OfQuack's antics on Twitter.
Few people are ever fired for a breach of a minor rule in any corporation. Supposedly minor rules are usually only invoked if the breach is a cause of a wider problem. For example, an unproductive employee might be fired for visiting personal websites during working hours. The cause of the firing is that the employee isn't worth keeping because they (amongst other things) spend all day browsing the web and not working, not that the websites were not work related.
Remember, it kills morale and makes people want to leave if they're in fear of losing their jobs over something other than performance and/or disruptive behavior. It's also expensive - an employee of any worth takes months, sometimes years, to replace, and crucial information is inevitably lost whenever anyone leaves. While corporations suck at the whole morale thing, it's an exaggeration to assume that most people are fired over something "innocuous". Even if the reason given might appear that way, the fact is the corporation wouldn't be firing the person in the first place if there wasn't a good reason to get rid of them.
That said, the reason in this case could be as simple as Scott isn't worth anything close to waht he was being paid and was easily losable.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
... according to ValleyWag.
http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/exec/stuartsc/default.mspx
* He is a Six Sigma black belt.
* Scott lives with his wife and SEVEN children.
* He helped "ensure that Microsoft is the "first and best customer" of its own products."
* He spends his free time with his family, coaching sports teams, leading youth groups, and playing golf.
I'm guessing...he was teaching Six Sigma karate to underprivileged inner-city girls and, as happened with his wife, got too close and BAM...instant pregnancies all round.
Seriously...who has SEVEN CHILDREN? On PURPOSE?
There's a few dangers with this approach...IANALB...
#1, if he can prove in court that Microsoft wasn't actively supporting this policy at all times and simply used it as an excuse to dismiss him, Microsoft would be legally liable. Same with using him as a scapegoat or as an example; disproportionate application of corporate policies is a big no-no. Varies by state-to-state of course.
#2, just because a corporation has an HR policy does not necessarily mean that its legal. This is somewhat less likely since I'm sure MS has lawyers who review these things (especially since they've been nailed for this in the past), but we'll know how 'fair' his dismissal was if this ends up in court.
My wild-ass guess would be something incredibly stupid or personally dumb happened, like using corporate resources to download pr0n or warez, or liasons with staff members, etc. On an outside chance, he might have pursued a strategic policy that was against the mandate of the board of directors (e.g. "he's our plan for segregation applications from O/S releases" board "you aren't supposed to do that"). Either way we're not meant to know, unless this ends up in court.
John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
Microsoft basically paid for the new members in the Swedish OOXML vote and a subsidiary of Microsoft in Hungary was raided by the police in July. I have no knowledge that it is related to either of this, an out-right firing of such a high level person usually means basically stealing money. Not even a sexual harassment scandal would do that, just a quiet resignation.
Somebody who is never at home anyway. Nannies deal with the kids.
- Only a few of us know the truth, posting the truth is a good way to violate company policies, and you see what happens when you violate company policies, so even anonymous posting just means pressure is applied to
... let's just say a few ... people until it is determined who the one is and BOOM, job over
- We don't like really like slashdotters that much, so we don't care if you never know the real reason
- The truth is not exciting or anything...it's just mundane policy violation...so posting it is less enjoyable than reading all the wild-ass guesses
- Halloween is over
I'll never tell. Even if I did, you'd be all "Meh" and say the idea that he was bangin' Melinda or selling Microsoft secret plans to Google is much more intriguing. So, sure, he was a Google mole. Just run with that one.Undoubtedly because he was caught using an iPhone or an iPod touch. Or perhaps he brought a MacBook Pro to work. I can see it now!
...Er...It's only running Vista, if that helps. I erased that...oh-so-lovely (whoops) Mac operating system...Mac X, or whatever it's called...
:P
Ballmer: What the fuck is that?
Scott: Oh yeah, it's a MacBook Pro. Sexy piece of kit, isn't it?
Ballmer: What the fucking fuck? Fucking sexy? No, it's not fucking sexy. It's fucking Apple, that's fucking what. What the fuck?
Scott:
Ballmer: You fucking fuck! Get the fuck out of my fucking face!
Ballmer grabs a chair. Scott exits quickly stage left.
...and caught one of them using Google. When asked 'shouldn't you be using Live?', the answer I received was 'Ya, but I want to find something...."
Slashdot makes be feel uncomforable posting as AC when the CAPTCHA is 'tracking'.
Yes. Eight-Xeon-CPU "boxes," with 64GB of memory, 200-TB RAID arrays of solid-state drives, and next-generation GPUs that make the ST Holodeck look lame.
Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
IANAL, but I strongly suspect that in order of any of these "catch-alls" to be enforceable, they would have to be applied in a demonstratively consistent fashion.
I'm pretty sure most major companies realize that their CIO has enough money and savvy to hire a good lawyer if their grounds for dismissal is questionable. A dismissal like this is going to damage his reputation, and I'm sure if he thinks the reason behind it is BS, he's going to go for damages.
In
And he wasn't necessarily caught by a catch-all. It's also possible he did something legitimately harmful.
I think it's highly likely that he did something most people would agree was "bad." It might have been something personal, like a substance abuse problem, or something professional, like falsifying records. Microsoft wouldn't fire someone this high up without a good reason.
He violated the terms of the EULA.
Eh, if you walk around their campus you see iPhones, you see iPods, their employees use Google and GMail.
Now maybe at his level its different, but they are not cold blooded fascists who instill fear in their employees.
Its hard to keep 75k of them if you do.
The rumor mill is already gushing about the story: turns out Scott had an affair with one of his subordinates, who recently go a big promotion that raised many eye brows around the company. The two were on leave together when the investigation started: http://www.pollsb.com/polls/poll/3617/microsoft-fires-cio-stuart-scott-possibly-for-inter-office-affair-with-his-subordinate
The real reason for this should be immediately obvious to anyone as schooled in espionage as I am.
A common gambit for agencies wishing to implant a mole into a rival agency is to first of all establish their lack of attachment for the potential mole, common techniques for this are high profile embarrasing sackings or similar. Just as we see here.
Don't be surprised to see this guy revert to the life of an itinerant alcoholic for a while telling the world about how he made it big with one of the top dogs in the software industry and how he could have been great if the bastards hadn't dragged him down like that and how he'd do anything for revenge.
The aim obviously is for him to be hired by Red Hat or someone similar where he can then work from within to destroy them.
It's all obvious for those looking at the right signs.
There's your answer - he pushed them to use Vista internally.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Says here 'Scott was charged with the distribution of Microsoft products among employees.'
So, was he bootlegging Halo betas?
I cant see them firing him for giving out copies of Vista.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/microsoft-executive-fired-violating-company/story.aspx?guid=%7B3C9D5FC9-8119-4559-93AE-8FA7ED975002%7D&dist=hplatest
Starman97@Gmail.com (bring it on spammers)
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
Is it a coincidence this happened so shortly after Microsoft finally accepted to comply with the EC's decision in the anti-trust case?
It might be totally unrelated, but I noticed no one had mentioned this yet.
When a business wants to hide the wrong-doing of an executive, they buy them out and everyone keeps their mouth shut. One publicly terminates an executive when one wants to send a public message. Often the message is that the business is responsive to a situation. So if the executive is harassing someone, or committing a crime, the business can try to limit its liability by showing that it took all possible steps to remedy the situation.
Also, at the executive level, ticky-tack reasons for firing someone aren't really applicable. If the CEO doesn't like the CIO, he just cans him and brings in his own guy. This can be a kind of message too...fire a rival and consolidate power. And if that turns in an employment lawsuit, a little gift violation is not going to stand up in court.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Well, that's what ValleyWag says he was doing...
rj
You guys are nuts ... for a big company to say that a high-ranking employee was fired for any reason is a pretty risky thing to do from a legal standpoint. They must've had a darned good reason to can Scott. Even when a CXX is caught doing something, it's usually handled much more gracefully - he's allowed to resign "for personal reasons" or "to seek a different position" or allowed to stay on the payroll while he finds another job, even if the true reason was that the guy was sleeping with his secretary or got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. He also might've been caught on the losing end of a corporate power play - the folks who report to him and the folks who are his peers are always jockeying for position, looking for an opportunity to look good to *his* boss in case they see an opportunity to set him up to get rid of him...
Regardless, most of the opinions posted here about why the guy was sacked are just plain silly.
-- Ed Carp, N7EKG erc@pobox.com PGP KeyID: 0x0BD32C9B What I'm up to: http://intuitives.mine.nu
"in a weekend"? That's good?
In Windows, the worst TV tuner (an ATi All in Wonder) took at most 2 hours to set up, and then only because I had to get the video drivers as well. Most TV tuners took less than half an hour from insertion of board to watching TV.
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
Mark Twann, I think, once said, "it's best to keep your mouth shut an let the world think your a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt." I'm pretty sure I butchered that quote but you should get the point. I would suggest that you take Mark Twann's advice to heart.
Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification
you are not supposed to promote your lover way beyond his or her level of competence.
Mark who?
He should have read the ToS before he broke open the shrink-wrap on his office.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Gee, I bet you're a lot of fun at parties!
Clemens.
(wait for it...)
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
My guess is snuff, kiddie pr0n, or necrophilia. Or he may have really crossed the line and gotten into the furry stuff.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
is still pretty derideable. Not so much because he's running microsoft into the ground or anything. Overall, Microsoft is doing pretty well, and I'd probably say their stock and outlook is a bit undervalued by most people.
However, he's screwed up on two major fronts and kind of failed to repent on at least one of them.
1. He let the vista development get strung out like it did. This probably isn't largely his fault, but as CEO he should have realized something was going very wrong and forced the development team to start removing features instead of pushing back the launch date. Windows is still Microsofts most important product, and he should have kept a better eye on it.
2. He seems to have some vendetta going with Google, for reasons that are totally beyond me. I honestly don't see how or why Microsoft and Google are in competition, and I tend to think that Microsoft is wasting a lot of money pretending that they are a serious search and ads company like Google or Yahoo. Maybe they'll prove me wrong in the long run, they did with the XBox, but I tend to see their web initiatives as a distraction from more promising products.
3. He seems to have encouraged a very inefficient corporate culture with a lot of levels of management and lots of meetings. I don't think the Google style flat management structure is an appropriate approach for a company the size of Microsoft (or a company the size of Google for that matter), but I think that something has to be done to address how sluggish the company has gotten. Something like Apple style skunkworks projects for some of their key projects would probably make sense.
There are plenty of people around here (myself included) that use competing products. We're talking about Macs, Firefox, Google, iPhone, iPod, PlayStation, etc. Yeah, some of it is competitive analysis and such, but a lot of it is just due to personal preference, and it is draconian to think that an employer would force such measures on their employees. Obviously MS would like everyone to drink nothing but Kool-Aid, and will suggest people buy Zunes, use Live Search, etc. and I think that's fine and healthy. I would expect Google and Apple to do the same thing with its employees, allowing them to run/own/use the competition's products.
-- jchenx