Comments

Hey - just referenced this in my comment to Tom.

From the WSJ:

"One of the few bright spots has been the company's printing-and-imaging division, which generates more than three-quarters of H-P's profits."

I'm not knowledgeable on the ins and outs of business acquisitions. HP and Compaq didn't really register on my radar. However, I did notice their printer ads. Very, very creative. That's what caught my eye and what I commented on when my husband was shopping for a new printer.

Why don't they focus on printer technology rather than computers? I commented before about the scrapbooking industry. With the increased use of digital cameras, printers are now becoming the new photo-centers. My husband works for a photography retail store and can vouch for the decline in regular film processing. However, they sell printers and more often than not, consumers are attracted to a reasonably priced printer that can quickly give them photos of their families and friends.

Cordless printers...oh...the ideas I could see. Conventions, outdoor festivals (take a pic with the clown!) - it might sound zany, but people are desiring more freedom to design what they want, where they want. I think HP has a huge opportunity to develop this. The only thing that could be an issue is which group to focus on more - the business or the personal?

I think that Fiorina may have had more ideas but the investors were tired of waiting.

Posted by M.R. Maguire at February 9, 2005 11:03 AM

M.R. Maguire:
I think that's probably it. The board probably doesn't have the patience for Carly's vision. I met her at a "Moon to Mars" presidential commission she was on and it struck me that she prefers to play the long game instead of the short one. Her vision was to turn HP into a faster, more responsive version of IBM. It has the definite potential: they have the intellectual property portfolio, the research arms to generate new IP, and it has the penetration and respect in the systems integration arena to carry the ball for the product side. But with that much profit coming from printers its hard to get your board to think of the company as more than just a printer company.

Eventually we'll have smart paper and then people will stop printing their digital photos. I still don't understand why you print those anyway. Here's a question to ask yourself: do your kids actually print their photos? If they don't then "photo printing" is not a viable long term business.

And why scrapbook when a flash presentation incorporating sound and video is so much more dynamic and responsive?

Posted by Michael Mealling at February 9, 2005 11:15 AM

Ms. Maguire -- I think you've hit on something BIG. As women, we both have noticed how beautiful the ads for their printers are, how perfectly fitted into OUR LIVES (women's lives) the products Carly championed are, how revolutionary her approach was.

Can I mention something by the way? Notice how you discount your opinion above "I'm not knowledgeable" and "it might sound zany" -- PLEASE DON'T DO THAT!

I'll let Tom rant on the subject of women being brilliant and trendspotting and the MAIN PURCHASERS OF MOST PRODUCTS, but your opinion is right on and your observations of Carly's contributions seem to be exactly on the MONEY if you ask me.

But then, I'm just a woman ... what would I know?!

Posted by Halley at February 9, 2005 11:22 AM

I completely disagree and am saddened to see this turn into a gender-based discussion. From the beginning Fiorina has not demonstrated true visionary leadership at the helm of Hewlett-Packard. Her taking on the mantle of CEO at HP was tremendously divisive to the culture, Her acquisition of Compaq was misguided and has proven yet another example of how a merger of big companies ends up as a negative, not positive transaction.

Then, as we watched IBM figure out the inevitable results of the commoditization of the personal computer industry and cut an excellent deal with Lenova, HP took exactly the opposite tact and saddled the successful printer division with the unsuccessful PC division.

What was Fiorina thinking?

I talk about this at more length at http://www.intuitive.com/blog/ for people who want to see another perspective. But, really, Halley and M. Maguire, please don't say that it's because Fiorina was female, because that just trivializes a much more important, serious and legitimate transition event.

Posted by Dave Taylor at February 9, 2005 11:42 AM

I think this is good for HP and Carly. I was never happy with her choice of strategy for HP. the acquistion route to success, blah blah, economies of scale, just doesn't and has rarely passed muster. when the founders and employees revolted, a while back, shareholders should have braced themselves. DELL and IBM continue to devestate server/pc strategic thrusts. dumping the creative employees is now in hindsight, maybe good for the bottomline but dismal for the future creation and out of the boxness.....

Knowing some long time HP/Agilent employees. she's undone the very culture that made HP build so many great products. My hope is the interim CEO will carefully examine what worked and what didn't work for HP and "Make it so" with WOW!!!! not turn the entire franchise into DEC 2 the sequel(sp).
hopefully this is an exercise in "creative destruction"...and the company can become a leader again. we'll see.

Posted by kurt at February 9, 2005 11:55 AM

Halley,

Thanks for the encouragement. I needed to be reminded!

I am an artist/writer/philosopher who has a serious hankerin' for anything regarding technology and branding; which is why I started to visit. I read TP's book, "In Search of Excellence" years ago. (ouch..it has been a long time!) I deliberately applied to The Disney Store as PT staff because I wanted to understand how they worked. What was it that made them so special? Well, I learned.

Then I worked PT for Starbuck's for the same reason. (Plus I wanted to learn how to make one mean Caramel Macchiato..) Again, I learned.

I take all those experiences and then apply them to the present business I'm developing - coaching 35+ women on how to date. (Hey...the dating industry is a $7 billion dollar one. Why not?!)

Regarding Michael's comment about scrapbooking: this particular trend is such a phenemon that it surprised even me. What started as a very simple way to organize photos has exploded into a $3 billion dollar industry that includes albums, stamps, special pens, stickers, buttons, fasteners, die-cuts, cutters, etc. etc. - not to mention all the organizational product needed to keep all that stuff straight!

Amazing. And why continue with print photos? For exactly this reason - because women need to remember and need to record their memories.

Look at what has developed with music, the iPod and memory sticks. Attend a concert, immediately afterward, head to some port to immediately download the "live" performance for a fee. Immediacy. That to me is key. What woman wants to wait for her photos to be developed so she can immediately start to create a scrapbooking page? (By the way, scrapbooking has become a big hit with high school girls. It perfectly blends journaling together with photos...remember 'slam books?' Hello. They have a new lease on life!)

There is something special about holding a photograph in your hand or looking at it in a scrapbook. Personally, I feel that women have been crying out for ways to creatively express themselves (all those frustrated artists out there..) and scrapbooking has given them a voice. I don't think it will die down anytime soon.

Women = record keepers
Women + too much technology = frustration
Women + simple technology + efficiency + reasonable price = a home run for whichever company dreams it up first.

HP was on its way. If they market to women and find a niche audience like scrapbookers, I would think they'd be very successful indeed.

Posted by M. R. Maguire at February 9, 2005 11:58 AM

Licensing the iPod from Apple was the definitive indicator that HP had tragically lost its way. It made no sense, and it was the ultimate insult to HP's own internal design talent. Efficiency is vital, but emulating your competitors (Dell) and forgetting the secret of your own success is not the road to success.

Posted by Mike Sax at February 9, 2005 12:06 PM

It sounds as if Halley may have an agenda well beyond the commentary regarding the Fiorina change. The "product" that Carly will be known for "championing" is the acquisition of Compaq. Many, many industry experts questioned the value added of that acquisition. It appears that the board and various shareholders did not see any synergy or value either. One may choose to "play the long game" - but it must make sense and not delay for too long the short game results that are expected. To what extent was there an operating style / culture clash issue at play - beyond the superificial female - male thing? Carly did push through the highly questioned acquisition of Compaq - what she did and how she did it is what she will be known for - and I think that is how we got to where we are this morning.

Posted by Rick at February 9, 2005 12:09 PM

I'm saddened that you think I have an agenda.

BTW, I love this:

Women + too much technology = frustration
Women + simple technology + efficiency + reasonable price = a home run for whichever company dreams it up first.

Do you all think a female CEO is held to a higher standard than a male CEO? Also, do you think Carly's gender had no bearing on anything related to her success or failure there?

I can't wait until she writes her book.

Posted by Halley at February 9, 2005 12:17 PM

Dave Taylor,

You misunderstood me. I was not referencing Fiorina's gender - I was talking about targets. Who is HP targeting? Business or personal? If personal, there's a great deal of opportunity out there. If it's business, then so be it. But when an organization is already profitable in one area, why change direction? Why not exploit it with brainstorming sessions that could end up with breakthrough products?

Another thought: I wonder how much support Fiorina received for anything that veered away from the "company culture?" Anything new, exciting, fresh, different?

Women are buyers. There is a huge market of women who want to print photographs. Women love visuals, design, user-friendly products. This is an opportunity for either a male, female or a very smart chimp.

Posted by M. R. Maguire at February 9, 2005 12:20 PM

Ms. Fiorina will find another job as CEO at some other company sooner than later. Her strategy wasn't right for HP, but more than a handful of other companies will be more than willing to bring her on board.

GS

Posted by Gabriel Salcido at February 9, 2005 12:23 PM

"Do you all think a female CEO is held to a higher standard than a male CEO? Also, do you think Carly's gender had no bearing on anything related to her success or failure there? "

YES YES YES.. if a woman screws up the board tears her apart.. if its man, they just it make up over drinks ..its simple as that !!

Well, take a look at her public statement : ``While I regret the board and I have differences about how to execute HP's strategy, I respect their decision,'' Fiorina said. ``HP is a great company and I wish all the people of HP much success in the future.''

Posted by /pd at February 9, 2005 12:31 PM

Yes, this topic now has my brain popping.

Halley, I'll be brutally honest. If a woman wants to be taken seriously at the helm, she better learn fast how to play with the boys. I also believe that a woman in such a leadership position has had to learn the language of men but I don't believe it's been reciprocated. (i.e. - "Women are just too emotional, dammit!")

Both men and women come to the table with preconceived ideas. As Covey says, "seek to understand first." Women have gone the whole nine yards in trying to understand the corporate communication structure; which yes, has been male-oriented. Meanwhile, how many women in leadership positions have been minimized, deconstructed and dismissed when actually, she just might have a damn good idea?

I can't help but wonder at how many good ideas Fiorina had. How many were supported? How many had her team say, "Yes. Let's go for it?"

There are hundreds, HUNDREDS (maybe even thousands) of women who are starting their own business. (Hello, HP? Can I talk to someone who could walk me through a small biz start-up?)

Who will talk to these women?

The canning of Fiorina may have been justified. I really don't know but what I do care about was having a women advocate in a huge monolithic structure.

Geez, louise...TP has noticed. Why hasn't HP?

Posted by M. R. Maguire at February 9, 2005 12:34 PM

HP's stock has gone up 5% today. Co-incidence?

I don't think this is anything to do with women or a boy's club. Carly Fiorina was both CEO and chairperson, and the chairperson role is to be taken by a woman.

To be honest, HP seems a bit blurred in vision now. They make a lot of products in a lot of markets, serving everyone from the $50 printer market upwards. There doesn't seem to be anything "wow" about them (compare their cameras and photo printers with Canons). What have the giant HP done in the same time that Apple launched the iPod, the G4 iMac, iTunes and OSX?

Posted by Tim Almond at February 9, 2005 1:04 PM

HP was originally an instrumentation company (the roots). Carly disposed of that and bought a commodity (Compaq). She came from Lucent and didn't have a sense of what HP was, not from a long term point of view anyway.

I can imagine the cheers in HP from the old HPer's. The integration of two cultures wasn't the best idea, but everyone can be a critic. Her background was medieval history and not engineering which was the at the core of the business and perhaps that played a part. Where was her passion? On advancing technology or on marketing?

Posted by Dan at February 9, 2005 1:43 PM

I was a strong supporter of the Compaq deal, even though I usually rip giant mergers. First, Compaq was a lot more than a PC company, with leadership in numerous arenas. But, mostly, I couldn't imagine HP playing with the big folk if was simply a glorified printer company. (Albeit a profitable one.)I'd actually liked the PWC idea, 2 years before, which might have gotten HP up the services ladder more quickly. I believe HP has a ton of innovation skills, but also agree that the grand strategy is murky.

As to the "other" issue, my friend Martha Barletta had just passed on a story which lauded HP for its share of women on their Board--33%. So it wasn't necessarily a gang of old white guys who tossed Ms F out.

Posted by tom peters at February 9, 2005 1:51 PM

There is one other thing she did that kind of upset the employees and I really think she did not understand the impact, she posted larger than life pictures of herself at HP offices not out front but in break rooms and meeting rooms, she became the head of the company and not part of the company...

Posted by Al Hill at February 9, 2005 2:05 PM

I have one other comment, no mater how good the ideas at the top, no mater how well that are implemented will it ever work if you have demotivated your most innovative employees?

Posted by Al Hill at February 9, 2005 2:32 PM

I remember the first time I heard about HP. Calculators. Then I heard about their computers which had (according to my friends) a horrendous help desk. Slow. Painful. When the time came for my own computer purchase, I admit I stayed away.

My question for anyone who has the info: what company has successfully served both the business and personal markets? Other than Microsoft. Is it a good idea to do both or should a company focus on one or the other?

My old computer was a Micron, which I believe started as a business-only company then opened to the personal computer market. Then they changed again.

Posted by M.R. Maguire at February 9, 2005 2:50 PM

I think this obsession with size has to be part of the problem. Do necessarilly great ideas have to be developed in the same company they were born? I think the answer is no.

Giantism is the obsession of having things under control. And this kills creativity and boldness.

Posted by felix gerena at February 9, 2005 3:01 PM

Fiorina's tenure at HP was remarkable for the amount of contention there was between her and the Board and her and practically everyone who represented the HP culture. I thought her aquisition of Compaq was foolish, and it's only lately that the company has started to recover, but it lost much of its printer niche with this little foray into Dellhood.

She's a tough, shrewd, strong person who had her own ideas, and I wouldn't surprised if she doesn't get offered another position with a top company relatively quickly.

However, I have no doubts that her leaving the company has nothing to do with her being a women, publications referencing her uniqueness as a woman among men aside. She was just too strong and too savvy to get canned for being a woman.

That aside, I found the following to be disappointing and sexist:

Women = record keepers
Women + too much technology = frustration
Women + simple technology + efficiency + reasonable price = a home run for whichever company dreams it up first.

Might as well say that women make good librarians, and are afraid of technology. Nothing like promoting stereotypes that many of us are trying to eliminate, or at least, highlight as stereotypical behavior.

Why not say, HP needs pink printers with cute little sequins on them and be done with it.

I think we'll find that both men and women prefer efficient technology and good price and value. And that there are men, as well as women, who don't want overly complicated technology associated with their printers.

Posted by Shelley at February 9, 2005 3:22 PM

Replaced my HP 6p Laser Printer with a Brother. I went out to the big box stores to buy a replacement HP toner cartridge. Cheapest one I could find for the 6p was $75. Instead of a new cartridge, I bought a Brother Laser Printer for $100. Did not see a comparable HP in that price range.

Posted by JW at February 9, 2005 3:38 PM

I can't say that I'm surprised. Over last few weeks there were articles in media about how the Board of Directors at Hewlett-Packard are considering an executive reorganization that would strip Chairman and CEO Carly Fiorina of some of her current responsibilities. Hewlett-Packard's merger of the printer division with the PC division brands Fiorina as someone who just doesn't get it. There was a Knowledge@Wharton article "The H-P Compaq Merger Two Years Out: Still Waiting for the Upside" at http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/index.cfm?fa=viewArticle&id=1053 (free registration required) that does a great job anylasis Carly Fiorina track record at HP. We're in the 21st century and it's not about making stuff, it's about packing it together in a palatable form.

Numbers are also telling a compelling story. In the last five years Dell's stock is down about 9% but Hewlett-Packard is down a whopping 55%. More shocking, you’d find HP still gets more than 75% of its profit from its printer division – even more than before the merger with Compaq. Let not forget that one of the objectives of the Compaq merger was to diversify revenues from the printer division. If I were sitting on the Board of HP, I'd be darn concerned about Fiorina's judgment too. But then again, I would never have voted for her to assume the CEO position in the first place.

Posted by Manny at February 9, 2005 3:48 PM

This is the best news I have heard about HP since the end of the past century! So, yes, WOW!

Posted by Alex at February 9, 2005 3:58 PM

This resignation is unfortunate because Fiorina was one of the most powerful women in the corporate world. Her departure greatly reduces the ranks of high profile women leading America's top companies. The stock hasn't done well at all over the past 5 years or so, but it seemed as though the HP-Compaq merger was beginning to provide synergies for the company. Fiorina almost seemed like a celebrity among CEOs. How many Americans know any CEOs beyond Bill Gates (not even a CEO anymore), Carly Fiorina, and Meg Whitman? Not many I would venture to guess.

Fiorina is a staunch Republican so it will be interesting to see if she now pursues a career in politics.

Posted by JP Holland at February 9, 2005 4:08 PM

Breakingnews:CFO Wayman named as interim CEO, director Dunn as non-executive chairman

Posted by /pd at February 9, 2005 5:04 PM

Bottom line: Results matter, no matter who you are.

Promises are not results, Carly promised time and time again that things would change and they didn't. Anyone else in the organization would have been dehired long ago.

Posted by Dan at February 9, 2005 7:39 PM

Halley:

Buy her book? Is that all she's good for now? Let
her use her great vision and smarts that you think the board ignored to create. She's got the millions. No more excuses. Prove them wrong. Look at Donna Dubinsky/Handspring. Carly doesn't have it in her.

Posted by JB at February 9, 2005 9:08 PM

All I can say is bummer.

Carly has brass ones and stodgy old HP needs her desperately. The Compaq acquisition may have been misguided, but it took a fierce woman (yes woman) to pull it off, and the integration of cultures by most accounts the most difficult challenge she faced post merger, has been successful (so I hear and read).

There have been at least as many articles written about her awesome talents as a manager, visionary and executive as there have been critiques, by monday morning quaterbacks, of her Compaq quest.

Let's not forget the industry as a whole has gone through mass consolidations over the past 20 years. Compaq bought Digital Equipment Corp (DEC) not too long ago. Where are Tandem, Buroughs, NEC, NCR, ATT (yes ATT was in the computer business). This is what the IT industry does. Period.

IBM may be a step or two in front of HP with regards to spinning off commodity products (printers, PCs) and aquiring consulting services capability, but HP still has an opportunity to carve out a niche for itself where it has always played best - behind the scenes in the data center - with awesome servers (HP-UX/9000 comes to mind) and un-paralleled systems management software (OpenView is the industry standard to which all others must bow).

HP needs someone at the helm to pull them out of the printers, calculators, and boring software mindset (see http://www.hpmuseum.org/ for some fun). It aint the Bill and Dave show anymore. Losing Carly might well be their death knell.

~ Will

Posted by people.love.technology at February 9, 2005 9:12 PM

Shelley,

Women do make excellent librarians but I didn't say they were afraid of technology. Complicated technology though, is another matter. My point was that women are a powerful market that HP would do well to focus upon.

Boomer women, for instance, are smart web surfers. They also spend more than $55 billion dollars annually on consumer electronics. (This is out of a $96 billion dollar total according to the Consumer Electronics Association.) Also, they like products that are portable, compact, and streamlined. (CEA Jan/Feb 2004)

Would a pink printer with cute sequins work? Maybe. Maybe not. Meanwhile, Barbara K! Enterprises with her cute home improvement tools (specially designed for women) is looking for a National Sales Director to keep up with demand. Sexist? Barbara K! gets it.

Posted by M. R. Maguire at February 9, 2005 9:29 PM

HP used to make, in the words of Steve Jobs, "Insanely Great" printers.

I suspect that HP could OWN the printer market today if they had stuck to their unique ability instead of buying compaq.

I like organic growth of a home-grown product over fake growth by aquisition.

HP/Compaq just didn't work.

Oh, and the HP iPod??? Please!!!

Posted by Erick Blackwelder at February 9, 2005 11:32 PM

Some great conversation going on here. It is particularly fascinating to read the dialogue between M R Mcguire and Shelley. It kind of makes me wonder if us guys have a chance of ever understanding the woman's point of view. Or maybe that's it, women are as diverse as men in their thinking and attitudes. Perhaps we should be a little more careful about stereotyping them as so different from us.

Posted by Terry K at February 10, 2005 12:52 AM

Tom, I know you're a proponent of building greatness, followed by destruction. HP is so known for printing (and related things). Perhaps that's their current "greatness." Was she too focused on the long view or was she working on destruction? Seems to me boards don't necessarily see either course as positive (long-term stuff or destruction). And I'm not saying they're mutally exclusive either.

Greatness is being fired and collecting $21M.

Posted by Randy at February 10, 2005 1:51 AM

Ms. Maguire, there is a vast difference between a computer and power tools. I don't deny physical differences between men and women, and tools designed for women make sense.

But computers are, for the most part, tools for the mind; making sweeping statements that women can't deal with complicated technology, is to disregard all of us women who do so for a living.

Now, I'm not denying that women aren't a good sales target, and companies would be foolish to disregard this. But when you say that women like products that are portable, compact, and streamlined, what does this have to do with then not liking complicated technology? My TiBook is portable, compact, and streamlined, but what I do with it, is very complicated indeed.

And exactly what do these women who are measured want that is portable and streamlined? A computer? A power tool? A widescreen TV?

There are differnces between men and women, some of which are due to genetics and anatomy; others due to culture. The former is something to work with, the latter is something to be aware of, and in many instances, work against. And it starts by not making sweeping statements about 'all women' such as:

Women = record keepers
Women + too much technology = frustration

Posted by Shelley at February 10, 2005 4:25 AM

On the topic of diversity-- there is a very interesting English language school in Osaka, Japan that has broken the mold. Conventional wisdom in the Japanese English market is that students prefer white teachers... especially blond and blue eyed ones, who are from America, Canada, or the UK.

It is very rare to find an African-American teacher at one of these schools, or anyone else besides the WASP stereotype. Regarding gender, there are a decent number of women teachers but certainly more men.

A school called "Wisdom 21" has carved a unique niche by going against these trends. Of the eight permanent staff members pictured on their website-- only one is a white male (from Lithuania!). These eight people represent eight different nationalities: Malaysia, Japan, Lithuania, Russia, Canada, The US, The Phillipines, and Ethiopia.

The curriculum of the school is likewise diverse... with a strong focus on African-American culture and history.

Best of all, against popular expectations, the school is doing great-- competing against the mega chains (Nova, Geos) and beating them. They have now expanded to four schools. See their website for more:

http://www.wisdom21.com/english/top.html

Posted by AJ Hoge at February 10, 2005 4:27 AM

As per Terry K - this is a very interesting discussion.

For my two cents - lets be look at the positives first:
1. She broke a/the glass ceiling firstly, and advanced the notion of female CEO's - great, more diversity ultimately means more communication, imagination, innovation ...
2. She is walking away with significant name and "brand" recognition (and some bucks) - I recall reading last year about her interest in politics ...
3. HP itself - has had significant levels of publicity first with the appointment, and now with the departure of the first major female CEO. Most publicity can be very useful (though, and no offense to the accountants, placing the CFO in temporary charge is worrisome at a company often thought to be "innovation driven").

The negatives:
1. It seems that HP has not generated enough value/innovation/return from its strategy over the past half decade. Will the return be found in the near future ... a big maybe, but is it likely to "prove" the investment in real terms?
2. There appears to be a fracturing cultural base within HP, from reading here, and other sources. This is not good for a company famously associated with a strong HP way! I may be wrong in my recollection, but was HP not also the company that refused to lay off staff during a particular (70's?) recession, instead everyone working short time, but keeping their jobs? What a powerful team that must have been!
3. There seems to be difficulty - reports in, for example the FT - with Ms Fiorina's strong leadership style, also from the points above - the use of her image in meeting rooms etc. The symbols of an organisation should be related to its core values - not necessarily the figurehead at any one point in time! I'm not sure you can run a technological (or any company) just like a political campaign, at least in the long run.

Finally, after my lack of brevity above - starts the applause in Ireland for the frustrated women and technology discussion! These types of debates are great to stimulate market revealing ideas ... is off to the HP'esque shed in my garden to develop a green, fast photo, friendly, easy printer, powered by recycled beer fumes just in time for St. Patrick's day ...

Posted by Shane D at February 10, 2005 6:11 AM

WOW!!! ... what a discussion this is.

My take on it is that one isolated issue does not contribute anything significant in its own right to the debate about men/women in senior positions.

I have had great bosses who are women and great bosses who are men. I have also had the oppostite experience.

For me it is HOW GOOD A BOSS they are and not what sex they happen to be.

Yes ....I really do think it is that simple!

Please do not over complicate this.

Warm regards

Trevor

Posted by Trevor at February 10, 2005 9:12 AM

What a great discussion! I've waited a day before I replied because I wanted to make sure that I was not letting my bias drive me. I am biased toward women bosses because the 2 best bosses I've ever had were both women.
Now that I've go that out of the way this looks like a case of unmet expectations. The board had expectations and Carley did not meet them fast enough. My perception of her from a distance is that she is a great leader who has real vision. If any gender bias plays into this it may be that a man may have gotten more time to accomplish the mission. Hope I'm wrong.

Posted by Paul Hasney at February 10, 2005 11:04 AM

DSL - I am headed out the door for some meetings in Silicon Valley - your comments, although only quickly scanned, caught my attention. Can anyone remember the circunstances surrounding the departure from Apple of John Sculley? There were no "male / female / gender" issues at play but many cultural and performance issues that are.........

Posted by Rick at February 10, 2005 11:32 AM

Shelley,

My apologies for not making my point more clear. First, I stand by my statement. I'll explain. When I said that "women + too much technology = frustration" - I was not implying a woman was inable to handle complicated technology but rather, she would prefer not to deal with complicated technology.

There are brilliant women (you included if this is your gig) who can program, assess and churn out a 'quick and dirty' before taking her first sip of coffee. If so, brava to you. But I still believe that most women aren't there and unless they're involved with technology at a development level; they'd rather have the tool (tech toy) do what they want quickly so they can move forward with the rest of their life. I don't see this as minimizing the intellect of a woman but rather a time management issue.

Example: I've been talking to my husband about this discussion. We talked about digital cameras and he said the most common request he gets from consumers (especially women) is this: "Give me a digital camera that does everything for me. I want to basically point and shoot."

We both believe our culture is in the midst of such information overload that when it comes to technology - the more simpler the design, the better. Stress is taxing on the mind. In the book "Brand Sense" by Martin Lindstrom, he references a consumer study he did where the person was asked to choose between Nokia phone and Sony's Ericsson. Although one consumer admired the Ericsson for its light weight and stylish features, they chose the Nokia because (and this is what blew me away) it simply felt easier to use; despite the fact that the Ericsson had more features, was cheaper and had more style.

Felt easier.

Another example: I used to work for a Chief Executive Nurse. Huge job. Stress out the ears. Was she brilliant? Damn straight. Did she want to fool around with synching her Palm Pilot to her desktop? Configure her new printer with her computer? No way, jose. That was my job. Could she have done it? Yes. Did she have the time to do it? No.

The question I hear from my fellow women entrepreneurs is this: what is the best and highest use of my time? They don’t want to be fooling around with technology that has them pulling out their hair while leaving them with zero energy to follow up on contacts they made at the last networking event.

Since more women than ever are starting their own business, I think it would be prudent for HP to take note of what is considered “easier to use.” And I suppose I was hoping Fiorina would have had the chance to connect the dots for them.

Posted by M.R. Maguire at February 10, 2005 11:58 AM

"Slam Book"? What's a slam book?

Posted by doug at February 10, 2005 1:39 PM

I'll give a cookie to anybody that can really explain HP's long-term strategy or value/belief structure to me.
Carly & Steve Jobs are very similar in style, but Carly came from the short time-horizon world of sales and couldn't climb that last hill of defining what the company stands for. Before you say "follow me," the dumbest among us must understand where you are going.
A potted plant could understand where Apple is going.

Posted by Cal at February 10, 2005 2:13 PM

No, Ms. Maguire, I thought your point was clear. What I can't understand is why you're differentiating between men and women when you say that people want tools that are easy to use, uncomplicated, and no unnecessary gadgetry?

That's commonsense. Unless you're into gadgets, you want something that works out of the box. And before you say men typically are more into gadgets then women, I'd have to see some strong facts and figures to support this, because that's not what I'm seeing on the streets and in the weblogs.

True, years ago women took home ec and men took shop, but times have changed. And as your seller of power tools for women is finding, the days of women sittin' and knittin' and dressin' real fine for their man folk are over. The Beaver is dead. Long live the Beaver.

Are you saying women have commensense and men don't? Or are you saying that women are more honest about saying upfront they something that works out of the box, while men don't want to admit they can't stand all those buttons? Now, this latter I can believe.

Posted by Shelley at February 10, 2005 2:18 PM

Oh mercy, what thought this hath wrought.

Unlike many posters here, I never followed the Carly Chronicles too closely. So I don't have a take on whether or not her ouster was justified, or if they should have bought Compaq. But lots of interesting takes!

Especially the gender wars. I notice that "she's a woman" is listed as a factor that was or should have been taken into account for her hiring and firing. And would women do a better job than men in that job? And are women up to it with technology? My thought is one of exasperation, and has been written above, and I'll write it too: SO WHAT? Can she do the stinkin' job? If she can, that's good, and I don't care what her sex is.

Fact is, men and women are different. And these differences can result in bad management. A woman I once worked with told me that she will NEVER work for a woman supervisor again, because they tend to get personal and catty, and judge by personal likes and appearances rather than by the job. That's what SHE told me. I've seen women bosses do this too, but I've also seen them do well. (Hey, I love women; I married one.) A lot of men (me included) try to keep objective in their management, keep emotion out, and like the adage of "hire someone smarter than you to do the job, then stay out of their way." But this may not work well for some people. Oh well.

But anyway, I read the WSJ article, and found two things: 1) They're making lots of money. 2) Their stock price dropped shortly after Carly came on, and has stayed down. Did the board get skittish at the skittishness of short-sighted investors? Demand that Carly raise the stock price or she'll get canned? Who knows. It ain't gonna change how I live. I can only speculate, and not that well in this case that I don't know well, so I won't even seriously speculate.

One thing's certain, though. Carly Fiorina leaving H-P sure has raised issues about being in power and a company's long-term direction. Issues that we all need to address for ourselves, and for those people we influence.

Posted by Ron at February 10, 2005 3:36 PM

Shelley,

I've really been enjoying this discussion. After giving further thought to what I posted, I realized my choice of words made it sound as though women wanted ease in technology but men didn't. I know men want ease also and plead guilty to any sexism that was conveyed. I was too focused on making it clear I didn't believe women were dunces when it came to technology.

But does "ease in technology" look different for women? I still believe it does. Remember the automotive industry and how they ignored women for years? Finally they started to add features that would make life a little easier for a woman. A driver's vanity mirror, for instance. Did that mean a man never used the mirror? No, but many women use that mirror to check their make-up. (or heaven forbid, put it on - but it happens)

I vote for your last statement. I think women are more upfront in saying what works out of the box. There seems to still be an assumption that if a guy is cool and tracking the trends, he'll automatically love all the new buttons and gizmos. Also, I'm wondering if men are more patient with the learning curve than women.

I love tech. I'm still trying to convince my clientele to get great digital portraits taken so I can carry them with me on my PDA! PDA's rock.

Posted by M. R. Maguire at February 10, 2005 3:37 PM

I have to wonder why everyone (not just on this site, but in many blogs and mainstream media in the last 2 days) is taking this story so personally.

It seems as if the engineer-led culture of the original HP, started by Bill Hewlett and David Packard, is so sacred and has had such an important role in the development of not only that company, but MANY companies in Silicon Valley, that ousting Carly and her more marketing-led leadership feels like an enormous win for engineers worldwide.

Shelley's insightful comments suggest this really is not a gender issue, but a engineer v. marketer drama being played out.

Thanks for ALL the great comments, btw.

As a non-engineer, I have to ask, "Are engineers and marketers really so diametrically opposed in their worldviews?" I suspect they are.

Posted by Halley at February 10, 2005 4:01 PM

I don't really know Carly personally, and have only met her briefly once or twice. But as an entrepreneur in the IT industry, I can tell you her talent has truly been an inspiration. I wrote off HP several years ago. Her leadership is a good part of what brought me back. My R.POV8 on the subject = Go, Carly go! You're one of my heroes!

Posted by Ray Heath at February 10, 2005 4:18 PM

There is no particular reason why CEOs should be immune from the inarguable lack of creative thinking (just look at Hollywood) or lack of analytical thinking we see around us. You would have thought that the lack of shareholder value and customer value that has been a by-product of the pharma mergers would have demonstrated to HP that mergers are not a strategy. The merging of 2 ill companies does not create a healthy company! I never heard from Ms Fiorina at anytime, and still haven't heard, what business HP is in. It never ceases to amaze me how companies confuse activity with business definition.

Posted by Dave at February 10, 2005 4:46 PM

"As a non-engineer, I have to ask, 'Are engineers and marketers really so diametrically opposed in their worldviews?' I suspect they are." (Halley)

Well, lessee . . . Engineers are objective, marketers are subjective. Engineers appeal to the head, marketers appeal to the heart. Engineers are concerned with the facts speaking for themselves, marketers are concerned with getting people's attention. Engineers like to deal with logistics and details, marketers like to tell an imaginative story. Scott "Dilbert" Adams was an engineer, and he hates marketing departments; a girl I once dated is a great marketing type, and she accused me of being an engineer ("Ron, you're so anal.").

Yeah, they're opposed, all right, although probably not as much as David Duke v. Jesse Jackson. I do think it's possible to have engineers and marketers in the same room and not have them kill each other - if they know that they're different, and try to work toward a common goal with a result that looks and feels good to all of them.

Posted by Ron at February 10, 2005 4:49 PM

"Are engineers and marketers really so diametrically opposed in their worldviews ?" tell that to APPLE --The engineers are the marketers !! :)

Posted by /pd at February 10, 2005 4:52 PM

Halley--

In my experience starting tech companies, a company's DNA is set very early. And most companies send to be either Engineering-centric or Marketing-centric organizations (some truly great ones are both [Apple], but there are also some very good ones on either side [Google, P&G]).

However, trying to run an marketing company as an engineering company or an engineering company as a marketing company is usually a bad idea. People have learned how to be effective at doing something, and you're disrupting their effectiveness. Be the best at something. From what I heard, at both Lucent and HP, Fiorina tried to treat an Engineering-driven organization as a mareting-driven organization, undermining the hard work and enthusiasm of their most tallented people.

I don't think it's a gender issue: It simply shows again that female CEOs can be just as incompetent and out of touch as male CEOs. (I've seen plenty of both and I've work with some amazingly in-touch and talented male & female CEOs.)

Posted by Dan at February 10, 2005 5:09 PM

As I read this I received the latest issue of Fast Company. There is an ad on page 49 for the M2W Conference, (marketing - to - women).

The ad points out that Women:

spend 5 trillion annually
over 1/2 the U.S. GDP
over 85% of all consumer purchases

and HP just booted the most vocal, recognizable and talented female CEO in America (Meg Whitman excepted) in a very public way.

Do you think other women around the country will apply a cold hard business analysis to the question of why, or will the reaction be a mass migration to Lexmark or Canon.

As I look around my office I have, 2 Epson printers, 1 Lexmark and 4 HP all - in - ones...and I have 2 Canons and 1 HP at home, all purchased by women. Hmmmm, is there a message here.

Tony

Posted by Tony at February 10, 2005 6:06 PM

LOVE IT WHEN WOMEN FAIL AND IT IS STILL A GENDER ISSUE.

YES THEY FAIL / SHE FAILED - AND MORE THAN DESERVED IT.

Posted by John at February 10, 2005 6:25 PM

I think she failed. And I think that if you're not an idiot you simultaneously realize there is still a gender issue in this country. (Not to mention the world.) (Not to mention our Islamic Brothers & Sisters.)

Posted by tom peters at February 10, 2005 6:29 PM

Tony - are you saying that women will avoid purchasing a H-P printer only because they booted a woman out from the CEO position, regardless of how good the printer is or how much of a trashette geekweed she was? And if so, how would that square with the thoughts of M.R., Shelley, and Halley?

Posted by Ron at February 10, 2005 6:30 PM

Carly really set back the culture - she meanwhile makes off with $10M, while putting 15,000 families out of work, plus the huge loss in equity.

Posted by John at February 10, 2005 6:40 PM

John: your wrong.. her take away is $21.1M - not $10M !! As for putting 15,000 worker out of jobs.. I wonder where you got those figures from ?? I don't think right sizing is in their favour right now.. There is no chatter on that.. Can throw me a link to your factiod ?

Tom:"I think she failed." - Actually no- she just played the players.. go figure.. !!! Remember just before she was fired.. HP had a complete Tier of Sales Rep getting their hearts ripped out..(read as right sizing) !! Thus was approved by the Board and then follow thru 'decesions' - were not implemented as per plan (?) or were they ???? :)-

Posted by /pd at February 10, 2005 8:07 PM

PD: (re: where John got the 15,000 figures) see in the above story which I pasted... "Fiorina's obsession with Wall Street pushed much innovation to the side, and eventually led to a rather unsettling change in the HP work environment: the company's very first layoffs. When it was all said and done, 15,000 of the then 85,000 workers found themselves without a job by the end of 2003"

source: TechnologyReview.com (MIT)

Posted by DSL at February 10, 2005 9:50 PM

For the record, I own an HP printer and love it. I will be very curious to see how HP will evolve. Perhaps they'll be like the phoenix, rising from the ashes. I'll actually be rooting for them.

Of the many issues discussed, the one that caught my interest was HP's marketing to women and how Fiorina's departure would affect it. Boomer women are my clients. As much as a 'tech-head' I may be, the same is not true for most of my female contacts. I do have to get inside their heads to understand their thoughts and feelings about technology.

Tony's question is valid, in my eyes. Anyone who has worked with women know that connections do mean something. If a woman connects HP with an 'anti-woman' attitude, then yes, she just might buy something else (even if the board is comprised of 33% women). Although I like my printer, I've viewed HP as a man's world. Their creative printer ads was the first time I felt a real connection. (Creative. Simple. Beautiful.)

I know HP is a Serious Business. Having a woman as the CEO was inspiring to women. And really, I'm not sure if women connected this with HP having great (or not so great) products. The two may very well have been totally separate.

HP now has an opportunity to not only redeem themselves with a clearer message, but perhaps define themselves for women. Call me a dreamer but still...over 85% of consumer purchases. That's a whole lotta printer ink. ;-)

Posted by M. R. Maguire at February 10, 2005 10:11 PM

Tony,

I wouldn't call someone who reduced the value of the stock during their tenancy one of the most successful CEOs, female or otherwise. Anne Mulcahy at Xerox (female running a tech company) on the other hand took the company out of debt and turned it around.

Posted by Tim Almond at February 10, 2005 10:28 PM

I've never participated in a blog session before so please forgive me if I violate any protocols!

I am a 21-year veteran of HP, one whose job was eliminated in the infamous August 2001 'purge'.

FYI, I was also a Stanford grad, both undergrad and MBA, worked in the services organizations in a range of 'marketing' and planning jobs, and was highly-ranked in the HP system -- my job was eliminated independent of my performance.

((I only put marketing in quotes here because the bloggers here seem to view the functions and skills and views as disparate, whereas in my roles at HP we were required to be cross-functional and integrative -- we didn't 'do' selling, we understood customer requirements and led product teams including R&D -- to ensure that the products released met customer expectations and requirements. And, to be more religious, I don't view marketing as qualitative and subjective, and engineering as quantitative and objective -- both have elements of both.))
((And I truly don't agree with the male-female discussion -- Carly was strong-- she wasn't fired, nor were the expectations unreasonable, because she was female.))

Onto Carly...when she first joined HP I was ecstatic -- she was a woman (which I viewed, all things condsidered, as a good thing); seemed charismatic and visionary. After about nine months my view changed -- she was totally non-operational; in fact, her overly-aggressive sales forecasts in early 2001 were what caused, after massive sales personnel hirings, the need for job reductions in late 2001. So I'm hardly unbiased. (see paragraph 2)

That said, she tried to lead a business with vast potential in a difficult time; she oversaw a mis-guided merger with tactical excellence -- the merger 'worked', if painfully; she worked incredibly hard, even if what she created was a stratified company (don't talk to me about pre- and post- executive compensation - the differences are disgusting if you look at the annual reports); and she fought.

In the end, I believe, unfortunately, she killed more than she created -- she destroyed the 'old' HP -- one of trust, excellence, doing the right thing for the company, and the simple opportunity to do good work on behalf of the customer.

I believe that, after some years, that will be her legacy -- destroying something truly good, based on a pretense of 'shareholder value', which was more truly a value of personal ego and ambition.

Posted by Barb at February 11, 2005 1:59 AM

Barb, thanks for the great addition to this thread!

Posted by tom peters at February 11, 2005 6:23 AM

And Barb and Mr. Tom - the board gave her too much time because she is a WOMAN - I agree with that gender issue, especially since I admire so greatly the Mr. Hewlett and Packard FABULOUS USA STORY.

Posted by John at February 11, 2005 7:18 AM

Wow !!!

Barb.. that was a candid dialogue.. One question.. will you buy a HP product after all this ??

DSL: Thks for factiod link.. yes I missed that MIT review !!

Does anyone think that HP will go thru another round of right sizing ?? Any comments on this thought ??

Posted by /pd at February 11, 2005 9:42 AM

For all the news of corporate shake ups, Fiorina alone seems to have been shaken down, despite the $21 million she will be walking off with. The public is treated to very few stories of male CEO's who are so redressed as to be ousted, and most never meet the expectations that her dismissal represents. Is there a Title IX for CEO's? If the Fiorina demise is judged acceptable, shouldn't the pattern be used fairly for all others, rather than allowing the bankruptcies and reorganizations that have become the common meal served all shareholders? Why is Fiorina singled out except as a woman, and most vulnerable to the male-oriented game of "slip and slide?" Heretofore, this game was only played with politicians and coaches.

Posted by Fiorina held to higher standard? at February 11, 2005 12:09 PM

Wow-this has certainly spawned some hot debate. Speculating on the double standard or resorting to sexist commentary distracts us from learning what the real deal was behind the shift at HP. While I am all for Title IX and equal rights, I am tired of blaming the planetary differences (as in Men emerging from Mars and Women from Venus) for everything.
As a mother of four student-athlete daughters, I can attest that their generation looks to history of accomplishments and what a team member can deliver whether they are assembling teams for the rugby field, ski slopes, or engineering lab. Planetary differences bore them or make them laugh. Maybe we could learn something from them.

Posted by Pam Brill at February 11, 2005 1:51 PM

Last and final $.02 from me on this subject.

1)I refuse to get into the gender issue. Carly kicks butt.

2) Where was HP (financially) and where were they headed (financially) - BC (Before Carly), and more to the debate, before Before Compaq? Would their so-called shareholder's value have held up under the weight of the economy and competition of the last 5 years if they had continued down their path? I dont think so - but that's just my opinion.

3) Had not Carly put some excitement and emotional charge into HP, would you even be talking about it right now? I sincerely and strongly doubt it.

Thank you Carly for putting the spotlight on a great company with a great legacy and great potential - maybe now the Board and Management will be held to a higher (and highly visible) standard, get into gear, and make some money!

Thanks!

~ Will

Posted by people.love.technology at February 11, 2005 3:01 PM

Thanks Halley. I see much of free enterprise from an ecosystem way:

1. Carly pillaged her environment, 2. She abused her people, 3. It is all personal - she is a therefore a loser - people cheered when she got fired.

Posted by John at February 11, 2005 3:36 PM

Was Fiorina’s gender an issue? Some here seem to think so, but I’m struck by the fact that while the HP/Fiorina saga was going down another woman executive, the newly sworn-in Secretary of State, was concluding a whirlwind tour of Europe and the Middle East and by all accounts wowing everybody everywhere she went. Forcefully and articulately spelling out U.S. foreign policy, speaking fluent French to the French, fluent Russian to the Russians. And what’s on her plate—riding point on U.S. foreign policy and national security—makes anything at HP seem like mighty small potatoes.

Posted by Doug Smith at February 12, 2005 1:49 PM

Doug - outstanding point - Condi has been also though denigrated by the so called "African-American branch" of the Democratic party - so cool to many that the Demos self-destruct. Carly is thankfully minor league history.

Posted by Brad at February 12, 2005 2:36 PM

Carly took an underperforming fat dinasaur of a company that was waiting to go out of business and transformed it into a contender in many ways. Imaging and printing is only one way. The problem, is that for her to be successful at this it meant doing things that are not popular with employees and not popular with short sighted wall street analysts. On both counts they cannot forgive Carly for taking them through the transition. Most employees know the company is leaner, faster, and stronger as a company then before Carly. Unfortunately employees cannot forgive Carly for how she got the company here and wall street analyst still do not want to admit the acquisition of Compaq has worked on many levels. The environment is such that Carly can not be successful going forward and so it was time for her to part. But that parting was not because of a failure but rather because her success comes with a price. A very wise person once told me, "No good deed goes unpunished." and I believe that sums up the situation for Carly.

Posted by Elric at February 12, 2005 4:49 PM

1. Equity and stock price dropped - a major sin
2. 15,000 families out of business
3. She stayed too long
4. She is a loser and not capable of "good deeds"
5. She is dead in the business community - only Hollywood likes her now

Posted by Mike at February 12, 2005 5:58 PM

I am impressed at the number of posts this event generated on Tom's blog. And I wonder whether somebody who has been able to attract such interest on her days and deeds as HP's CEO is a total waste... I remain of the opinion though, that these are the best news I have heard for HP since the end of the past century :-)

One of my friends told me I should allow her the right to be wrong. True, but only in STRICT proportion to her own fairness to the great professionals at HP, some of whom lost their jobs because of HER mistakes... for which she is now getting 21 m USD...

By the way, is there something wrong with US capitalism, or what? People who perform poorly at the top can leave with several millions of dollars in their pockets, while at the same time the health system cannot afford to provide decent care to America's poorest citizens.

Posted by alex at February 13, 2005 10:06 AM

Carly is done because she bet her company and career on a merger that was not strategically sound from the start, and H-P has failed to develop any cool products under her reign. It's as simple as that. For more visit: http://cdgroup.blogs.com/design_channel/

Posted by Kurt at February 13, 2005 10:55 AM

80 BLOGS on this Blog via the Tom site - a new Tom world-record and/or - A SLOW NEWS WEEKEND VIA BLOG. Carly stimulates le Blog extraordinaire.

Posted by Ashton at February 13, 2005 7:09 PM

A $ 21,400,000 severance package for.................what? Where are/were the Board of Directors? Increased governmental regulation is not where it is, or is it? Shareholders have taken another hit on this one. CEOs that have made a significant improvement to shareholder value should be rewarded. This type of activity will start to drive my conservative Republican profile to the other side. Enough already :-(

Posted by Rick at February 13, 2005 10:47 PM

Rick - latest news has Carly at $42M.

I agree - I don't understand the metrics of CEO compensation - apparently they can name an extremely high price for their services.

Posted by Ashton at February 14, 2005 6:33 AM

Time for #83. Surely this is a record for this site. Ashton, this has been blogged since mid-last week. And stop calling me Shirley.

The only way I can see a $21MM reward for being fired as justified is if the board figured that it would be a better investment of $21MM to get rid of Carly than to allow her to stay on and waste even more than that.

Strange mindset, eh? But I'm more comfortable with HP's asinine board making that decision, NOT a peeping tom government agency or committee. Rick, stay on the right, please; I doubt you can stomach the thought of Howard Dean being your party leader.

Posted by Ron at February 14, 2005 10:57 AM

Looks like we'll be talking about HP for a while - check out Terry Shannon's article "Opinion: What Went Wrong at HP?" from OSNews [http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=9894] posted on 05-03-07 07:48:07 UTC.

Posted by bd at March 7, 2005 6:05 AM