Steve Ballmer: "Not the right CEO for Microsoft"

[MxPhenom 216]

Very Interesting article I just read about Steve Ballmer. Apparently he uses tyrant like powers, and cuts people down if they appose him and his management style.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/0...90L04320130122

"Is he a great CEO? I don't think so. Microsoft's board is a lame duck board, has been forever. They hire people to help them administer the company, but not to lead the company. That's the problem," said Kempin.

[erocker]

He don't care, he just got himself a basketball team. I kinda fail to see what this has to do with software though.

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by erocker

He don't care, he just got himself a basketball team.

haha yes he did, well helped get one.

To your edit, didn't know where to put it since I cant post articles or anything. And its about Microsoft and Microsoft is a software giant. Welp.

[qubit]

I doubt Ballmer's good for anything. The writing was on the wall for Microsoft when Gates stepped down.

[Mathragh]

Am I the only one that thinks that if Ballmer really was such a nitwit, he would've long been replaced or that microsoft would've done far worse?

I mean, I can understand that many people dont like him, but (atleast as far as my knowledge goes) Microsoft isn't doing that bad? I mean they've got the most innovative products out(or in the pipeline) since a long time(whatever people might think of stuff like windows 8), and I dont think they ever adhered to so many open/widely used standards as they do at the moment(think IE10, and implementing stuff like caldev).

Or am I missing something?

[lemonadesoda]

Sometimes companies need aggressive people to cut through... but those kind of people aren't good long term for a company. And if there isnt a decent succession plan, then the company becomes a one-man survival thing, and a one-trick pony. Companies like MS and Apple and Facebook are very different from companies like Shell, Boeing, Intel. Which of those companies are more likely to survive a roadcrash of their CEO?

However, I don't advocate "democratic-inclusive-lovey-dovey" type leadership. That just encourages rot and politic. It is a difficult balancing act. But at the end of the day, the CEO has to lead from the helm, just like a captain and his ship or his plane. You can't have everyone having a go at the steering wheel.

[Drone]

Not the right CEO

What company today has the right CEO anyway
They all use dirty tricks and they all are double-faced.

[RejZoR]

I kinda miss Bill Gates. He was a very charismatic man with that kinda geeky look and always a bit shy.

[Aquinus]

It is interesting to see what a difference in view is. Look at Bill for example, he had an idea for a company and a product and he hit the ground running. I suspect the "greed" factor has become stronger over the years and people become more interested in making money than producing a good product. Not to say that the two can't come hand in hand, but the wrong goal is being set and the CEO sets the tune for the entire company.

[Tatty_One]

There are many styles of management and leadership..... authoritarian is just one and works very well in certain scenario's/situations. Many senior leaders adapt their style to the situation so the style is not always a refelection of their character/personality.

[Frick]

Originally Posted by erocker

He don't care, he just got himself a basketball team.

So?

And i very much agree with mathragh. MS is doing good.

[lilhasselhoffer]

So, financial analysts from Forbes claims that it's time to sell MS stock (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news...-For-Microsoft). They base this on
1) Relatively poor windows 8 sales performance.
2) XBOX division requiring cash infusions.
3) A large percentage (40 in the article) of users still 3 or more operating systems (XP) behind

In the same week, an article comes out questioning whether MS leadership is steering the ship in the right direction.


I have to ask, when does the US government chip in and "save" MS with a cash infusion? They did it with the airlines, and the banks. MS is obviously doing something stupid, but they're too big to fail right?

MS is experiencing actual competition, and they haven't evolved well. They took the ballsy move of completely unifying UI over multiple devices, which didn't go over well. They introduced the surface, about three years too late to compete with the Apple offerings and two years too late to compete with the much cheaper Android offerings. It seems as though every step they make forward costs consumers more, and has a detrimental effect elsewhere.

There is some praise to be leveled in MS's direction. They're doing a good job making the OS perform better with less resources. They have done a good job incorporating more OS level security measures.

I don't think the excellent back end (heaven help me, I'm quoting the Mailman) can make up for poor decisions on the front end. The people who pushed for a unified UI (I remember Balmer being one, though I cannot vouch) and projects like the Kinect were completely ungrounded in this reality. That kind of decision making should only be accepted once, not time and again, from someone with Balmer's responsibility. I wish I could say that the articles about MS were coming from somewhere unfounded. I also wish I had a winning lottery ticket.

[TheMailMan78]

Originally Posted by Tatty_One

There are many styles of management and leadership..... authoritarian is just one and works very well in certain scenario's/situations. Many senior leaders adapt their style to the situation so the style is not always a refelection of their character/personality.

This. Ive seen a few over time. Depends on who you are dealing with you have to adapt. Sometimes you have to be a bully. Other times going with a humble approach works. Depends. Honestly if Steve Ballmer came flying into a room yelling at me I would just laugh at him. If he came in and asked me kindly to step it up a little I would do some serious OT to help out.

[Wrigleyvillain]

Originally Posted by MxPhenom 216

Very Interesting article I just read about Steve Ballmer. Apparently he uses tyrant like powers, and cuts people down if they appose him and his management style.

lol sounds like Steve Jobs.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by lilhasselhoffer

I have to ask, when does the US government chip in and "save" MS with a cash infusion? They did it with the airlines, and the banks. MS is obviously doing something stupid, but they're too big to fail right?

All that Microsoft could offer the gov is a bunch of Windows8 OS copies, which no sane IT manager woulk use, anyway.

M$ has cash to bleed, they don't need a cash infusion. What they need is new talent at the helm.

[Frick]

Originally Posted by lilhasselhoffer

So, financial analysts from Forbes claims that it's time to sell MS stock (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news...-For-Microsoft). They base this on
1) Relatively poor windows 8 sales performance.
2) XBOX division requiring cash infusions.
3) A large percentage (40 in the article) of users still 3 or more operating systems (XP) behind

In the same week, an article comes out questioning whether MS leadership is steering the ship in the right direction.


I have to ask, when does the US government chip in and "save" MS with a cash infusion? They did it with the airlines, and the banks. MS is obviously doing something stupid, but they're too big to fail right?

MS is experiencing actual competition, and they haven't evolved well. They took the ballsy move of completely unifying UI over multiple devices, which didn't go over well. They introduced the surface, about three years too late to compete with the Apple offerings and two years too late to compete with the much cheaper Android offerings. It seems as though every step they make forward costs consumers more, and has a detrimental effect elsewhere.

There is some praise to be leveled in MS's direction. They're doing a good job making the OS perform better with less resources. They have done a good job incorporating more OS level security measures.

I don't think the excellent back end (heaven help me, I'm quoting the Mailman) can make up for poor decisions on the front end. The people who pushed for a unified UI (I remember Balmer being one, though I cannot vouch) and projects like the Kinect were completely ungrounded in this reality. That kind of decision making should only be accepted once, not time and again, from someone with Balmer's responsibility. I wish I could say that the articles about MS were coming from somewhere unfounded. I also wish I had a winning lottery ticket.

I'm not sure I agree with that article. Windows 8 have, afaik, not done bad. It moved the same amount of Windows 7 licenses, and that was considered a decent thing. Are they troubled? Well yes they will face tough times, as will everyone else (except maybe Apple). And I don't think it's obvious they are doing something stupid.

Also I think it is a wee bit unfair to compare Surface tweets to iPad tweets. The iPad, and Android tablets, have been around for years now, the Surface RT (as the big one hasn't been released yet) have been around for a couple of months.

Ballmer appears to have committed to fight to the death in his effort to defend & extend Windows. So expect death as resources are poured into the unwinnable battle to convert users from iOS and Android.

The only reality this has in it is Windows Phone, which hasn't been a success worthy of Apple. But it isn't a total failure yet either. As for PC's.. Yes sales there are declining, but Windows is still a de facto standard in many environments and the PC is not dead yet. And this is why Ballmer is doing what he's doing I think: Redefining Windows. We have just seen the beginning.

As resources are poured out of the company in the Quixotic effort to prolong Windows/Office, dividends should steadily diminish.

Isn't especially Office their cashcow? If so I don't see how trying to prolong that is a problem. If anything it's the "right" thing to do. But Office is changing too.

Expect substantial layoffs over the next 3 years. They could even reach 50-60%, or more, of employees.

Will see. 50% is a lot. I don't believe it, but as said we'll see.

The entertainment division could be spun off, sold to someone like Sony or possibly Barnes & Noble, or dramatically reduced in size. Unable to make a profit it will increasingly be seen as a distraction to the battle for saving Windows, and Microsoft leadership has long shown it doesn’t know how to profitably grow this business unit.

I don't know enough about this to comment, but couldn't this change when a new console is out and have matured? If they hold onto it that long that is.

As more and more of the market shifts to competitive cloud infrastructure Apple, Amazon, Samsung and others will grow significantly. Microsoft, losing its user base, will demonstrate its inability to build a new business in the cloud, mimicking its historical failures with Zune (mobile music) and Microsoft mobile phones. Microsoft server and tool sales will suffer, creating a much more difficult profit environment for the sole remaining profitable division.

Moving to the cloud is exactly what MS is doing. Azure, integrated Skydrive, Office 365.. MS are changing, have changed quite a bit in the last couple of years. It feels like this was written in the mid 2000's.

Interesting article, but I think it's too much doom and gloom there.

Originally Posted by cadaveca

M$

Oh Dave no..

Using the term "M$" should result in an instaban. As well as iCrap or whathaveyou.

[cadaveca]

Originally Posted by Frick

Oh Dave no..

Using the term "M$" should result in an instaban. As well as iCrap or whathaveyou.

I feel it is very to the point, myself. Microsoft is a business, which is about making money...by selling software. It seems to me, on a personal level, that they are now more about the money, than they are the software, and Ballmer is part of that.


I mean, OK, we got Windows8, clearly suited for tablets...and mainly surface...yet here it is on tonnes of OEM boxes and such...because it makes them money. And this is even though most businesses, which account for the majority of PC sales, still aren't interested in Windows7.

That's my opinion, and really, I'm not asking anyone to really agree with that...it's just how I feel. It's not making fun of anyone, or flame baiting, so it's not something that'd get anyone banned.

Unlike that religious thread, where everyone seems to think the reins have been let go.

[lilhasselhoffer]

Originally Posted by Frick

Moving to the cloud is exactly what MS is doing. Azure, integrated Skydrive, Office 365.. MS are changing, have changed quite a bit in the last couple of years. It feels like this was written in the mid 2000's.

Interesting article, but I think it's too much doom and gloom there.

I would like to think that a person who is part of Forbes is wired to be overly cautious. I never said I agreed with all of the author's points. I think some are valid, but the tone and information presented were all designed to make MS look as bad as possible.

Actually addressing all of the points of that article would take another thread. I brought it up in passing, but failed to elaborate. This was an oversight on my part.

Originally Posted by Frick

Oh Dave no..

Using the term "M$" should result in an instaban. As well as iCrap or whathaveyou.

Why? Microsoft is a business. Successful businesses are about the money. Ever consider that all that visceral hate for Walmart will never be enough to kill it, and it's precisely because they are untouchable on the business end.

I come from the school of thought that evil can create beauty just as easily as good.

Originally Posted by cadaveca

All that Microsoft could offer the gov is a bunch of Windows8 OS copies, which no sane IT manager woulk use, anyway.

M$ has cash to bleed, they don't need a cash infusion. What they need is new talent at the helm.

Yeah.... I know the MS money castle runs deep. I also know that banks have plenty of money and the airlines made insane profits for years. Even the biggest businesses can be maimed and destroyed if they lack solid leadership.

I can't say that MS is anywhere near actually needing cash. It'll be windows 9 at least before then.





As a final point, consider that the most purchased application from the store is one that removes the new UI and replaces it with a more traditional one. If failure of good intentions can be quantified in a more concise manner I can't think of it.

[remixedcat]

I would have rather had Sinofsky leading MS. He had some great ideas and turned MS around. MS was stagnating.

[Easy Rhino]

Hey look, a thread full of people who have never run a business slamming a man in charge of one of the most successful companies in the world...

[hellrazor]

Originally Posted by RejZoR

I kinda miss Bill Gates. He was a very charismatic man with that kinda geeky look and always a bit shy.

I never thought I'd hear that, but now I agree with it. What has this world come to?

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

Hey look, a thread full of people who have never run a business slamming a man in charge of one of the most successful companies in the world...

Worthless post is worthless.............

[Chevalr1c]

Originally Posted by Easy Rhino

Hey look, a thread full of people who have never run a business slamming a man in charge of one of the most successful companies in the world...

Originally Posted by MxPhenom 216

Worthless post is worthless.............

There seems merit in it though. Good point Easy, I did not think of that yet.

(I am not being sarcastic or so, I am meaning it)

[Easy Rhino]

Originally Posted by MxPhenom 216

Worthless post is worthless.............

how is it worthless? balmer took over in 2000 and MSFT continued to thrive. we have a lot of armchair CEOs here who think they know enough to criticize a man running a multinational company.

[MxPhenom 216]

Originally Posted by Chevalr1c

There seems merit in it though. Good point Easy, I did not think of that yet.

(I am not being sarcastic or so, I am meaning it)

Its the way he said it.