Thursday, June 21st 2018

Intel CEO Brian Krzanich Resigns - For Having Sex With Colleague

Intel Corporation today announced the resignation of Brian Krzanich as CEO and a member of the board of directors. The board has named Chief Financial Officer Robert Swan interim chief executive officer, effective immediately.

Intel was recently informed that Mr. Krzanich had a past consensual relationship with an Intel employee. An ongoing investigation by internal and external counsel has confirmed a violation of Intel's non-fraternization policy, which applies to all managers. Given the expectation that all employees will respect Intel's values and adhere to the company's code of conduct, the board has accepted Mr. Krzanich's resignation.
"The board believes strongly in Intel's strategy and we are confident in Bob Swan's ability to lead the company as we conduct a robust search for our next CEO. Bob has been instrumental to the development and execution of Intel's strategy, and we know the company will continue to smoothly execute. We appreciate Brian's many contributions to Intel," said Intel Chairman Andy Bryant.

Intel expects to deliver a record second quarter, with revenues of approximately $16.9 billion and non-GAAP EPS of approximately $0.99. With accelerating data-centric revenue, the company is off to an excellent start in the first half of the year and expects 2018 to be another record year. Intel will provide full second-quarter results and an updated outlook for the full year on the second-quarter earnings call on July 26.

As interim CEO, Swan will manage operations in close collaboration with Intel's senior leadership team. Swan has been Intel's CFO since October 2016 and leads the global finance, IT and corporate strategy organizations. He previously spent nine years as CFO of eBay Inc. Earlier, he was CFO of Electronic Data Systems Corp. and TRW Inc. He has also served as CEO of Webvan Group Inc.

Swan added, "Intel's transformation to a data-centric company is well under way and our team is producing great products, excellent growth and outstanding financial results. I look forward to Intel continuing to win in the marketplace."

The board has a robust succession planning process in place and has begun a search for a permanent CEO, including both internal and external candidates. The board will retain a leading executive search firm to assist in the process.
Add your own comment

123 Comments on Intel CEO Brian Krzanich Resigns - For Having Sex With Colleague

#1
Bones
TheMailMan78 said:

THATS IT BRIAN!!!! INTEL INSIDE ME!
Brian approves this post with a toast.... Doggie style.

And you guys wanna blame it on the dog.....
Posted on Reply
#2
lexluthermiester
dj-electric said:
Dat title, cmon bro, w1zz... While technically might be correct, forms a very negative connotation about the situation.
Having romantic relationships of any kind are a violation in the company. It doesn't have to be sexual
What I don't get is why? Unless the colleague was under their direct supervision or they were getting it on at work/on company time, which was not disclosed, why does it matter? There are two general rules for dating co-workers, 1, they can not be in direct chain of command and 2, neither can be already married. Other than that they are free to carry on outside of work as they see fit.
Posted on Reply
#3
Easo
I'm gonna put on my tinfoil hat and say that this is Intel saving face and deflecting inquisite gazes.
Meltdown/Spectre, supposed problems with 10nm, AMD's resurgence and what I would call lackluster Intel response (that silly marketing slide was amazing xD) and the supposed insider trading before Spectre news got out.

And I wonder with whom he did have relations? Direct underling? Direct boss (assuming before he became CEO)? Those cases yeah, position of authority and all that. Other cases it's not and it shouldn't be anyones deal. In my company couples are a thing. Then again, I am in Europe, not USA, work laws are very, very different.
Posted on Reply
#4
Assimilator
HammerON said:
Sadly, I have attempted to moderate this thread and have handed-out several warnings (with no points attached). I feel it is a losing battle at this point.
Can we please try to be civil and cut down on the rhetoric? I understand that due to the nature of the topic that my request is almost impossible...
Please try though.
What should have happened was that this clickbait thread should never have been posted. Since that didn't happen, every jerkass clever clogs happy to assassinate Krzanich's character simply because they are rabid Intel-haters, or because "I would've done it looooool", should've been handed a time-out to teach them to behave somewhat like the adults they claim to be. Especially since TPU is - supposedly - enforcing good behaviour more rigidly now.

It's not outside the realm of possibility that Intel or Krzanich could decide to sue TPU for providing a platform and not discouraging and environment that allows people to defame him. I bet then we'd see rather fewer clickbait headlines and a lot more good behaviour, so I'm actually kinda hoping it happens.
Posted on Reply
#5
lexluthermiester
Easo said:
In my company couples are a thing. Then again, I am in Europe, not USA, work laws are very, very different.
Same here. It's even encouraged. Most solid and stable companies like having married employees as it generally promotes stability.
Posted on Reply
#6
I No
This sounds a bit iffy... but hey if they wanna roll with that ... what can one do ... my 2 cents...
Posted on Reply
#7
lexluthermiester
I No said:
This sounds a bit iffy... but hey if they wanna roll with that ... what can one do ... my 2 cents...
Because you didn't use the reply function, let's presume you were replying to me; Why is that iffy at all?
Posted on Reply
#8
I No
lexluthermiester said:
Because you didn't use the reply function, let's presume you were replying to me; Why is that iffy at all?
Neah dude... Was just my thoughts on the article... I mean it sounds a little too far fetched. Usually stuff like this gets swept under the rug
Posted on Reply
#9
lexluthermiester
I No said:
Neah dude... Was just my thoughts on the article... I mean it sounds a little too far fetched. Usually stuff like this gets swept under the rug
Ah, understood.
Posted on Reply
#10
medi01
So, this dude:

1) Burnt 300$ million on "diversity efforts"
2) Aimed at extremely realistic "40% of engineers are female" (good luck at that, whatever he was smoking)
3) Meltdown, Spectre
4) Ryzen, Threadripper
5) Threadripper 2 and widespread mocking of Intel's response

fired for consensual sex with someone working at Intel, sure thing.

Jizzler said:
My building is 80% woman and some how my dick stays in my pants.
Would you like a cookie for this?
A small monument perhaps? Or rather big one?

Should we PM you telling how great you are?

Fucking unbelievable how pathetic people can get.
Posted on Reply
#11
Disparia
medi01 said:

Would you like a cookie for this?
A small monument perhaps? Or rather big one?

Should we PM you telling how great you are?

Fucking unbelievable how pathetic people can get.
If you need that interpreted: Someone has their job and someone does not -- and I'm certainly down the pay scale from my from own CEO. The whole point being that it should go without saying, yet here we here, with apologists believing this only affects him and not every single employee he commands. So yeah, apparently it does need to be said out loud sometimes because it's the minimum bar standard. The second something like this happens at my company is the second we longer need that persons service, and we're small compared to Intel, but still thousands of families with their livelihoods to company stock and quarterly returns. Humanity -- starts becoming real valid when our sales team are talking to customers. That's possible contracts lost until things our soundly changed.
Posted on Reply
#12
rtwjunkie
PC Gaming Enthusiast
lexluthermiester said:
What I don't get is why? Unless the colleague was under their direct supervision or they were getting it on at work/on company time, which was not disclosed, why does it matter? There are two general rules for dating co-workers, 1, they can not be in direct chain of command and 2, neither can be already married. Other than that they are free to carry on outside of work as they see fit.
In many large corporation, as well as the U.S. armed forces, it is not allowed. It exists for a reason. It can have major impacts throughout the company if no policy existed. Anyone dating the CEO, for example would be viewed with suspicion and envy and hatred. From that day forward, no one would believe any promotion came on their own merit.

There would be so many webs you couldn’t move even half of those who might be affected or cry favoritism if fraternization was allowed. The higher ranked person’s impartiality and professionalism also become called into question by the rank and file members. He thoughts he was above his own company’s rules. He found out different.

You don’t have relationships where you work.
Posted on Reply
#13
LiviuTM
R0H1T said:
I thought the board would've booted him out a while back, for underperforming ;)

But I guess this is what it takes, except for a certain someone who's always in the news for all the wrong reasons :shadedshu:
Maybe it is for underperforming and this ”love story” is used as a pretext. Not entirely my idea, here is a better take on this https://semiaccurate.com/2018/06/21/brian-krzanich-out-as-ceo-of-intel/
Posted on Reply
#14
DRDNA
Man oh man some of the comments in this thread just shows how much some have the need for improvement in their cognition and reasoning and their understanding of truth. That is all I have to say. Also would like to add thank you to W1zzard for the update on this !
FOX NEWS IS NOTHING EVEN CLOSE TO TABLOID, IT IS THE MOST TRUTHFUL NEWS IN THE USA AS OF DATE!
Posted on Reply
#15
Slizzo
lexluthermiester said:
What I don't get is why? Unless the colleague was under their direct supervision or they were getting it on at work/on company time, which was not disclosed, why does it matter? There are two general rules for dating co-workers, 1, they can not be in direct chain of command and 2, neither can be already married. Other than that they are free to carry on outside of work as they see fit.
He's the flipping CEO, potential for favoritism is way too high to let something like this slide.
Posted on Reply
#16
I No
Slizzo said:
He's the flipping CEO, potential for favoritism is way too high to let something like this slide.
He was let go due to Intel's position not because he was banging the receptionist, let's think about it for a second, if he was to be fired do you think they would want more flak than they already got? Usually when a CEO gets the boot it's followed by a nose-dive in the stock market and I'm not sure if Intel can afford that right now. This is how I view it at least I'm pretty sure this thing is going on on a daily basis in the corporate world (I do work in a corporation that has that policy in place, yet they sometimes choose to ignore it). I'm pretty confident that Intel's position has led to this.
Posted on Reply
#17
Bones
I No said:
He was let go due to Intel's position not because he was banging the receptionist, let's think about it for a second, if he was to be fired do you think they would want more flak than they already got? Usually when a CEO gets the boot it's followed by a nose-dive in the stock market and I'm not sure if Intel can afford that right now. This is how I view it at least I'm pretty sure this thing is going on on a daily basis in the corporate world (I do work in a corporation that has that policy in place, yet they sometimes choose to ignore it). I'm pretty confident that Intel's position has led to this.
You might be onto something....

From what I've experienced with folks that are in the boardroom..... If they want someone "Gone" all they have to do is dig around for some dirt. I'd be willing to place my money everytime if a CEO gets investigated, something would be found they could be fired over according to corporate policy.
I'm thinking in this case it was desired to see him leave in a way that wouldn't shake the stocks so much yet still serve the same purpose - And behind closed doors he's been blamed for all the setbacks Intel has had in recent times.

I've been witness to such shenanegans before with how the blame game is played at the corporate level.... And it's about the highest level of game play you'll ever see like this aside from politics itself.
Just plain nasty.
Posted on Reply
#18
R0H1T
Bones said:
You might be onto something....

From what I've experienced with folks that are in the boardroom..... If they want someone "Gone" all they have to do is dig around for some dirt. I'd be willing to place my money everytime if a CEO gets investigated, something would be found they could be fired over according to corporate policy.
I'm thinking in this case it was desired to see him leave in a way that wouldn't shake the stocks so much yet still serve the same purpose - And behind closed doors he's been blamed for all the setbacks Intel has had in recent times.

I've been witness to such shenanegans before with how the blame game is played at the corporate level.... And it's about the highest level of game play you'll ever see like this aside from politics itself.
Just plain nasty.
To be fair to the rest of the board, he did drop the ball multiple times. Otherwise how can you explain a 3 year delay to 10nm from the earliest roadmaps, there's also nothing to counter Zen v2 atm.
Posted on Reply
#19
Bones
Potentially a ton of reasons why it didn't happen, from things he was directly responsible for to things that was out of anyone's hands to control. Failures of others at his level to get things done too yet they somehow managed to pass that buck UP the ladder... And right into his lap.

The first rule of management still applies:
"Everything is your fault".
Posted on Reply
#20
trparky
Bones said:
And behind closed doors he's been blamed for all the setbacks Intel has had in recent times.
Oh yeah, AMD coming up from behind and whacking them upside the head probably was one of the reasons.
R0H1T said:
there's also nothing to counter Zen v2 atm
Yep.
Posted on Reply
#21
Assimilator
R0H1T said:
To be fair to the rest of the board, he did drop the ball multiple times. Otherwise how can you explain a 3 year delay to 10nm from the earliest roadmaps, there's also nothing to counter Zen v2 atm.
Blaming him for the 10nm problems is like blaming the sky for rain.
Posted on Reply
#22
R0H1T
Assimilator said:
Blaming him for the 10nm problems is like blaming the sky for rain.
Wow what an analogy, I'm sure Brian would approve btw 10nm isn't late just once it's continuously slipping & any other CEO would likely be axed for such a string of failures on multiple fronts.
Posted on Reply
#23
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
lexluthermiester said:
What I don't get is why? Unless the colleague was under their direct supervision or they were getting it on at work/on company time, which was not disclosed, why does it matter? There are two general rules for dating co-workers, 1, they can not be in direct chain of command and 2, neither can be already married. Other than that they are free to carry on outside of work as they see fit.
Being ceo, he is the top of chain, so directly in command regardless, he screwed up by using the wrong head and should of dated a woman else where...
Posted on Reply
#24
mtcn77
R0H1T said:
Wow what an analogy, I'm sure Brian would approve btw 10nm isn't late just once it's continuously slipping & any other CEO would likely be axed for such a string of failures on multiple fronts.
False dichotomy. The foundry business is one thing, executive lack of leadership is completely another. You cannot blame the foundry thingy on the CEO. Afaik, this guy was at the head of the foundries.
[Mr. Sivakumar]
Posted on Reply
#25
cadaveca
My name is Dave
R0H1T said:
To be fair to the rest of the board, he did drop the ball multiple times. Otherwise how can you explain a 3 year delay to 10nm from the earliest roadmaps, there's also nothing to counter Zen v2 atm.
Um, delaying a launch means more return on investment of the stuff that is in place while the new is delayed... it's actually a good thing, not a bad thing from a business perspective. Intel still ahs top-performing products, regardless of technology behind them..technology that Intel developed and paid for, whose cost becomes less every day they use it.

But OK, let's jstu say that we need MROE stuff, because we aren't happy with what we got now... that sounds more like your personal perspective leaking through. :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment