
Microsoft CEO Search: Stalemate - jcurbo
http://www.mondaynote.com/2013/12/08/microsoft-ceo-search-stalemate/
======
sytelus
I agree there is profoundly something wrong if Microsoft uses executive
recruitment firm. This company has 100,000 employees with significant
filtering in hiring and even more filters in climbing up the ladder. If no one
from 100,000 people within Microsoft is deemed to be worthy of leading it then
its yet another fail from Ballmer's part.

~~~
privong
> If no one from 100,000 people within Microsoft is deemed to be worthy of
> leading it then its yet another fail from Ballmer's part.

Even if there is a capable person inside the company, it still makes sense to
also look externally. A fresh take on things. In fact, I'd argue they'd be
crazy if they didn't at least look outside the company.

------
jballanc
Back when Microsoft was brought up on charges and convicted of abusing their
monopoly power, I was of the opinion that a "baby bell" style break up would
be in the best interests of _both_ Microsoft and the public at large. Already
back then I suspected that the company was becoming a ship too big to steer.

I haven't changed my opinion in the intervening decade-and-a-half.

------
shmageggy
_" flawed men... who abuse people, facts, and furniture"_

So subtle I almost didn't notice. Nicely done.

------
nl
It's hard to suggest sensible names, even from a distance. Microsoft is such a
diverse company in terms of Enterprise and Consumer focus that there are very
few candidates who would make sense.

I'm not very familiar with the MS internal candidates. I'd note that it would
be pretty unlikely that the board would appoint an internal candidate who
wasn't on the "Senior Leadership Team"[1]. That would mean none of the
"Scotts" are candidates, but Satya Nadella[2] is. Nadella has done a pretty
good job the MS's enterprise cloud strategy: Azure is a decent platform.
However he has no consumer background...

Exceptions to the "must be on the Senior Leadership Team" might be made for
people from semi-autonomous divisions. Stephen Elop is one such candidate (who
has consumer experience) and Tony Bates is another. Bates has a very well
rounded resume: self taught programmer, ex-CISCO (so knows enterprise), ex-
Youtube board (so knows media), ex-Skype (so knows consumer).

Outside the company.. hmm. Vic Gundotra or Sundar Pichai from Google? I looked
through the Oracle & IBM leadership teams and no one jumped out at me (except
for Mark Hurd, but I don't think that will happen..)

The person they really need is a cross between Andy Groves[3], Phil Knight[4]
and Jack Welch[5]. We've had a Groves/Welch cross[6] and a Groves/Knight
cross[7], but getting all three at once looks hard.

[1] [http://www.microsoft.com/en-
us/news/exec/slt.aspx](http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/exec/slt.aspx)

[2] [http://www.microsoft.com/en-
us/news/exec/nadella/default.asp...](http://www.microsoft.com/en-
us/news/exec/nadella/default.aspx)

[3]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Grove](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Grove)

[4]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Knight](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Knight)

[5]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Welch](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Welch)

[6]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_V._Gerstner,_Jr](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_V._Gerstner,_Jr).

[7]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Jobs](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Jobs)

------
kyberias
I think this is quite a novel observation. If you patiently read to the end of
the article, it is explained that, in fact, potential candidates's fear of
Gates and his refusal to leave the board might be causing a stalemate.

~~~
astrodust
It's hard to impose change when nobody wants to throw themselves into that
fire.

------
keithwarren
So because there were rumors that Alan Mulally was slated for the role - and
now there are rumors he will stay at Ford, there is a stalemate?

I read the article hoping for something informed, something from the inside -
a leak even. What this is, is rather boring speculation.

I even find the dismissal of Elop as an option curious given that internal
structural changes that were made after the acquisition announcement - the
akward positioning in the org chart between he and Julie Larson Green seemed
to suggest that one of the two of them may be a strong candidate for the
position.

Personally as a shareholder and someone whose consulting practice is very much
tied to the fortunes of Microsoft - I would love to see Scott Guthrie in
charge. Alas this may not be his time up to the plate. Maybe 5-10 years from
now the road will be paved for him. He moves from Azure onto something bigger
like Office or Windows - continues his success and the reins are handed over.

~~~
majc2
It'd be awesome if it was ScottGu down the line - but think its unlikely.

~~~
drawkbox
I think all developers wanting Microsoft to go back to old developer focused
ways (the way to win the war of platforms) would prefer Scott Guthrie, Scott
Hanselman or even Scott Forstall from Apple of iOS fame (it might also worry
Apple a bit -- if their problem is mobile, this guy knows).

As I have said before, it's any Scott's game...

They need someone that holds their ground and has been trying to change
Microsoft for the better, into the present, for some time.

If it happens to be a Wall Street favorite you know innovation is dead at
Microsoft for good. Even Elop talking that he'd cut XBox just shows they don't
need a metrics guy right now, they need an innovator and someone to make
Microsoft competitive. And the Ford CEO, while being extremely good, seems
similar to bringing in Pepsi CEO John Sculley at Apple back in the day, wrong
domain.

~~~
trimbo
> And the Ford CEO, while being extremely good, seems similar to bringing in
> Pepsi CEO John Sculley at Apple back in the day, wrong domain.

A counter point to "domain" being critical is Louis Gerstner at IBM. He's
widely credited with saving IBM and came from Nabisco.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_V._Gerstner,_Jr](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_V._Gerstner,_Jr).

~~~
drawkbox
Microsoft was started to not be IBM, if they want to be IBM for sure they can
bring in a guy like that.

If they want to compete with Google and Apple, they need engineering/product
people, or someone that gets it and has done it.

One redeeming quality of Ballmer even though he was a metrics guy was he was
there from the beginning and saw the innovation modes, even he couldn't keep
it on track and missed.

So yes these guys are good CEO's quarterly, but they might miss the big waves
of change simply because they are good metrics guys/quarterly guys.

Nabisco and IBM are quarterly focused companies first. IBM is doing some fun
stuff with Watson but I am afraid a CEO like that will turn Microsoft into an
IBM or an Oracle. If that is what the shareholders want they might have to, it
isn't what developers of the platform want. What does Microsoft need more of
now?

~~~
louthy
> What does Microsoft need more of now?

Developers, Developers, Developers...

------
milhous
Still rooting for Forstall. The ultimate revenge, and the once in a lifetime
opportunity for Microsoft to change its ways, cut waste, bureaucracy, and ship
new product on a regular basis.

If Microsoft wants to operate like Apple does, there's no better person to do
it than the man who learned and worked for Jobs! You can't do this kind of
thing with a run-of-the-mill CEO. You need someone that's going to micromanage
and rebuild the company over the course of a few years, in addition to being
somewhat polarizing and making unilateral decisions.

Scott Forstall is this person, and Bill Gates would be foolish to completely
discount him.

~~~
milhous
Also, I'm curious what it's like to be a Microsoft insider. Is there a
perpetual whisper along the lines of "Why can Apple execute, but we can't?".

I'm not denigrating Microsoft and it's employees. But I'm really curious what
morale is like over there, before and after Bill Gates left.

edit: Start with Forstall, bring Ray Ozzie back, and you have a very solid
leadership base.

~~~
CurtHagenlocher
For the most part, employees who are unhappy at Microsoft will leave. From
what I've seen, Microsoft employees have no trouble finding jobs at places
like Google, Amazon or Facebook -- even those who I don't consider especially
desirable as employees.

For the rest of us, we're mostly focused on shipping whatever it is that we're
working on.

~~~
milhous
Thanks for sharing. Having gone back to student life, but with prior
experience working for larger companies, I guess you can't really worry about
C-level stuff because it's out of your control. Good advice on staying focused
on what you're doing until something affects you directly.

How long have you been there, and how would you compare it to other places
you've worked at? No need to disclose specifics.

------
jimbobimbo
Yeah, why is that one of the biggest tech companies with fingers in many pies,
turning billions a quarter in profits, can't find a new CEO in a couple of
days? Anyone can run this kind of company, right? Right?

~~~
venomsnake
As Steve (Em)Ballmer showed yes. Just cannot run it good.

~~~
jimbobimbo
The machine may be had lost its clear coat and polish, but still prints
enormous amount of money. If this is bad, then I don't know what good is.

Could Microsoft do better? Sure. Is it doing bad? Hardly.

~~~
venomsnake
What is good - short history of Apple 2002-2011?

There is a medium ground between good and bad - mediocrity.

~~~
jimbobimbo
Ballmer is Microsoft's CEO since 2000. Yet, the company is still up and
running and profitable. He lacks vision of SJ, but Microsoft's history is full
of opportunities they've missed initially.

Look, I'm not trying to say that Ballmer is a great superhero CEO, however,
it's silly to assume that anyone can run a company like MS. There's no book or
leadership school that deals with the issues of running the company of this
size. He ran it for 13 years. And he did it by many - not all of course -
accounts successfully. I think, he deserves credit at least for that.

------
bicknergseng
I wish Microsoft would promote someone instead of headhunting externally. I'm
sure there are many people who have been there for years who are qualified and
care more about MS, its employees, and its customers than some outside person.

~~~
jedberg
The problem with that is that you just get more of the same.

Microsoft really needs some outside influence, someone who hasn't drowned in
the kool-aid.

I think the last line of the article is the only relevant one -- that the
people they are talking to don't want the old guard looking over their
shoulder, and the old guard doesn't want to leave.

------
drakaal
They can hire me as CEO. I would welcome Bill on the Board. I think things
went downhill when he stopped being CEO.

When I was at Microsoft I got along well with Bill, I did not get along with
Steve. Before I was at Microsoft it was the opposite. Steve and I got along
well and Bill and I bumped heads.

Afterwards I figured out why. Steve cares about doing things. As long as you
are working he is happy. Bill cares about doing the right things. He will sit
for 2 hours and think before acting. When I was young this didn't work for me.
I couldn't understand, it seemed like doing something was better than doing
nothing. But now as I am older I get it.

I think Bill was often ahead of his time because he would do the right thing
and hope others would catch up. Steve would do the thing people wanted and
always be behind.

------
adventured
Microsoft lost its new CEO about a year ago: Steven Sinofsky

~~~
jimbobimbo
I'm so looking forward to someone from his timeframe write a memoir about
Windows division of Longhorn/Vista/7/8 period. Something like Barbarians Led
By Bill Gates. I bet Sinofsky's period would be as much polarizing.

~~~
gummadi
Here is a developer's account who worked under Sinofsky during Windows 7
development
[http://blogs.msdn.com/b/e7/archive/2008/10/15/engineering-7-...](http://blogs.msdn.com/b/e7/archive/2008/10/15/engineering-7-a-view-
from-the-bottom.aspx)

~~~
jimbobimbo
I have a lot of respect for Larry Osterman, but an official Engineering blog
would not be a source of war and politics stories I'm sure aplenty. :)

------
bruceb
How is Elop even in the discussion? That would be failing up.

~~~
RyJones
Devil you know. Elop was racing up the ranks before he left, and now he has
some seasoning as a CEO.

~~~
CurtHagenlocher
While I understand that people enjoy playing with the various Elop conspiracy
theories, they always seem to ignore inconvenient facts. In particular, Elop
has now been a Nokia employee for _longer_ than he was ever a Microsoft
employee. Furthermore, he was hired into Microsoft as the head of MBD and
that's the position he had when he left less than three years later -- so
there was certainly no "racing up the ranks".

------
mathattack
I find the most interesting part of this article is the co-author - Jean-Louis
Gassee [1] of Apple, Be and Palm fame. Whether you view him as a success or a
failure, he brings a very unique perspective to discussions of leadership and
succession. It's several levels more insightful than most business blog
drivel.

The idea of a stalemate is interesting. On the one hand the authors accuse the
board of giving Ballmer too much of a free reign. Then they say the next
candidate won't accept the position without it.

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-
Louis_Gass%C3%A9e](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Louis_Gass%C3%A9e)

------
moocowduckquack
Perhaps they could ask Clippy.

 _It looks like you are choosing a CEO..._

------
amaks
Huge difficulty of Microsoft CEO search is explained by a huge diversity of
Microsoft business and existing problems (everything is tied to Windows,
Windows popularity is declining in post PC world, weak mobile story). All
candidates seem to be experienced with only specific aspects of Microsoft
business (enterprise - Nadella, mobile/office - Elop, Sinofski is gone). Steve
Jobs once gave Larry Page advise to consolidate Google's product offerings
because Google was all over the place, which Page is seemingly following.
Microsoft needs to do the same, find a single vision (which is not Windows)
and aim for that with their "One Microsoft" story. Likewise, they need to have
a 'visionary' as their CEO, which is damn hard to find externally, and likely
impossible internally.

------
theatraine
[http://www.nextmicrosoftceo.com/](http://www.nextmicrosoftceo.com/) presents
some good candidates. However, I doubt that the first contender, Gabe Newell
would leave Valve, and that the second-place contender, RMS, would be a good
business decision.

~~~
Crito
Of those top three, only Newell really has experience running a company, and
his company is structured radically differently than Microsoft's (Ignoring the
wildly different scales of the two companies, Valve has a vaguely non-
hierarchical lattice-like organizational structure. I would not count on those
CEO skills being transferable.) Linus can obviously manage a large project,
but that in no way makes him a good fit for being the Microsoft CEO.

I don't know much about the non-top three suggestions there, but the ludicious
choices for the top three make me inclined to doubt them.

------
hendzen
I wonder if Sheryl Sandberg would be up to the challenge.

~~~
tjmc
Overrated - particularly in regard to the reqs for Microsoft CEO. Sandberg
doesn't have a track record of growing new products. Facebook's new product
dev efforts thus far have been either non-existent or woeful.

What about DuPont CEO Ellen Kullman? Four years at the helm of another highly
diversified, high tech Fortune 500. Grew their kevlar division from nothing to
a multi-billion dollar business.

------
brudgers
Using an outside search firm is just due diligence - they have a year, there's
no rush. The board certainly has people on their shortlist, but perhaps
Sinofsky really was the heir apparent - right up until not offering browser
choice in Windows 8 earned a billion dollar fine from the EU.

In the long run, my gut tells me it will be someone from the post IPO
generation, with Larson-Green as the leading candidate.

------
fishcakes
They should make David Sacks CEO.

------
sjg007
buy box. appoint ceo as msft ceo.

