Two of the biggest companies in Silicon Valley underwent big boardroom shakeups yesterday. At Google, Eric Schmidt, the professional manager who has headed the company since 2001 relinquished the CEO title to co-founder, Larry Page. At Hewlett-Packard, the world's biggest technology company by revenue, four board members departed with five new ones coming on.
The Google change is a big deal. I'd argue that Google is the most important company on the planet -- more so than Facebook, IBM, Apple or News Corp. The Google triumvirate has created an amazing business model. And it is also a cultural and political force with its own foreign policy. Google's stance against Chinese censorship (allegedly pushed by co-founders Larry and Sergey) was an important development in world affairs last year. Its stewardship of many individual's documents, e-mail, photos, videos, phone calls and blogs is a bedrock of Internet existence.
Eric Schmidt, who I met a few times while covering Sun and Novell, has an amazing ability to foresee how technology will impact business and the economy. Google has made a series of smart moves through acquisition and invention during the decade he has been there. I'm not a shareholder, so I don't have that perspective. But as a citizen of the globe, I hope the change won't derail Google.
The good news is that the co-founders presumably are more attuned to the company motto -- Don't Be Evil. The risk is that Schmidt's acute sense of how Google fits into the wider world will be subsumed to a Google-centric view.
Hewlett-Packard, on the other hand, doesn't really matter. It's a collection of unrelated commodity businesses that don't lead in anything but cutting prices. If the whole company blew up, someone else would license Canon's printer engine technology. The same Chinese factories would make the same PCs and laptops. Another Indian body shop would take over the offshored services. The Intel-based enterprise servers would be made by some other Microsoft spawn. And only the legacy enterprise equipment would retain an H-P identity. Mark Hurd managed to make H-P profitable, but the decision to slash R&D has made it largely irrelevant.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment