To find the context of this blog, please do read this
one I published recently. To summarize, this is a part of knowledge sharing
of my panel talk at GHCI. Just as a note of caution, please do not expect the
below answers to be elaborate as these were conveyed in a time limit of 3-4
minutes. I have tried to recollect these to the best of my knowledge.
Jack Welch
famously said that if a division at GE is not #1 or #2 in their industry, that
division should be closed. He implemented that strategy at GE while he was
CEO. How important is leadership style
in driving the necessary portfolio changes?
Let me talk first about three pioneering figures of our
Industry. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and Andy Grove. They make an interesting study
because all three of them had their strong points and they had weaknesses too
and their personality reflected in the organizations that they eventually led
to glory.
Gates’ USP in his early days was the rate knowledge on how to
program the early personal computers. And he was a true expert at that as he
has been featured in Malcolm Gladwell’s famous 10000 hour rule needed to be
expert at anything. During his early days (till around 90s), he was so involved
in programming related work that he himself admitted that “I wouldn’t let
anybody write any code. I went in and took every statement that anybody else
had written in BASIC and rewrote it myself, just because I didn’t like the way
they coded.” He used to astonish company’s engineers with his programming
details. He soon realized that he and Microsoft couldn’t scale this way and
hired the able people to lead in other major functional areas.
Steve Jobs’s focus on design was just as intense as Gate’s
focus on software. As Gates went deep into the code, Jobs committed himself to
user experience and design with maniacal depth. He oversaw every aspect of
product design and would scrutinize everything, down to pixel level. There are
stories around Jobs wanting scroll bars to be looking in a certain way, forcing
the team to show multiple versions in a process that took almost six months.
Andy Grove, possibly lesser celebrated than Gates and Jobs
but no less effective was passionate about disciplined thinking. He would
challenge people’s thinking. Then he would probe all the way through a strategy
and force people to really justify it. He also once famously said- “Execution
is God”
So be it Gates’ penchant for technical details, Jobs’ for
design and Grove’s focus on disciplined thinking, their personalities showed up
in the way their organizations shaped up and that included how their products
looked a fared. Their leadership styles driven by their primary personality
preferences shaped up the products.
Michael Watkins in his book “The First 90 days” talks about
STARS framework based on the business situation a particular business or for
our discussion, a product is. Each letter except the letter “A” in the STARS is
related to a business situation i.e. Start-up (when business starts), it either
becomes Sustaining Success (after some efforts) or it closes
(Shutdown/Divestiture). Once it’s a sustaining Success usually complacency sets
in where it reaches the state of Realignment and post this stage, it is either
back to Sustaining success or Turnaround. If we study this framework closely,
each of the stages requires different leadership style.
To quote the case of
Apple, when Steve Jobs took over Apple in 1997- it was almost a dead business
dearly in the need of being Turned-around. At this stage, he adopted a very
hands-on approach to leadership and involved himself in taking tough decisions,
culled projects, got into product design. He eventually made Apple, a
sustaining success. On his departure, and taking over of Tim Cook, Apple has
undergone certain realignment and Cook’s leadership style evolved accordingly.
E.g. Steve Jobs used to call acquisitions as “Failure to Innovate” whereas under
Tim Cook Apple has made more than 50% of its acquisitions. Tim Cook is more
open to doing partnerships with IBM, Microsoft than probably Steve Jobs was and
Cook even leveraged these partnerships to open-up enterprise market for Apple.
No comments:
Post a Comment