A couple of thoughts on the article posted re: HP's fallout with the son of Hewlett:
1. Why did he as a Board member flip-flop and change directions?
The only time a board member from any company could arguably flip-flop on a decision would be if new data comes in that contradicts existing data. As a rule, board members of companies do not flip-flop in their decision, they are reliable, consistent decision makers. This is because flip-flopping directions is horribly expensive for the operations of any company. So, decisions are done 'right' the first time around. This isn't to say that I agree (or disagree) with the merger, but it's an observation that flip-flopping would be considered unusual board behavior by any company.
New data could certainly warrant a change of opinion. If the flip-flopping had to do with the entrance of new data, such as, "the further we went along, the more we discovered the cultures were not compatible", then that would make sense, because that would be considered new data. But not a change of opinion due to reasons listed, because these would have existed when he voted "yes" as a board member.
I've seen some reporting that said the board originally voted unanimously, but I haven't seen any of the actual participants quoted. Votes of the Board are probably not made public unless somebody talks. Is it possible that Hewlett abstained out of consideration for Carly & made his decision later? Is it definite that he voted yes originally? Any links? |
