wanna_bmw, I say start the new CEO search, and bring in someone from the outside. Not invented here, it too much part of the corporate culture of Intel. NIH manifests its so much that the actions of the CEO are not questioned. Barrett screwed up with his off-hand remarks. There is no question of that. Whether they were thought to be truthful or not is not the issue of a CEO. Barrett's comments were not the right thing for Intel, its employees and its investors. Barrett has an obligation to those three entities. But what did Barrett do with his obligations as CEO, IMHO he decided to put them aside and stroke his own ego.
Barrett had no clue about the Holiday seasonal period but he chose to shoot off his mouth.
It not a question, if I think I could do a better job, as an individual, what I am raising up, is that there is a better CEO out there for Intel, who can better manage the resources of Intel. Barrett has a lot of good resources to draw upon, and any CEO would. There is a better CEO out there for Intel, I am convinced of this.
Part of being CEO is being the public face of a public company, and here Barrett just fails. You suggest in your appraisal of Barrett he does a good job with operations. Well I would have no issue with demoting Barrett to COO. He has Petered out as CEO.
IMO Intel is trading lower than it should, considering its potential and its status. All I am saying is Barrett continues to under perform in his job, this not a new issue, and its time for a new CEO.
I don't subscribe to the CEO is King theories, but if I were to, I would say it time for succession, because the country-side is being laid ruin at the hands of this inept King.
What has Barrett done well as CEO? What are his list of accomplishments, his is a legacy of incrementalism and lack of imaginationm, without any new “wins”. Great for a COO but not Barrett’s job as CEO. |
