Review of Gil Amelio's On the Firing Line [LONG]
While I've still got it fresh in my head, I thought I'd write down some of my reactions to Gil's book.
The overall purpose of the book seems to be an attempt by Gil to rescue his reputation as a turnaround (or "transformation") artist. He does this by conceding some of his own mistakes, defending himself against his accusers, blaming Apple execs and managers, and slamming his enemies, which include Jobs and the press. The tone of the book is straightforward, though it could have done without the constant Shakespeare references and cliched quotes.
Conceding his Mistakes
To his credit, Gil seems to have realized that he was over his head. I wouldn't call him a bozo, or to invent a new scale for stupidity, as in 1-Gil 2-Gil etc., as Steve Jobs is supposed to have done. But he doesn't seem to have been up to the task, intellectually, of running a company as complex as Apple. He concedes this:
"One of the experiences a pilot dreads is that of getting 'behind the airplane,' with a situation developing faster than the brain can process . . . at Apple, I sensed myself behind the situation for months on end." (pp.288-89)
Throughout the book, Gil dispenses his theories of transforming businesses. They give the impression of being sound, and to the extent that they helped Apple, so much the better. But nowhere did I get a sense that he was brilliant, and whoever runs Apple should be brilliant.
Defending Himself
The start of the book is dominated by Gil's rationalization of his compensation package. His defence is this: 1) he deserved more money than he was getting at National Semiconductor, and 2) he deserved compensation that is comparative to those of other CEOs running similarly sized companies. He complains that his package was watered down by an Apple exec, Ed Stead, who changed it so that it was more performance-based. And he vilifies Ed for doing this, lumping his action together with the political in-fighting of other execs. I completely disagree. Gil's pay should have been much more performance based than it ended up being. And I disagree that his pay should be the same as CEOs' of profitable companies of the same size. A CEO of a company in crisis should be a special case, not a typical one. Jim Barksdale and Steve Jobs exemplify this. Gil never acknowledges this, or relates his compensation to the financial well-being of Apple.
Quite apart from anything else, his compensation greatly affects Apple employees, and his ability to cut costs. A CEO should lead by example. Conversely, if he negotiates a huge compensation package for himself, it limits his ability to slash employee salaries or fire people, because it's hyprocritical. Strangely, Gil is able to discern this disconnect in others, but not in himself:
"This was one of the many times that I picked up double signals from Apple people who professed a fierce company loyalty but wouldn't support any plan that didn't put them - as individuals - at the very top of every priority list. They refused to accept that Apple wasn't in a financial position to redesign a stock program that would be impressively better for all employees. Sure, they needed to be convinced that I would keep their interests in mind, but I also needed to bring this ailing company back to health. Those twin priorities couldn't always fit together; it became a most excruciating balancing act." (p.86)
The real villain in the compensation issue is not Amelio, though, so much as Mike Markkula. This guy was an ongoing diaster for Apple. Markkula seems to have thought that the company was his private business, and would do incredibly unprofessional things. Three examples: he privately negotiated Gil's compensation package, and Gil quit his National job based on that, but the board had not approved the package; when it didn't, Markkula offered to make up the difference out of his own pocket (which although magnanimous, never ended up happening). Markkula also apparently, prior to Gil renting his private jet to Apple, had rented his jets to Apple. In fact, Gil uses this to justify his cheaper jet, as if one unprofessional act excuses another. This is on top of news I learned months ago that, before Jobs switched to Chiat/Day, Markkula had made Apple use an ad agency that his wife worked at. Markkula rivals Jean-Louis Gassee as one of the top disasters for Apple (read Carlton's book for the Gassee story).
Blaming Apple Execs and Managers
This blame is probably justified, so I won't go into it. Carlton certainly corroborates Amelio on this. But I got a little tired of Amelio describing Apple as "dysfunctional," and complaining that he would have a conversation with someone, and discover later that his words weren't taken as orders and put into effect. At some point, with such consistent experiences, either Gil should have learned his lesson, or he should accept the blame for the lack of his underlings to execute.
Slamming His Enemies
Gil trashes the press, at one point listing various journalists and devoting a paragraph to critiquing each one. I tend to agree with his analysis, though I also think, and Amelio admits this, that he could have done a better job of playing the press.
Gil also trashes Steve Jobs throughout the book, sometimes gratuitously. The last chapter of the book is mostly devoted to this. Gil's basic view is: Steve is a conniving little bastard with no business sense who stabbed me in the back; everything that went right with Apple after I got fired was my idea, not Steve's; and Apple is going to implode now that Steve's in charge.
As for this, time will tell. I think Steve should get much of the credit for the last two profitable quarters, since he cut harder and marketed better than Gil ever did. And the iMac is the first all-Steve initiative. Whether it succeeds or not will tell us a lot about who's better for Apple.
After Gil left, some journalist remarked, after an Apple employee, that at first Gil's sense of calm was reassuring, but in the end it became unsettling, as it seemed to indicate a sluggishness or lack of awareness of the depth of Apple's crisis. I get the same impression from reading the book: Gil was too patient and methodical given the situation Apple was in. Apple needed someone tougher and quicker to act. Again, time will tell if Steve Jobs is that person.
rhet0ric |
