 |
Happy Endings Todd Stauffer
(tstauffer@webintosh.com)
Taking the Jobs?
Some of you may recall my opinion earlier this summer during the changing-of-the-Amelio-guard saga. I was all for giving Ellen Hancock the CEO spot at Apple. At the time, I thought it was the right thing to do. I still think it would have been. At the time. But now, with Jobs busy thinking about dropping the "interim" from his title of interim CEO, I'm ready to just lean back and let him go for it.
In fact, I don't see where we have much choice.
Back when I was supporting Hancock for the position, I saw her as a leader who bought a lot of the Amelio plan -- like I did. She supported cloning, put together the NeXT acquisition and offered what seemed to be (from a public vantage point) a keen head for the marketing of interesting products. I thought she spoke more effectively than Amelio, appeared to relate on a consumer level to Apple's customers and, best of all, was a techy sort. Being the most qualified internal canidate and a woman CEO (of the politically left-of-center Apple Computer) probably wouldn't have hurt anything, either.
Then there was Steve.
With what amounts to a boardroom coup, a flashy MacWorld address to rally the citizens and the public beheading of the Princes of his less-than-loyal cloning principalities, King Steve has usurped power, changed direction and launched a new propaganda campaign that, arguably, is more about him than it is about Macintosh.
And that's fine. Maybe it was the Germans in the 1930s who said, "Well, at least we're headed somewhere." With NCs, Rhapsody, G3s, eMates and other doozies possible by the end of the 90 days of "patience in Jobs" that we've been asked for, this is a company that has changed so dramatically and completely that Ellen Hancock -- or anyone else -- would be cut off at the knees before pulling into the CEO's parking space. It's Steve's company, so he might as well run it.
Go Ahead, Steve
If Jobs does take over, though, it seems some precautions should be put into place. Hopefully the executive staff can stabilize for a year or two -- assuming Jobs' personality has mellowed a bit. In that vain, however, I'd recommend that Jobs and the board either combine the CFO position into, or create completely anew, the position of Chief Operating Officer (COO), giving CEO Jobs the corporate equivalent of a prime minister to run things on a day-to-day level. Not only will a COO provide continuity when Jobs does decide to move on, but it might also make it possible to get good fiscal talent on-board with the clear understanding that Jobs is the head honcho.
My biggest fear is that Jobs' favorite project might get the run of the Apple campus while unique, interesting or simply useful projects get less than a fair shake. Hopefully, though, with complete control over the company, Jobs' overriding pet project will be Apple itself. Taking the odds, then, I'll say Jobs as Chairman of the Board is an O.K. idea, too.
Lost, Gained
Now gone from Apple is stability, the "turn-around artist" and a slow-but-steady plan toward profitability. Back again, however, is Steve Jobs. If he takes the Chairman and CEO position (along with a COO as a buffer and a fiscal leash-holder for the company) we may see some interesting reactions. Wall Street might like it. Apple employees might like it. Customers might learn to appreciate it.
What we definitely get back is Apple's road-less-taken mentality along with Jobs' amazing tenacity, his reality distortion field and, perhaps, a person who's designed to lead us to the next level of computing significance. There's definitely excitement brewing -- some might even say that having Steve Jobs as CEO of Apple is the most "insanely great" thing that's happened in quite a while at the company.
I'll definitely concede the "insane" part. Nothing is crazier than handing over the helm of Apple Computer to Steve Jobs. So, what better reason could there be?
[an error occurred while processing this directive]