Intel From Behind the Curtain 109
Good Morning Silicon Valley writes "So now that we've reached this postmodern understanding that all official corporate communication is, if not a charade, part of a ritualized dance where meaning must be divined between the lines, where do you turn to hear an executive talk straight? Why, to his or her blog, of course. Even more candid than the still-rare public executive blog is one meant just for internal consumption, and that's what makes Intel President Paul Otellini's postings such interesting reading. The Mercury News snagged a copy of Otellini's 8-week-old blog and found it full of frank interaction with employees on strategic initiatives and the competition."
About AMD (Score:2, Insightful)
Do ya think?
Interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
I suppose seeing as he's the president that that would be sorta difficult.
Does anyone see the board coming down on him?
Re:Interesting (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Interesting (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Interesting (Score:2)
The blog also provides a forum where Intel employees can respond and stay within the intranet.
OK, all Intel employees raise their hands! (Score:4, Funny)
Obviously, someone doesn't read their company memos.
Re:OK, all Intel employees raise their hands! (Score:4, Insightful)
I mean that sort of setup is just begging for trouble.
Re:OK, all Intel employees raise their hands! (Score:1)
Re:OK, all Intel employees raise their hands! (Score:2)
of course, he may have expected it to stay internal a little longer, but who knows...
Pull an Apple.. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:OK, all Intel employees raise their hands! (Score:3, Insightful)
I do note that nowadays the blog is prefaced with the standard legal mumbo-jumbo about "forward-looking statements".
"Straight Talk"? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:"Straight Talk"? (Score:1, Informative)
Well, how many executives do you see admitting that their competitor has a "strong product offering"?
Re:"Straight Talk"? (Score:5, Insightful)
That's pretty common - we had a number of speeches and other internal communications where I work a year or two ago about how we had to become "more customer focussed", amongst other things. None of them were expected to be seen publicly; executives really do just talk and think that way.
Look at it this way - no executive or manager is going to tell their staff to care *less* about customers, are they?
Re:"Straight Talk"? (Score:1, Funny)
No, not in any documents that may become public, anyway. The whole thing just seems Dilbert-esque--Synergize! We need to maintain a focus based on multinational analyzation in the form of interceptable efficiency, people!
Just more pretending to be customer-service driven because being customer-service driven makes more money.
Re:"Straight Talk"? (Score:2, Insightful)
No, but they could at least try to come up with something meaningful to say. Nobody but a manager really knows what becoming "more customer focused" really means. What a mmanager might say is something like "stop making silly, mocking faces while talking to customers on the phone and don't assume they are morons." But then again, maybe scolding employees isn't the best motivating force.
-
Re:"Straight Talk"? (Score:1, Offtopic)
Someone at the movie/record companies came up with the bright idea to sue their customer base. How's that for bad PR? It ruins their company's image in the eyes of the consumers.
I know that downloading the songs/movies isn't legal, but running such a highly visible crackdown campaign doesn't exactly make your company look like a caring company. In fact, crap such as this reinforces the "Big
"Customer Focus" (Score:5, Informative)
Imagine a tech company staffed by brilliant geeks who are working their asses off to solve customers' problems. It would be wonderful, except the nature of brilliant geeks is not to solve other peoples' problems, but to work on things that interest them.
There's only so many ways to remind folks that, yes, indeed their salaries are being paid by customers who expect their needs to be met, before you start to repeat yourself and are perceived as spouting more of the bzzt-bzzt-bzzt of corporate speak. Reminding the staff that their are competitors with good products waiting to take the customer away is something every corporate leader has to do, becausing thinking about competitors is not something geeks like to do.
I know the first thing I think of in the morning isn't how I can stick my thumb in the competition's eye. OK, the first thing I think of in the morning is whether there is any coffee left in the coffee room, but the fact is under normal circumstances, it would never cross my mind to think about the state of the business. I want other people to worry about that for me.
Of course, you have take into account that Ottellini knew his blog would eventually get leaked, but that doesn't mean it was primarily meant for leaking. I think it was more or less meant for internal consumption, accepting that leaks are going to happen and are probably OK. Anybody who knows who Paul Ottellini is probably knows that AMD has a strong product already.
Re:"Customer Focus" (Score:1)
Re:"Customer Focus" (Score:2)
The problem isn't the overuse of term. The problem is that nobody has a sure fire formula for creating "customer focus", so in the absence of this they do what they can, which is to talk themselves blue in the face.
Re:"Customer Focus" (Score:2, Funny)
Re:"Customer Focus" (Score:1)
Re:"Customer Focus" (Score:4, Interesting)
However, its not always simple. Suppose you had an industrial robot company. Your guys have spent years successfully meeting the needs of industrial customers by making robots that are easy to integrate into different kinds of manufacturing situations, are modular, serviceable, and flexibly programmable.
Now you decide to make a Roomba competitor. The needs are different from what you are used to. The robot will be used for one purpose. It will not be user serviceable or maybe not serviceable at all, if it can be made cheap enough. It will perform one task only so it doesn't need to be programmable at all, except to perhaps handle several different precanned vacuuming routines.
Furthermore, the device will have requirements that are entirely new to you. It has to be very small. It has to be economical with power. It has to be mobile, and do things like maneuver around and fit under chairs. Above all, it has to be cute, maybe even have something that could be perceived as a personality.
I think, in a way, that this is actually fairly easy. You have so many new requirements, that your guys (and gals) have to start with a blank sheet. There's a certain appeal, like having a new field of snow to tramp around in.
What I think is hardest is when what you are doing is more or less right, but you have to track rapidly evolving customer needs. The necessary self-destructive work of tinkering with past successes is bound to be the hardest. So you've got a team that's focused on delivering raw computing power for ages and ages, but maybe power consumption is going to be an issue in the next generation of processors, or maybe the kinds of applications they run can't use the power the way they're planning on delivering it. I dunno, I'm not a CPU designer or design bigot, but I assume there are problems of this nature.
I do know geeks. If they have an idea they really like, it's going to be hard to get them off of it just because it may not be exactly what the customer is asking for.
Re:"Customer Focus" (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't have too. Always have.
> It would be wonderful, except the nature of brilliant geeks is not to solve other peoples' problems, but to work on things that interest them.
BZZZT! Thanks for playing. In my experience the problem comes down to the mgt. insisting on the band-aid approach and nothing but the band-aid approach. I've seen many a 'quick fix' go in ending up being a permenan
Re:"Customer Focus" (Score:3, Insightful)
Really this shouldn't be seen as management knows whats right vs. geeks know what's right. The issue is that management needs more technology sophistication and geeks need more business sophistication.
Re:"Straight Talk"? (Score:2)
Of course, its no wonder that CEOs don't communicate in a written form, since there always one disgruntled person willing to forward clearly internal things to the outside wor
Re:"Straight Talk"? (Score:2)
Right on. I personally only try to do business with companies which are customer HOSTILE.
My God, get off it. "Customer focus" is a real, important concept. Would you prefer more companies which are self-focused?
Re:"Straight Talk"? (Score:2)
Re:"Straight Talk"? (Score:1)
Re:Poor Taste (Score:1)
Yes, I recently read "The Cluretrain Manifesto".
Re:Poor Taste (Score:2)
In other words, your point that "this will probably mean that businesses will become less adoptive of technology to exchange ideas" is absolutely wrong, because he KNEW the stuff would be "leaked" and did it anyway. That means he EMBRACED it.
It's scary. (Score:5, Interesting)
A couple of cases come to mind:
Just last night, a mistrial was declared in a murder case because one of the witnesses had put stuff on the internet that made her seem less credible. The stuff had been taken down a long time ago but the cache was still there. (The trial is the 'Jonathan' trial in Toronto.)
Recently a bunch of brokers got nailed because the text messages they thought couldn't be intercepted were intercepted. The messages proved that they were plotting against their employer.
If you want to have a frank discussion with your employees, you have to be very very careful. Treat it as though it will become public and will be there forever.
Re:It's scary. (Score:2)
Not familiar with the case (or Canadian law, for that matter) - How does that count as a mistrial? "Waah, we had to actually do some work to find this really old drivel she posted on the internet a decade ago!"??? Sure, if the defense lawyers encouraged her to remove it and then deny it ever existing, I could see it as not quite kosher, but this sounds more like a precedent by which any case would mistrial, uncomfortable
Re:It's scary. (Score:2)
You know, he pretty much says exactly that in his blog, and it's even quoted in the article...
corepirate nazi hypenosys not hard to decipher (Score:1)
all is not lost?
If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and look upwards, and seek my peace, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear them, and will forgive their blindness, and will heal their saddened hearts, and their land.
don't forget? consult with/trust in yOUR creators. providing more than enough of everything for everyone (without ANY distracting/spiritdead personal gain motives) since/until forever. see you there?
It is still censored (Score:5, Insightful)
Moreover, especially with the ever-increasing threat of lawsuits, people are more and more careful what they put in writing in any context at all, and companies have learned that digital words are more dangerous than words on paper.
Now, if there were transcripts of a converstion between two executives that were good friends, and not rivals in any way, completely trusted each other, and were slightly drunk, they would be interesting transcripts.
Most interesting would be words written where the guy thought that NO ONE else would EVER see them.
Re:It is still censored (Score:2, Informative)
Re:It is still censored (Score:1)
I apologize if my use of "censored" has confused anyone. Though the word has very strong connotations of depriving people of their agency, that is not its only appropriate use. Censorship is not always bad, and not always the same as untruth. I often censor myself, seldom regret it, and try to be as honest as I can.
It seems you're suggesting that just because people watch what they say doesn't mean that their first concer
Re:It is still censored (Score:3, Interesting)
That's why executives play golf.
Re:It is still censored (Score:2)
Does it matter? (Score:3, Interesting)
I do not understand why "honesty" is something noone really cares for. The "candid" things a CEO might say is usually something everyone always knew. If Bill Gates said that Linux is a threat that must be watched closely... well d'uh.
For me the only real difference is the respect you gain by telling the truth. "Stupid Customers" that fall for those additional 5 GHz don't give a rats ass about such statements. Even if Linux was whooping MS's ass they would rather go petting a hedgehog than change what they have gotten used to.
But the respect you gain for someone that just tells the whole world the facts is worth a lot in my eyes. Because that will gain you attention from the people who will be advising their CEOs on whether that companies product will work reliably(!) and whether the support can be expected to be acceptable.
But that's just my opinion of course.
Re:Does it matter? (Score:2)
Re:Does it matter? (Score:1)
Honesty is great, but I'm not too sure whether it would work out in politics. Certainly, a lot of things could be gained by stating certain facts but in a political environment you meet a lot of different opinions. What would you do to change things that you yourself would consider as an enhancement of the current situation but most other people wouldn't?
A great leader also must be a d
Re:Does it matter? (Score:1)
Choice bite (Score:1)
"perfect balance between fear and greed" (Score:2)
Just to be clear the "fear and greed" is on the part of the Hollywood exec's not Intel.
Why will the leak kill the market? Sorry, I'm still waking up and things don't make sense yet.
In Soviet Russia... (Score:4, Insightful)
In Soviet Russia, people reached that understanding decades ago for all official corporations. Obviously, they were far ahead of their time. Of course, the poor suckers didn't have much of a choice than to figure it out--their lives depended on it every day; for us, most of the time, the consequence of figuring out corporate messages just comes down to whether we buy Coke or Pepsi.
Seriously, this is no coincidence: modern political propaganda was invented during WWI in the US by people like Bernays. After WWI, the now out-of-work folks started writing books and selling their services to the private sector. Their "Torches of Freedom" campaign made smoking instantly acceptable for women (even though Bernays himself already believed that smoking was bad and forbade his daughter to smoke). Goebbels picked up Bernays's methods for the Nazis (from Bernay's published works), and I suspect the communist movement used it as well. After that, this has been pretty much the standard way for any large organization to communicate with rest of us--it is standard textbook stuff.
Here's where I turn (Score:2)
Try one of these. [crystalinks.com] Or these. [amazon.com]
Classic Disruptive Technology? (Score:2)
Good god, THAT bit's already here. Intel's New World Order DRM is just a last ditch attempt to hold back the tide.
You think the employees get the truth? (Score:5, Insightful)
The City got a rather different speech - verging on apologising for the poor results, it was very much lower-key.
Which is more accurate? Well, I'm no accountant or investor, but the results didn't look that great to me. The point is that just because something's said internally doesn't make it true, *especially* when it's communicated to the employees in general.
Re:You think the employees get the truth? (Score:3, Interesting)
And then two weeks later they laid off seven people. Because sales weren't meeting the projected quotas any more. WTF. We always have a downturn about this time of year, but now that we're corporate, that's unacceptable. Feh.
*Internal* blog, so why are we reading it? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:*Internal* blog, so why are we reading it? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:*Internal* blog, so why are we reading it? (Score:4, Insightful)
That is not the case here, but I'm speaking directly to your statement.
Further, as the head of one biggest names in technology, you can't hope for anything you write down for mass consumtion NOT to be spread around. It's the nature of the beast. Surely intel exec, more than anyone else, would understand this.
This is just a cleverly craft bit of PR.
Re:*Internal* blog, so why are we reading it? (Score:2)
If he wanted to say something really secret or illegal, a game of golf would be involved, not a blog.
Paul KNEW it would leak! (Score:2)
Have you considered that there may be designated "leakers" and it's all part of a PR campaign?
It's a PR ploy (Score:4, Interesting)
While this is intended as an internal blog, I recognize that it will become public--welcome to the Internet! As a result, please recognize that I may be a bit limited in my comments and responses to protect Intel, and that we may exercise some editorial privilege on your comments for the same reason. I want to be clear on this up front. This is the price of entry to this blog.
Mercury News is putting quite a spin on this "internal" stuff.
did you see the PR part (Score:3, Interesting)
"Kudos to the PR exec who thought up this forum"
Nice double speak. (Score:5, Informative)
This is not a true statement. I would bet the AVR and Xscale both out sell the Itanium. He might have meant that the Itanium was out selling all other server class RISC processors except Power and Sparc. But the question then becomes what other server class RISC processors are there besides Power and Sparc? Mips is dead in the server space. Alpha being killed. PA-RISC is at the end of it's life. Sounds like the Itanium is a distant third place. Too bad AMD did not pick up the Alpha line. Maybe they could have pushed Intel down to number 4 on the list. Probably for the best it might have distracted them more than it would have helped.
Re:Nice double speak. (Score:2)
Running Scared of Apple? Silly! (Score:4, Insightful)
It's called "reference design" (Score:1, Interesting)
Intel can become cool by creating cool reference designs for their chips. Employees who say "we're just a chip company" are really too blind.
BTX ain't it!
Re:Running Scared of Apple? Silly! (Score:1)
Apple, AMD, and convergence (Score:4, Interesting)
It's all about "Hats" (Score:2)
However, he knows the truth, and if he feels he needs to communicate that to someone, how does he do it?
By switching hats of course. As a memo to employees, he is supposed to wear the "Stern but fair father" hat. No bullshit, just the facts.
The real question here is: Who was he trying to communicate this to? Is he
This just in: blogs not latest buzzword anymore (Score:1, Offtopic)
Postmodern what? (Score:1)
Any article that contains the above words immediately tells me this was not written for the common man -- or geek -- to understand.
We can't all be cool (Score:2, Insightful)
Customer Focused? (Score:3, Insightful)
I read the responses also, and one person hit it on the head. They site Apple as making cool products and Intel as making products that other people use to make "cool" products. Does Intel really want to get in to the same market as Apple? If so then are they going to write software for their products also? What about their OS? What OS are they going to use? Lots of questions and how they answer them depends on how much they piss off Microsoft and others.
Heck I have an idea for Intel. How about making the best X86 and X86-64 for the money? I will give you the mobile market for now. Then look at where the bottleneck is the current systems (memory) and do something about it. RAMBUS was not the answer!!! Adding more and more cache is not the answer either. You have around 12 BILLION in R&D and you let AMD beat you in your core business?? If you couldn't force Dell and others to not ship AMD systems then you would probably be in a world of hurt, but how long can you continue your stranglehold (illegal monopoly practace)?
Lastly I want to say again... You have BILLIONS in R&D. Come up with the best product.
Lather, rinse, repeat... (Score:1)
Where did they get this blog material? From an internal source? While I like to dislike Intel as much as ex motorola chip fab employees this smacks of wrongful publication...
I am glad I got the pdf though! w00t!
But how do we know it's real?
product placement != cool (Score:2)
The irony is that such out-of-touch statements is the reason why companies that make them have products that are not considered "cool". Apple is cool because Apple is cool. Pepsi has tons of product placement, would anyone consider Pepsi
The least cool company on the planet (Score:2)
Why? They're not fun. I remember a day when I was sitting at a truly arcane 8086 intel development system to bring up the ROMS for an 8086 version of the companies 8085 based product. Other people were using macs. And having fun doing their work. I was suffering with segment registers. Not cool.
Even IBM is slightly more cool than intel. I can't believe I'm saying this.
I have to laugh (Score:2)
From TFA:
Kinda like that Usenet thingy that's dying, [slashdot.org] right?
Re:3rd post (Score:1, Funny)
Re:postmodern (Score:5, Informative)
On Postmodernism: Read some Jean-Francois Lyotard for starters. From the Postmodern Condition is his most important work. You might want to follow that up with some Bertens or Hamermas. And as I'm sure you already know, this [wikipedia.org] wikipedia entry and this [answers.com] answers.com entry offer basic overviews (though the wikipedia entry is better IMO).
Meme is a term coined by Richard Dawkins in The Selfish Gene. Wikipedia also offers an overview of the term here [wikipedia.org].
Cheers,
--Maynard
Re:postmodern (Score:1)
Anyway, it's worth reading from an academic point of view: to see what crazy ideas other people can come up with, but post-modernism is nothing to take too seriously: it's a toy for philosophers who've lost the competition with other scientists.
Re:postmodern (Score:1)
That's called a typo. Whoops.
Anyway, it's worth reading from an academic point of view: to see what crazy ideas other people can come up with, but post-modernism is nothing to take too seriously: it's a toy for philosophers who've lost the competition with other scientists.
That's certainly one opinion to take, though I never thought "philosophers" were "scientists." I will note that you haven't offered any critique of what these people said, you've simply impugned the ent
Re:postmodern (Score:1)
Anyway, your offering is not much better: it consists of a wikipedia reference that's totally free of argument of the validity of post-modern interpretations. As a matter of fact, it literally says "Postmodernism therefore has an obvious distrust toward claims about truth, ethics, or beauty being rooted in anything other than individual perception and group construction." That basically allows for ad hominem
A funny techie answer (Score:5, Interesting)
however, when the jokes (and they are good!) are done, he goes on to offer a helpful reading list for the interested
Re:A funny techie answer (Score:1)
Re:A funny techie answer (Score:2)
It also confims my suspicions about "experts" in some fields. Make something so abstract and convoluted that logical conventions no longer apply to them. Also as a benefit, that gives the opportunity for various "experts" to have wildly different and even completely conflicting views on a yes/no question and still be considered correct.
Re:A funny techie answer (Score:2)