“The death of Apple Inc’s strong-willed co-founder and Chairman Steve Jobs has put the secretive company’s small board at crossroads,” Poornima Gupta and Sinead Carew report for Reuters. “Business as usual, or time for a change? The first signs of the future will be whether they choose an independent chairman and expand the number of directors.”
“Apple directors include heavy hitters, but they were seen offering advice to the chief executive rather than overseeing Jobs, who was known for persuading people to see things his way,” Gupta and Carew report. “The old message was ‘trust Steve,’ the new message has to be ‘trust the team.’ … It’s no longer the cult of personality.’ said Jim Post, a professor of corporate governance at Boston University School of Management who called for an independent chairman.”
“‘The board needs to be expanded. They need to bring on additional independent talent …, people who were not living in Steve’s shadow,’ he said,” Gupta and Carew report. “Apple’s time frame for finding a new chairman — and even whether it is seeking one — is unclear. A spokesman declined to comment. Previously, Apple had no chairman but only co-lead directors… Apple’s board, with just seven current members, is one of the smallest and most opaque in the industry. Most of Apple’s peers have boards that have 10 directors.”
Read more in the full article here.
There’s only one name who could possibly fill the Chairman’s chair IMO. Time for a Woz comeback.
I agree
Agreed~
Woz wasn’t cut out for it in the 80’s, and there’s no PIXAR or NEXT under his belt to even remotely make him a consideration.
He’s a lovable clown, but still a clown.
Tim Cook = Chairman, the guy is capable, knows his strengths vs. weaknesses and has experience running the show. No outsider can trump that.
Also expanding the board is “the stupid fucking idea I’ve ever heard” (to quote Steve). Apple is lean and mean now, no need for additional corporate baggage at the top.
BINGO!!!
Remember that this is the Chairman role we’re talking about, not the CEO position. Cook is the perfect guy to run the company, but Apple needs a figurehead.
NO, Woz, for all his technical talent is not CEO or chairman material. He cannot be a replacement for Jobs. As for changing the board, do we really need to emulate DELL, GM or MS in making big boards? It’s working, let it work. Although it will be hard to find a new chairman with the talents of Steve JObs, that is what the board needs to look for, nor more mediocrity.
Even Woz has stated that he couldn’t even close to filling that role
Woz has been secretly working on a new project just for Apple.
Here is a secret photo of a package that just arrived at Apple R&D.
http://goo.gl/xtFWv
Just spit out my drink when I saw that! 😀
Sadly, thats not realistic. Woz is brilliant, but business man he is not. I think it would be fantastic if they employed him in an advisory capacity for R&D. Woz has fantastic ideas, he just doesn’t seem like the executive type, and thats not a bad thing.
Let’s reiterate the “need”… Apple needs (not exactly in the pure meaning of necessity) a chairman to fill in a position of a great creative and visionary that left a legacy.
Woz is as good as any other visionary readily coming to minds… and if the choice is a mistake it has to be changed after trying him out. This is not about a person, it is about a vision, an idea, an evolution…
Apple must have a board that is willing to think differently from the rest of the industry. If the board were to be consisted of people that flow with the stream of Wall Street’s thinking and are unable to resist negative thinking from the maddening crowd, Apple will be in trouble again. That was the type of board that Apple had when it decided to throw its lot behind Scully, a typical Wall Street’s creature, and turned its support away from Steve Jobs. When Steve returned from his exile, he immediately removed the deadwoods.
The most important thing the board must possess is to be financially conservative and not go on unnecessary acquisition binges, unless the acquisition meets with Apple’s long-term goals.
I think Jonathan Ive should be inducted into the board. He has worked closely with Steve Jobs, who treated him like a son and best friend. By now Jonathan Ive would have understood and absorbed the thinking of Steve Jobs. Leave the execution to Tim Cook and the rest who have proven themselves.
Think Different!
Leo Apotheker is available.
/jk!
Disagree. Jobs has always said that Apple works best by keeping the mindset of a startup.
That means that you don’t allow well intentioned people to hijack your vision. The inertia in any organization is to become insider focused and to protect your turf. That would be the death of Apple.
Agreed. People who have said that Apple needs to be more like Microsoft or such have always lacked the vision of Jobs.
This is not the time to cave into traditional thinking just because its….. er….. traditional. LOL
en
Apple doesn’t need to follow the rest. Apple has been, and should continue to be, it’s own unique self. It has never been following the stats quo, and should never did.
and its peer boards are known to be effective. take HP for example . . . .. or Oracle . . . ..
What a load of crap – Are these guys looking for a seat on the board? Apple IS the new era.
Why does Apple want to be like everyone else? Answer, they don’t, never have and never will.
Apple wandered down that path under the “guidance” of the idiot from the soda pop world and – ah – oh, that sucked! Stop throwing pebbles and broken sticks at Mount Olympus trying to evoke a response from those who reside at the top, hidden amongst the clouds.
To Poornima Gupta and Sinead Carew: go bother Microsoft, better yet, just go away!
Exactly! “Business as usual” has resulted in 9000% profits for stockholders since Jobs’ return. The board is doing just fine. There is a reason that Jim Post is a professor and not a CEO or COB. It’s the same reason I don’t take stock advice from my barber.
I completely agree.
I never cease to be amazed at how the pundits and analysts want them to do things like everyone else. Not doing things by the suit playbook is why Apple has been successful. I hope the board doesn’t fuck the golden goose.
and that could be why they perform better than their peers
Never had it never will. Nothing like the real thing.
The composition of the board is the most important aspect of Apple’s future. While the next couple of years will be about execution of plans already in the pipeline, the judgment of the board kicks in after that.
Jobs was always willing to bet the company. Whether it was in creating Apple stores, or committing to huge quantities of key components, he was willing and able to take enormous chances. While different in personality, Tim Cook appears willing to operate in that mode. We’ll all find out how well his gut works.
But most boards (like the board of the multinational I work for) slowly fill up with beancounters. They’re concerned about “the interests of the stockholders” and gun-shy about the kind of decisions that must be made to keep a company healthy and innovative. They become concerned about salaries and expenses and typical B-School stuff. This is eventually reflected in the type of executives they put in place.
So the challenge to Apple is to keep the board from becoming a typical board. Good luck to them!
Now is the time for Apple to buy back all those shares and go private.
If they must stay public – then keep the board small – and select from within. This is not the time to be adding new blood. If someone moves up to be Chairman – then fill their spot with someone mature and calm.
I wish I was that person – but I’m not
Tommy , I disagree. Who would buy the shares??? Most companies have boards of directors and CEOs that are just there to make money, usually from shares.
I think the Tim Cook thing is best. Pick a guy, give him tons and tons of money so that he is not greedy and doing things to make himself money from a bonus etc, and let him go to work. Of course he has to take the Steve Jobs training course too. 🙂
en
Richard Branson, Jack Dorsey and the founder of Mint would be good.
As board members
This is another story from Reuters which appears to have bo basis in fact. It’s the opinion of one person and Apple’s board are not at any sort of crossroads.
Committees can’t be trusted. They screwed Apple the last time. If Apple is to remain Apple, then the committee needs to leave it alone.
Steve chose Tim Cook, so should we.
They don’t need to be stirring the pot. How about Laurene Jobs on the board to make sure Steve’s vision for Apple isn’t forgotten.
Hey, that would be a good idea. Also train Steve’s son into the culture of Apple and see whether he has the potential of his father’s passion for excellence. He must have his father’s DNA. But do not pass the company to third-generation Steve’s dynasty. Most probably they could be spoilt brags.
There is no “need” to expand the board or do something else in that field.
I don’t have any idea who’s running “Apple University,” whose mission is to instill Steve Jobs’s way of thinking into the next generation of Apple’s mid-level managers and other employees …
but that’s the person I would nominate for the Apple board. Not someone who necessarily has Steve’s vision, but someone who is adept at seeing whether the company is applying Steve’s principles and methods to new challenges.
I assume that Tim Cook and three or four of Steve’s top lieutenants have a firm fix on Steve’s vision and will be following it for at least the next 5-10 years.
That would be Joel Podolny.
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
Reuters’ Gupta and Carew: “Apple’s board, with just seven current members, is one of the smallest and most opaque in the industry.”
“Most of Apple’s peers have boards that have 10 directors”
And they and we are more better for that?
So, Apple should now become more like every other MBA-driven company? Because that’s what will enable the company to continue to be Apple for the long term? I think not.
Woz for developer relations chief.
Yeah, let’s ask the anal-lysts how to run Apple and turn it into the next run of the mill corporation, run by suits… How about the CEO of Coca Cola!
“… Jim Post, a professor of corporate governance at Boston University School of Management …”
If you can’t do it, teach it!
Thank goodness Apple doesn’t follow the corporate cookie cutter path of failure and innovation-less products. Whatever happens here, Apple will do what they have done since SJ returned – “think different”.
You know what we all should say?
Fsck Reuters.