Many people underestimate what t takes to run a large corporation such as Yahoo and to make it a success while even many more mistakenly believe that CEO's determine all the outcomes of such firms. It is rather unfortunate that Yahoo! has had to lose its CEO because of a misstatement in his resume just at the same time that it has been struggling greatly to revive its businesses. I hate to kick a person who is on the floor and therefore will not overly condemn Scott Thompson for the error on his resume. However, I am unsure that having a computer science degree on its own would mean that he was more capable than not. In my view, his departure is about material misstatements that could have misled the recruiters.
That aside, I think that the most perceptive piece that I have read about this unfortunate incident is by Charles Arthur, the technology editor of the Guardian. He suggests here that the present circumstances show that the successor CEO must answer an important question about what Yahoo! is. To be honest, that question is one that not many people can answer for the firms that they work for or purport to run. Added to the fact that in Yahoo!'s arena are Google, Facebook, Twitter and many more, I would not answer that question in a thousand words or on a postcard. It may even be a question that has no answer. But as Charles suggests, it is possible that the inability to answer that question convincingly shows that there is cluttered thinking in that firm.
I hope that any readers of this blog would venture an answer as I am wondering whether Yahoo!'s trajectory is an illustration of creative destruction at work.
That aside, I think that the most perceptive piece that I have read about this unfortunate incident is by Charles Arthur, the technology editor of the Guardian. He suggests here that the present circumstances show that the successor CEO must answer an important question about what Yahoo! is. To be honest, that question is one that not many people can answer for the firms that they work for or purport to run. Added to the fact that in Yahoo!'s arena are Google, Facebook, Twitter and many more, I would not answer that question in a thousand words or on a postcard. It may even be a question that has no answer. But as Charles suggests, it is possible that the inability to answer that question convincingly shows that there is cluttered thinking in that firm.
I hope that any readers of this blog would venture an answer as I am wondering whether Yahoo!'s trajectory is an illustration of creative destruction at work.
No comments:
Post a Comment