Semi Conscious
Comment
docdivakar
I think a crucial thing to do now at Cadence is to prevent further departures of ...
spamtit
I've worked on & off at Cadence since the early 90's. Titillating story. ...
Is Cadence preparing for a change at the top?
Dylan McGrath
8/1/2011 3:57 PM EDT
Bruggeman too aggressive for Cadence?
But Bruggeman's aggressive push for change at a company that has largely done business the same way for more than two decades may have been too much for some of Cadence's more conservative executives. Smith—who wonders if Cadence will be ill-served without its loudest advocate for change—said, simply, that Cadence "is way more conservative than Bruggeman is."
If indeed Tan is preparing to replace himself, it may be that the rest of the company's board believes the next CEO—be it Huang or someone else—can fill that role as company spokesperson and that Bruggeman was no longer needed to bridge that gap.
Still, you've got to believe that there is more to the story. The way that Cadence pushed Bruggeman as the company's face and voice sometimes suggested the company was grooming him to be its next CEO (Smith quickly dismissed this theory). You have to wonder about the logic of elbowing out someone that has been put on such a pedestal to represent the firm. (Longtime EDA watcher Gabe Moretti reported on his blog that rumors circulated at the recent Design Automation Conference that Bruggeman was not happy with his role at Cadence).
Predictably, Bruggeman did not immediately respond to a request for an interview on the topic. Cadence reports that the company and Bruggeman signed a transition agreement which calls for him to remain a full-time "non-executive employee through Aug. 14," a part time employee entitled to benefits after that, and likely includes restrictions on what he is at liberty to say publicly.
To sum up, Bruggeman's departure brings about at least as many questions as it does answers. Is Lip-Bu Tan preparing the step down? Was it wise for Cadence to make Bruggeman the go-to guy for the company and then elbow him aside? Will Cadence be worse off without its loudest advocate for change?
The call here is that EDA in general may be worse off without Bruggeman (assuming he doesn't hook on with another EDA firm). Bruggeman is a marketing guy through-and-through, but he's long on vision and audacity—two things that often seem to be in short supply in an EDA landscape that has been stagnant for too long.
But Bruggeman's aggressive push for change at a company that has largely done business the same way for more than two decades may have been too much for some of Cadence's more conservative executives. Smith—who wonders if Cadence will be ill-served without its loudest advocate for change—said, simply, that Cadence "is way more conservative than Bruggeman is."
If indeed Tan is preparing to replace himself, it may be that the rest of the company's board believes the next CEO—be it Huang or someone else—can fill that role as company spokesperson and that Bruggeman was no longer needed to bridge that gap.
Still, you've got to believe that there is more to the story. The way that Cadence pushed Bruggeman as the company's face and voice sometimes suggested the company was grooming him to be its next CEO (Smith quickly dismissed this theory). You have to wonder about the logic of elbowing out someone that has been put on such a pedestal to represent the firm. (Longtime EDA watcher Gabe Moretti reported on his blog that rumors circulated at the recent Design Automation Conference that Bruggeman was not happy with his role at Cadence).
Predictably, Bruggeman did not immediately respond to a request for an interview on the topic. Cadence reports that the company and Bruggeman signed a transition agreement which calls for him to remain a full-time "non-executive employee through Aug. 14," a part time employee entitled to benefits after that, and likely includes restrictions on what he is at liberty to say publicly. To sum up, Bruggeman's departure brings about at least as many questions as it does answers. Is Lip-Bu Tan preparing the step down? Was it wise for Cadence to make Bruggeman the go-to guy for the company and then elbow him aside? Will Cadence be worse off without its loudest advocate for change?
The call here is that EDA in general may be worse off without Bruggeman (assuming he doesn't hook on with another EDA firm). Bruggeman is a marketing guy through-and-through, but he's long on vision and audacity—two things that often seem to be in short supply in an EDA landscape that has been stagnant for too long.
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
semi08
8/1/2011 10:34 PM EDT
Lip-Bu has done a great job of steering Cadence towards a predictible business path. It appeared that the street loved his simple yet consistent message quarter after quarter. He restored the confidence in customers and built the much needed partnerships completely reversing the culture set by his predecessor. Kudos to him for that. But he is not a Joe Costello for Cadence. I guess someone like Joe is badly needed for Cadence. John Bruggerman also did a marvelous job by re-establishing the Cadence brand through his more broad EDA360 message. After a long time, it appeared like Cadence was taking the right steps in all sectors to be a trusted partner in the entire eco-system. It is sad to see that John has to leave.
Sign in to Reply
AnitS
8/2/2011 10:33 AM EDT
As a Cadence employee, it's funny the perception John created outside of the company but in reality, there was a lot more that went on behind the scenes. No doubt John has been very visible in the EDA industry and portrays an image of higher knowledge. But this is exactly why pushing John out was the best thing that could have happened to Cadence. John is a great self-promoter but his leadership throughout Cadence was a very different story. He was divisive, demoralizing and disengaged much of the time. It doesn't matter how great your vision is, if you can't rally the troops behind you, you won't get anywhere. John was never going to be successful at leading Cadence to EDA360 glory, because he didn't have the leadership or personal skills to convince the engineering organizations his ideas were anything but superficial fluff. A common saying inside the company was that John's marketing was all flash but no substance. The press and analysts seem to buy in to his act, but the company who could see the real John, never did. The sad thing for the industry is that while he takes credit for the EDA360 paper, Richard Goering was the real author of that document. For me, I'm hoping we can now actually focus on how to deliver EDA360 because that is really what Cadence needs to do now.
Sign in to Reply
spamtit
8/14/2011 2:17 PM EDT
I've worked on & off at Cadence since the early 90's. Titillating story. Unfortunately, the comments are much closer to reality. Cadence has always been an innovation factory that few can manage, let alone exploit. It takes either a visionary that gets his/her hands dirty on the doing side of the vision, or a technocrat like Aart or Wally. That's why most of the real stars actually leave Cadence, or get pushed out. My guess is that the hunt is on for someone else to run Cadence. That's just not Charlie Huang's thing. Let's all hope they find the right person soon. Someone that can inspire and rebuild Cadence quickly.
Sign in to Reply
docdivakar
8/25/2011 9:14 PM EDT
I think a crucial thing to do now at Cadence is to prevent further departures of productive employees during turbulent times like the one they are in now. With Ansys lurking close by with acquisitions of EDA companies, Cadence's best bets are matching some of Ansys' non-EDA offerings as a counter balance.
MP Divakar
Sign in to Reply