Jha will have his work cut out for him at GloFo, not let the ex Moto semiconductor types with questionable track record continue, but rebuild his top management with strong technical achievers & managers
I wish him good luck but this type of company always make great guys seem simple. When a bright man hits a terrible business model, the latter always wins. Let us hope Sanjay is lucky this time around.
Can a CEO ever be an "engineer's CEO," like an artist has "an artists' artist" or an engineer has an "engineers' engineer"? i was impressed with how Jha was portrayed in the Forbes article. having read engineers' complaints for years about management not getting it. But I don't suppose any business leader gets a big vote of confidence from engineers. It's a big generalization but am I wrong?
It's natural fo rengineers to be at odds with management given what is epected of them and the lack of a voice that is often encountered....it's not much of a generalization, the CEEO is the face of management, he or she steers the comapny in its stated direction, so much of that dislike for management is going to be centered on the CEO...
The problem is that the CEO is in the public spotlight. He has to perform for the shareholders. The engineers just want to create and have fun. If the CEO is good, he will give the engineers the direction needed and get out of the way. If he is not good, he will try to engineer the solution. His job is not to engineer anymore but to provide the support needed for the engineers. It sounds like Sanjay may be good at this based on the article. I'm not sure if Motorola really benefited from his leadership. I do know that he benefited from Motorola being aquired by Google.
Morris Chang of TSMC is an Engineer and does not hide it. To go up against TSMC, GloFo would need someone of at least Dr. Chang's caliber. Jha too has a PhD in Engr. ( EE ) and did show good analytical abilities and what one may call Techno - Macho while at QCOMM. What is the alternative ? To bring in another non-Techie like Otellini at Intel and try to avoid making tough decisions for 5 years because you lack the basics ? The semiconductor industry, thank heavens, is still driven by science & engr, so MBAs, Economists or English majors playing Technical Analysts need not apply.
from Shockley on down to Rodgers, Woz / Jobs..., the whole pack
and if you want examples of the opposite, won't have to go any further than H-P, created by Engr.s Bill & Dave, the founding fathers of Si Valley, but now bleeding 15 years after falling for glorified sales girls ( MBAs ) like Fiorina & Whitman.
>> from Shockley on down to Rodgers, Woz / Jobs..., the whole pack
It is not true. Shockley never ran anything right. All his firms were bankrupt.
For Intel, the guy that built Intel was the marketing guy that figured out how to make people aware of the components used inside their PCs. Before then, no one cared what was inside their PCs. But when Intel Inside campaign came, Intel took off. AMD has made better products than Intel but this is not a tech race, it is marketing which techies are not good in.
>> I do know that he benefited from Motorola being aquired by Google.
That is the most important line in your comment. CEOs win - head or tail. While others get fired or layed off, CEOs with their special contracts win in all scenarios. Jha failed in leading MOT to the promised land, we hope his chance in this new call is brighter.
>> But I don't suppose any business leader gets a big vote of confidence from engineers.
I do not think there is a correlation between being an engineer to being a good CEO in a technical firm. It is like in academia where you appoint a professor who has never run a single 5-person business to run a university with $1B budget. Where is the prepration? Publishing papers in journal has no relationship to managing students, staff and faculty.
But don't you think an CEO should have some understanding of how the products are produced---how can a CEO or manager make good decisions if they don't know how they will effect work production. Being an engineer or a chip designer or at least having that knowledge would help CEO make more informed decisions.
>> But don't you think an CEO should have some understanding of how the products are produced---how can a CEO or manager make good decisions
The problem with experience is that you keep perfecting the thing you have experience on. A chip designer will continue to see a business from that lens instead of from the needs of the market. There is no correlation between been an IT geek and being a great IT manager. It is like universities that hire anyone to run over professors instead of making professors Presidents purely because they are professors. You get someone who has been watching spiders and how they walk to run a university with $1B budget becuase he has published papers less than 30 people in the world have cited. It is the same with business. Management does not get much from deep specific expertise.
GloFo needs 3 things: more customers, more capacity and a new DNA.
The chart we showed on anysilicon site, can demonstrate how far are GloFo and UMC from TSMC. Sanjay will bring a new set of contacts: Qualcomm, Moto/Google, but this is not enought. GloFo needs also Apple.
Capacity is also an issue. GloFo cannot grow without bringing more wafer capacity which ATIC has now agreed to an investment of 10B$ to the fab.
Last but not least, GloFo was created by a merger of several fabs, organizations and cultures. To ensure all this work together a new leader has be in place. And Sanjay has the right backgound and the spirit to create that and drive GloFo to the top.
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.