Finding New Leadership Outside Microsoft - who should we hire?
I am a big sports fan. I love the idea of finding the right combination of the right people with the right abilities to make a winning team.
Working in a large company is very similar to that. A great leader/manager will know when to build people up from within the organization, teaching them the tools and providing the resources they will need to be successful. A great leader also knows when you need new players on your roster—when it’s time to look outside your own team and draft someone new into a leadership role.
This got me thinking: There was an article in the Wall Street Journal a few days ago, talking about how Steve Ballmer has decided to look outside the Microsoft organization for hiring new managers and top talent. The article talks about bringing in people from other industries, while not upsetting the masses, which many see as a strictly developer culture.
We have had some great acquisitions from some of our drafts, including COO Kevin Turner, CFO Chris Lidell and Recruiter Extraordinaire Janelle Godfrey (Hey- I wasn’t home grown within MS, so I’m going to say I was an amazing acquisition to the team).
Seriously though, smart companies need to know when to build people up and when to look elsewhere for talent. I think it’s a smart move on Microsoft’s part to be willing to look outside the organization.
Many employees will say that we should be promoting within. I think we do a lot of promoting within. It's definitely a strong point for working at Microsoft. However, there has to be a balance.
In order for an organization to continue to be at the top of its game, you need people who know this place like the back of their hand. You need college hires, you need people with 10+ years of experience working in 10 different groups. But, you also need people who have seen how the other half works, including our competitors and people from other industries. This balance allows a company to thrive.
Therefore, I think it’s a good thing. I’m glad my company is willing to look elsewhere to hire top people, and I don’t see it as a last ditch effort to make an impact. I think it’s very strategic.
What do you think?
Are there any superstar players we should hire? Who are some of the real visionary CEOs/leaders out there that could be added to the Microsoft roster? Should we make any trades?
-Janelle
33 Comments
Techy News Blog » Finding New Leadership Outside Microsoft - who should we hire? said:
PingBack from <a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://www.artofbam.com/wordpress/?p=4300">http://www.artofbam.com/wordpress/?p=4300</a>
PS said:
I think microsoft should buy Infosys. I am not a business person so I dont know how feasible it is. Infosys has some brilliant leaders like N. R. Narayana Murthy, Nandan Nilekani, Kris Gopalakrishnan, S. D. Shibulal.......
mcgurk said:
1) me. But if you can't afford me,
2) www.codinghorror.com
Chakkaradeep said:
My suggestion would be to look for real supporters and people and firms who are working hard in Microsoft Technologies. There are many examples that Microsoft does that and some of the examples are SysInternals(<a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/default.mspx">http://www.microsoft.com/technet/sysinternals/default.mspx</a>), Softgrid(<a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://www.microsoft.com/systemcenter/softgrid/default.mspx">http://www.microsoft.com/systemcenter/softgrid/default.mspx</a>).
And I also like the Microsoft Partners program through which companies can interact with Microsoft and get the help they need. These kinda programs will guide ways to those people who want to help and make Microsoft even more better and not just thinking that Microsoft is already doing good. Certainly, there are lot of ways that Microsoft can be improved :)
My choice would be to look for good firms than just CEO,CFO or people. If you look for a good firm, you already got good people and Microsoft can partner with them and develop good products. (This is a more broader sense)
One firm I would like to point out is Intergen (www.intergen.co.nz) here in New Zealand who are the #1 partners for Microsoft NZ.
said:
Yeah, there are loads of Microsoft groupies and thought leaders that would be great additions. Myself included.
However, they would not be the completely external type of acquisition (like Boeing hiring ex-3M CEO Jim McNerney). They would not be hiring people from the forest behind their fence...
said:
I think you could consider hiring also non-computer-scientists persons, but persons e.g. like scientists or philosophers.
(I'm not joking.)
I believe that they can provide very fresh intellectual energy, and they could bring to Microsoft fresh new innovative ideas, that the great Microsoft SDEs can turn into code and cool software products.
(For example, as you know, the WWW was invented - or at least a very important contribution to this technology was given - at the CERN labs by physicists!)
Just my 0.02
G
bigkissy said:
I think it's good that Ballmer is wanting to do this, and Microsoft should stop focusing solely on technical skills when hiring. You guys are so in love with hiring creative technical people, and it seems like that is most of the criteria for a hire. And you know what, it's perfectly easy to do so, just give them a coding problem, or a design question and see how they respond and that's that. I like the team analogy though, in sports you always have to find the right mix and not have too many egos and have some young blood.
Herman said:
Always enjoy your posts, Janelle - kinda like listening to alternative music :)
but yeah. MS needs a good pair of eyes from the outside world, someone to offer insight on the direction the company should be headed for the next 4-5 years. entrepreneurial and revered throughout the industry:
Guy kawasaki. Bring him in as a VC type VP so he can help identify the next StumbleUpon or Twitter.
haitham hamed said:
********* *****ImagineCup for Leaders*************
yes a competetion between leaders to express their vision
on how he will lead Microsoft,
what is his thinking , how many ideas dose he have that will make microsoft always in advance and Briliant!.
let us say it, yes Microsoft are doing well but I think Microsoft till now is Business approach even when it innovate it innovate to get more business , like surface , silverlight
especially silverlight , when we consider how Microsoft is hitting other business we will see Adobe Flash will decay
with years because Microsoft Invest heavily to control this market of nice light graphics.
but forget the business , don't you think there are more values in leave this area for Adobe and instead of competing try to collaborate ,i.e give them Microsoft vision
support , and also you will get a portion from the business
if you like .
Google for example refuse many projects because it will harm other small business in my opinion values is more
than money and give your thinking another chance to hit another area that no one is investing through this you gain
business , respect !,and enrich the software market with new ideas.
we must learn from others and take the best of all values and visions to be the best .
In my opinion if Microsoft change it's thinking from Business
to complex Science ,people feeling, values!!!!, user satisfaction. it will attract the Others! in the Galaxy.
have a nice day and tell Microsoft there are many people
respect and loving you and wish one day to be the best and more sronger
Janelle said:
Herman-- thanks! I hope that means you enjoy alternative music. :)
-Janelle
Anthony Ramos said:
To clarify, I mean that web, software-as-service developers essentially offer the technology first, and seek to make money later through service or ads or other models. This sort of thinking fires up both developers and customers to offer tech advancements immediately, rather than make the customer purchase a new license for a yearly product release.
Essentially, the only way for MS to compete with such nimble developers is to innovate rapidly. The Office team is doing a great job of this, completely revolutionizing the Office suite user interface. I am glad that members of that team have now been tasked with redesigning elements of Window's UI for Windows 7.
said:
Actually you know this goes COMPLETELY against what I want to do but, well here's a simple thought.
Microsoft should probably try and hire somebody who HATES Microsoft. Not being funny here. I'm thinking the next top leader should be the opposite of Mr. Balmer. Well still enthusiastic of course, but not a "Yes Man".
Someone who will throw a little fuel in the fire. Maybe the Bleach to the Ammonia and cause a huge reaction.
Of course not quite was Atari did. That didn't pan out too well for Atari....
You get the idea.
James said:
Funnily enough, Sean, I drafted a post earlier suggesting Steve Jobs :-) Difficult to entice into the post, I'm sure, but hey - he's left Apple before, he could do again...!
More seriously, perhaps John Sculley would be an asset. Given what happened with him and Steve Jobs, I can't imagine Steve Ballmer being keen on the idea though.
Anthony: software-as-a-service has many advantages, as you note (and seems to be working well for Google so far) - Microsoft isn't unaware of this, but ... well, it's rather difficult to deliver an operating system that way. Judging from Google Apps so far, it's not entirely straightforward delivering a full-featured office suite that way either!
Alternatively: me!
said:
Well it would be a little "Full Circle" if Mr. Jobs joined Microsoft. Wasn't it a "Long time Ago in a Galaxy Far Far Away" when Microsoft was part of the Apple team?
But of course that could never happen. Could you imagine the "Monopoly" lawsuits that would fly about with either "AppleSoft" or "MicroApple" now taking over?
You could just see the Linux bunch cringing if Microsoft and Apple EVER joined forces.... Oh THAT would be cool
And kinda scary...
James said:
Sean: Yes, in the early days Bill was very enthusiastic about the Mac, to the extent of offering to pay the author of Switcher (the first task-switcher) $40k to develop and release it, just to make the Mac a better platform for his software! (He ended up getting $150k from Steve Jobs for the same software instead...)
Right now, there's too much overlap between the two companies, with everything from operating systems and office suites to MP3 players. Probably a good thing in most respects: competition does make the products better, but it can also make the companies involved more focused on developing better products, which I suspect is better for the developers involved as well.
Anthony Ramos said:
Janelle:
BusinessWeek's latest analysis of your company under Top 50 Places to Start A Career shows that your company is made up of approximately 0% Liberal Arts majors. Might be something worth addressing and analyzing, as the people who use Microsoft products are not all technical people.
said:
I'm sorry (no offense meant)
Being a pure geek myself, what is "Liberal Arts"?
I'll look silly to the "Uber smart" but an honest question. Maybe a smile from somebody out there saying "Oh you've got to be kidding.... "
:)
Janelle said:
Anthony-- that statistic is alarming, and I must say that I can't imagine that is true. I would guess that upwards of 20% of people who work at MS have non-technical or non-business degrees. Of course, it may not be in the hard core dev roles (which historically is a cs/it/is major).. I myself hired approx 60 people last year into entry level starter careers who did NOT have a CS degree.
I agree completely that a variety is needed--- nothing against Business Week of course- i think that stat is off.
What did/do you major in?
-Janelle
Chakkaradeep said:
Anthony Ramos - Media/Internet has various information flowing. If you tend to believe them then its going to be your nightmare. Me too don't know how far BusinessWeek analysis may be true ! On what basis you tell its true ?
I would believe a Microsoft Recruiter (Janelle or any other) than BusinessWeek or any other article !
James said:
Sean: a quick search turns up "Liberal arts: the study of humanities, arts and literature, language, and natural and physical sciences. Most U.S. universities and colleges offer an ample liberal arts program. Some schools are dedicated solely to the liberal arts."
I'm not sure about the 'sciences' reference, but it seems to cover languages, literature etc, as you'd expect from the name.
Technically, almost every degree my own undergrad university offered would fall under that heading (even physics, chemistry and biology are parts of the 'natural sciences tripos', although computing and math are exceptions); I'd expect MS to have relatively few arts and literature graduates, though, with even the non-computing people tending to be business or law majors.
In US terms, my 'major' would be Computer Science, making up 50% of my first year and all of the other two (a BA(Hons) is three years in England, but four in Scotland, with the first year in Scotland sometimes being waived if you have prior relevant study, a bit like AP credits), with 25% physics and math. I think most US degrees are less focused?
Anthony Ramos said:
Janelle:
I'm pleased to learn there may have been gaps in BW's statistical survey :P Don't worry, they ranked MS #6!
In all seriousness, from a business perspective, the most important attribute is the ability to relate to and understand the customer. I suggested liberal arts majors, i.e. people with a social science or hard science background, as they are sure to comprise a large portion of the Microsoft user base. A couple anecdotal traits are that they are typically less tech savvy and are perhaps late adopters.
As for myself, I received a BA in Political Science from UF, as well as a Business Minor and graduate education studies, but am a hardcore tech geek ;p
-A
Janelle said:
Thanks for the clarification on liberal arts majors-- it is a bit confusing what falls under what. I have been known to be wrong before, but i believe that article is a bit off.
Anthony-- i agree with your comments about the customer focus being important. Late adopters are key to our success (which maybe why people think MS is "uncool"--- since late adopters tend to use our products in the end. :)
-Janelle
said:
Sounds to be very vague study indeed... :) Could be almost anything from how humans interface with a subway to how we learn not to have spitting contests in a restaurant.
Or is that just a REALLY vague description of the Liberal arts?
I wonder what happened to "Consersvative Arts" or "Republican Painting". "Democrat Musical Design" was popular in one day.
No it's not. I'm just making it up.
Sean
Herman said:
I am very pleased to see a meaningful discussion in one of these posts... they always start promising but end with ppl making random call-outs to the recruiters to give them interviews ;)
Offering a bit of my thoughts into this issue:
Microsoft is in no way short of non-technical personnel. In fact, I feel that we have a very diverse workforce with lots of motivated people.
The problem is not with hiring - rather, I would say the company made some strategical decisions over the last years that backfired and cost them several years of potential development and creative evolution. Several cases in point:
1) Longhorn - this was supposed to be the version of Windows that revolutionized the way people use computers. It was an overly ambitious project and after 4 years of intense development, it dawned that it wasn't a realistic goal after all, so the company spent the remaining year and a half on damage control and subsequently released Vista.
2) Internet Explorer - the decision to pause development of the browser after IE6 won the browser war allowed competitors to build better products and slowly take away IE's market share.
If you look at both these decisions, they really did make sense from a certain standpoint. For example, focusing development away from IE made sense because it had already gained massive market share and the company could sure use some more resources with Longhorn.
Unfortunately, this strategic direction handicapped the company. Back in 2001, the Internet was truly starting to gain traction among mainstream audiences. Instead of allowing the Web to become the center of the user's intellectual universe, Microsoft wanted the OS to remain the focal point of the user's attention, and the Web as a means to support the user's thirst for information.
The story could have been different if we chose another strategic direction. That being said, I am in no way criticizing the company's executive leadership - the work on the last several releases of Office have been stellar, among many other hugely successful endeavors. My point is that often it is so important to have people within the executive branch that have a knack for user behavior and social patterns to be able to make bold and concrete strategic decisions to guide the company through different phases of technology.
Microsoft's aim has always been to groom its leaders from within - that's why college hiring is so important. But it is so important to properly understand and analyze the industry situation and evolve the company accordingly, and this is where external hires come in.
However, it is also way more expensive to hire executive leadership than entry level talent. It makes economic and strategic sense for Microsoft to hire young people with the long term view of grooming them to be strategic thinkers for the company.
Now, what kind of young talent does this company need? Simple - passion motivates innovation. Continuous passion motivates versatile innovation. This company needs people who have endless curiosity for technology, people who could think like 20-year-olds when they're 50.
So while it is important to welcome external leadership to the company, the first step to re-energizing the corporation is by hiring the right combination of people from the beginning.
Anonymous said:
One of the problems here at Microsoft is that most of these outside managers are often so focused on greed (at customer expense) that they choose not to be team players and ignore their employees knowledge and experience. They usually don't promote from within and then hire their friends from the outside with similar views - thereby perpetuating the problem. In my group (about 600 of us,) almost every manager that we have was hired from the outside. I can only think of four that were put into their positions from within the Microsoft.
Brian said:
Someone said "Hire a person who HATES Microsoft". Interesting. That would make me a candidate. But even though I am currently un-employed, I would rather be on welfare than work for MS.
Oswaldo said:
Oops! I got carried away and attributed a post by Herman to Janelle. Sorry about that, Janelle. But I said what I meant to say. Thanks.
Kinda Frustrated with MSFT recruiting said:
Microsoft Recruiting seems to be focused on the GPA-and-where-did-you-intern crowd; there seems to be little interest in bringing fresh blood into the midrange and upper levels of the MSFT ecosystem.
The "Industry Recruiting" link goes back to the generic careers website while there are directed sites for college and newly-minted MBA's. Where's the link for those of us who have actually used our MBA's to do something valuable for our businesses and for our customers?
Industry candidates bring real-world sensitivity and a fresh approaches to the job. We're not "expensive", either: we don't have those big stock options hanging out, nor are we treading water until we're vested (the offensive and telling "--IV" acronym). Being vested never stopped me from kicking "a" and taking names.
If an industry candidate wants to give up a civilian job to run with the Big Dogs in Redmond, I'd guess that candidate is highly motivated and a smart hire. As for me...bring it on, 30-somethings!
Crystal said:
Oops, haven't read in a long time (was that a "Rent" reference up there about NYC?). A greatly delayed answer then...
Here for your consideration is a gentle revolutionary, and frankly, MS could use him, and likely he could use MS:
Justen Deal
<a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://blogs.wsj.com/health/index.php?s=matthew+holt&x=0&y=0">http://blogs.wsj.com/health/index.php?s=matthew+holt&x=0&y=0</a>
There's more to the story than just that, including a WSJ article. But He is the mouse that stood up and roared. With great integrity. Every big company needs a Justen Deal. Too bad Kaiser Permanente doesn't get that, people like Justen are what make a good company great.
BTW, if you hire him someday, my fee is $50 and a phone interview for my husband. He hasn't had the good fortune to be kicked to the curb by KP yet. ;)
said:
Bring me in and I'll shine the new person's shoes everyday... :)
Slip me past the door and I'll scrub the baseboards of the lobby with a toothbrush.
I'll individually pick up and bag weeds on the front lawn.
I'll walk all the pets on the Redmond campus.
Why I'll even sell hot dogs for charity if I had to.
Ego? No ego for me. But I'll take a toasted "Eggo" anytime!
Oooo... Ooooo... I sense a funny on the horizon, I have to go write.
Anthony Ramos said:
Microsoft needs people who are really not afraid to try new things, and who are not so comfortable they've lost their edge.
Having worked for an open-source web application developer, Focus / SIS, the business model is completely different and has several advantages, such as a faster development cycle, less testing, and thus even greater ROE. The abandonment of software licensing also allows lightning fast development cycles b/c the product is web-based.
If MS wants to keep up with the industry, they're going to have to change their business model to software as a service more rapidly.
Oswaldo said:
Janelle,
If what you said, that "This company needs people who have endless curiosity for technology, people who could think like 20-year-olds when they're 50. " Then MS needs someone like me. When I was 20 I was so old then...!
(I'll turn 48 this December).
I believe that in the world of technology people live in a sort of hyperreality, fed by a metalanguage called computerese, and sometimes they omit common sense. You only need to read a report written by a consultant about CRM, or CMS or IA to notice that they are talking about simple things in a very "elaborated" way. Somehow like "sophists" who Plato considered "self-interested imitators of wisdom lacking any concern for the truth." A company or leader who is able to cut to the chase, cutting the rhetoric, will have a better company. Let's not forget that this is about people, not only about systems.
Karthik said:
I think Microsoft should acquire all the start up companies dealing with add-ons, plugins etc which are exclusively for Microsoft products. Infragistics for example.