HPGate: What did the CEO Know, and When Did He Know It?

Sigh.

I knew there was trouble when the HP "news conference" featuring CEO and recently minted chairman Mark Hurd began with the announcement that neither Mr. Hurd nor his "independent counsel" would take any questions. Then, Mr. Hurd admitted knowing about the investigation of other HP board members and industry journalists, and that he had received but not read at least one written report that provided details of what was being done in HP's name. Then, he refused to disclose details of his independent counsel's initial findings, but said that they were "disturbing." Oh, and by the way -- former HP board chair Patricia Dunn, who was planning to remain on the board until January, according to earlier announcements, is instead resigning now, Mr. Hurd said.

Whether all of this will significantly affect HP's long-term ability to deliver enterprise-class solutions and services is impossible to tell yet. (I'd be very interested to hear from anyone who is reconsidering their personal and/or professional relationship with HP, in fact.) But it is already clear that short-term effects are greater than any of us outsiders knew a week ago, and that this drama will take longer than most of us expected to play out. Meanwhile, those of us of or beyond a certain age hear echoes of Watergate-like whispers, and lament what appears to be the final, irrevocable death of what used to be broadly trumpted and admired as "The HP Way." And my late father-in-law, who worked at HP for decades, is either rolling around Heaven laughing, or spinning in his grave -- or both.

Enterprise IT decision-makers and the vendors who do business with them can already take several lessons from the events surrounding HP's board and the reporters who have been following the company. One is that no matter how many IT-empowered tools one throws at the challenges to privacy and security, these are human and cultural, not technological issues, and that tools without policies and processes sensitive to these issues are useless. Another is that personal and corporate reputational risk are serious and significant. Let's hope the folks in and around HP who know these things can explain them effectively to those who don't -- or replace those folks with others who do.

Comments

[Ron Exler]

I think it goes back to the leaks. Why did the board member(s) feel the need to leak information to the press? Because their voices were not, er, hurd? Personality conflicts? Why couldn't these high paid executives work out their differences in private? Instead of acting like ethical adults, they became whining children in a schoolyard fight. But what's dunn is dunn. This might not hurt HP longer term, but its reputation is damaged. But before throwing out the baby with the bathwater, it is important to remember this scandal involves a miniscule percentage of people in a company of thousands. Too bad they are the top executives.