I used to love working here. Rarely did anyone want to leave Intel as much as they do now because everyone was full of enthusiasm.
I will never understand how Intel, from a great leader company, has become a company that can hardly compete in new technologies?
Something went in the wrong direction.
27 replies (most recent on top)
The short answer is that Intel has a broken, toxic culture that prevents the company from retaining good people, from building a winning strategy or properly executing a plan.
At the same time, Intel remains incredibly profitable and enough of a monopoly to get massive government support, to be complacent and to survive.
There's no silver bullet. Just living through the swamp of politics, circular firing squads, back stabbing and nonsense.
Sounds like a story about living in Portland…
My observation that some H1B actually worth every penny invested on them.
however, most of them...some really does not worth half a penny
Don't worry. All intel evacuees are joiNing amd and nvidia. Give them 5 years. They will run those companies to the ground.
Time to remove VPs and Sr Directors. They eat big chunk of money
The H1B is actually paid more and does even less than domestic engineers. This is the third world culture that has destroyed Intel.
It's definitely not H1B the average h1b is paid more much more then the domestic college drop out or it state school Intel hires from
If you have to ask...
Isn't it obvious?
I guess the people that know have already left.
What is going on now with Intel can be called the anti-virtuous cycle: product failures lead to customers leaving for competition which leads to financial under-performance which leads to under-compensation which leads to best people leaving for competition too which leads to more product failures, rinse and repeat.
It is hard to say exactly what vision PG was able to sell to the BOD, and there perhaps is a place a for a third player in the open foundry business, but success there can only come with scale, so the prospects of a new entrant with a technology that's behind two established players and a poor execution track record do not look particularly good.
The damage started under CRB, who was clueless about leadership and running a company. However the real deep and lasting damage was inflicted by BK. He is resposible for the loss of technical leadership while head of TMG. The 10nm trainwreck all points toward BK. Then as CEO his misguided policies completely destroyed the cultural fabric of the company.
@uyq yeah, they made sure that it can never happen again. It's embedded in the culture now. Ki-l all threats. The competition is down the hall. Enjoy your vitality curve. They won the race to the bottom.
The job and culture isn't interesting enough to keep real talent. Talented and experienced engineers give daily (sometines more) updates to management, that setup breeds mistrust from the start. Why should people enjoy wasting so much time propping up losers.
@kqo+1dYRtnDy In Conroe days Intel had process leadership, manufacturing excellence and scale, now they got none of that so skunk works will not matter much at all
@kqo+1dYRtnDy So the only question is when they fire PG like Immelt at GE, the future disemboweling is all but certain
@kau without Sohail and most of his minions, and with Andy and Richard gone, I wouldn't give Pat too much consideration really. He's just a cheerleader who wants to reset the clock to 2006. Maybe there is a germ of the old company that will come back if the embedded bureaucracy doesn't ki-l it on sight. Maybe the new BOD will let it happen. But the old politics are still alive and well under KE's new roost. And all new folks around IT Sec act like they are running a big call center full of hostile employees. Just like with Conroe, it will take a skunk works to save their a--es.
@tzw+1dYRtnDy One could argue the BoD and CEO didn’t understand technology and let Sohail ruin the place.
You could argue that it is repeating with BoD letting Pat do it again. Between PSO, BK and PG the destruction will be totally complete
Classic innovators arrogance, Intel leaders and BoD were so full of themselves.
Even today Pat is arrogant and thinks a roadmap and accelerate will make Intel competitive. Sorry the business dynamics have changed as have your competitors and even more important the competitive landscape.
Intel’s rise to leadership is as likely was was GEs or IBMs resurrection to relevance, no amount of money, or talk can change their fate.
Run Forest, Run!
ACT 2015/2016 was the end result of SET in 2006 and the manager layoff just before that. This has been coming for a long time. The fall of TD and the rise of BK are both just symptoms of the wholesale destruction of the centers of innovation across the company that occured when PTD consolidated its power. Now those folks failed to deliver and very little of the original engineering culture is left.
The layoffs in 2015 and ACT in 2016 ki---d this company. Even if you weren't laid off, it destroy any sense of trust in or loyalty to the company. BK and Richard Taylor were responsible for ACT, but the BOD and MCM all went along with the decision.
It’s crazy. Now all the grade 7s and 6s are leaving.
Learning the hard way.... 2 RCG’s can’t do the work of a seasoned champ!
The competition became super strong and lured away the best talent.
Why did the competition become super strong?
Intel missed the boat on mobile computing which drove huge 10x volumes vs. PCs and caused TSMC to surpass Intel. Intel did not consider mobile phones to be a threat since they were adjacent to PCs. After all, nobody to this day is using their phone to run complex excel spreadsheets. What they MISSED, was that the volumes would drive fab leadership away from Intel and enable everyone to pass Intel due to the open foundry model. Now AMD, Apple, Qualcomm and others are free to use the TSMC/Samsung platform to build PC chips to DIRECTLY compete with Intel in both client and server.
This is what Otellini missed.
This is what BK missed.
This is what Pat did not understand at the time it was happening... Remember the iPhone was released in 2007, so someone should have known about this early on.
The leadership really dropped the ball.
Also, they missed the GPU Megatrend which enabled Nvidia to eclipse Intel many times over in market value. That is another story of incompetence with the Larrabee fiasco. Intel was in a position to outright buy Nvidia at that time, but failed to see the future, due to their CPU-centric blind spots.
Just massive incompetence at the CEO / BOD levels.
OP, which rock have you been living under?
How much of it was BK. We never recovered from the senior people that left and were replaced by a rcg’s
Simple: H1B1 and the pursuit of cheap labor.
Its call no leadership and erosion of culture. Engineers don’t work together the same way. Bureaucratic.