Monday, January 26, 2009

McNealy: Hire Great People and Delegate

Forbes.com

by Elizableth Corcoran

January 26, 2009
Sun Microsystems' chairman talks about what it takes to turn managers into CEOs.
Scott McNealy
pic

Only a few companies know how to manufacture new CEOs. Scott McNealy has done it again and again. More than 75 people--including a number of women--who have wound up as chief executives at

BURLINGAME -

Only a few companies know how to manufacture new CEOs. Scott McNealy has done it again and again.

More than 75 people--including a number of women--who have wound up as chief executives at technology companies trace their managerial roots back to time spent with McNealy, who was one of Sun Microsystem's four co-founders in 1982.

Currently McNealy is chairman of Sun as well as deeply involved with the nonprofit Curriki.org, which makes grade-school curriculum available for free on the Internet.

McNealy has long been a study in contrasts: He has a blue-blood education pedigree that includes an undergrad degree from Harvard University and an MBA from Stanford University, but he delights in an aw-shucks demeanor and named his children after models of American cars, like "Maverick" and "Dakota."

His managers by and large admired him--in no small part because he trusted them. "We weren't punished for making mistakes. We were encouraged to try bold moves," recalls Laurie Yoler, an investment banker at GrowthPoint Technology Partners who worked at Sun in the 1990s.

Carol Bartz, who has just taken on the top job at Yahoo! and Eric Schmidt, chief executive of Google, are among the most famous McNealy alumni. Ed Zander, who ran Motorola, served as McNealy's number two.

Forbes spoke with McNealy recently about how to hire talent, how he advises managers and what he thinks of Carol Bartz and Eric Schmidt.

Forbes: What was different about how you managed Sun in contrast with other Valley companies?

Scott McNealy: I tended to manage by clear delegation. People got to be in charge of things. My decision-making process was not to make the decision but to decide who got to decide. And therefore I'd say, "Alright, Eddie, you're in charge of this decision. Go off and run a process and come back to us with your decision." If you hire really, really great people, they're going to know more about the problem they're dealing with than you will.

What did that leave for you to do?

I spent a lot of time helping and coaching people. When you make a decision, you have to, first of all, outline the problem. Then you have to consider the alternatives. You then have to be incredibly participative in the problem definition and problem proposal--get everybody's input--and then you have to decide quickly. You can't just grind it out and think about it and wait until it becomes explicitly obvious what the answer is. You've got to come up with the answer before the competition does. And so I put a lot of pressure on my managers to be quick decision makers.

Is that "consensus" management?

I call it participative but not consensus. One thing I always told them is: Everybody shouldn't necessarily agree with your answer. And nobody should be surprised. I always said, "I'll be very upset if you don't know how people are going to react to your decision." So that forces them to go out and talk to a lot of people.

How did you make people accountable?

We had a very strong annual planning process where we had a set of deliverables … including … an "interdependencies" section. It said: To make my plan I need to do the following but here's what I need out of my peers.

A lot of negotiation and conversation happens when you have an interdependencies sheet. And when [a manager] didn't make the plan, they'd go back and say, "Well, so-and-so said he was going to deliver on this and he didn't." That would provide some fairly interesting accountability inside the organization.

We had a million little management tricks and techniques that we used [in growing Sun from zero to more than $10 billion in revenues run rate]. You require some management tricks--structure, process, culture--to do that. And good feedstock. We made sure we were hiring good people and doing good reference checks … We had a thing called "sunscreen" that was our process for checking whether the resume facts were correct and whether someone had a police record. Just simple things like that. It's a really good idea.

What if a hire didn't work out?

It doesn't mean they're not good people. They were all good people when we hired them. Sometimes they'd leave on their own if they didn't feel that they were being appreciated. Sometimes they'd settle into a role more attuned to what they were doing. Sometimes we had to let them go because it wasn't working out right. But we never mistreated anybody out the door.

When was the last time you heard someone got "fired" at Sun? If they break the law, they're fired like crazy. But our view is that everybody is trying hard, everybody's working hard, everybody's talented in their own way … and if they're not in the right role we should treat them with respect.

You might remember a situation where a company missed a quarter and publicly fired a couple of people on the earnings call. And laid the blame right at their feet. And the CEO says, "We're getting stuff done here. We're delivering accountability." That's just not the right way to go do it. Can you image the next staff meeting? You bring in the two new executives and say, "Here's a towel. Wipe the blood off. Have a seat, and, you know, good luck. Have fun."

How did you pick who to hire?

My interview process … wasn't very scientific. Usually by the time they got to me they were pretty talented people. I would interview the person and--unless it was such a brain-dead obvious decision--I wouldn't let the moment get me. I'd let my mind process it while I was asleep. I'd wake up the next morning, and if I was thinking about the person that next day at work, I'd hire them. If I went two days, and [someone] came back and said "What did you think of so-and-so?' and I said 'I haven't thought about 'em for a nanosecond. I'm not interested' [then they weren't hired].

I know that's a weird way ... and I wouldn't say it was 100% but whether they were on my mind the next day would have a huge impact on whether I hired someone or not.

What's Carol Bartz like?

She's tough, she can make a decision, she knows what she wants to get done. She's got a big smile, a big laugh, but she can be tough, too. (See "When Scott Promoted Carol.")

She'll have a lot of competitors--including Eric Schmidt at Google.

Oh yeah.

How do you think that's going to play out?

[McNealy laughs.] I don't know. [Laughs again] Eric's super bright, too. Eric's got an intellect that goes forever. But you know, there's two kinds of smarts: There's intellectual and then there's street smarts. Carol's a real street smart person--not that she's not smart intellectually. She makes really smart moves. Eric makes very intelligent moves. It's very funny to watch. They have very different styles.

What else has been a key to Sun's culture?

We always had a cause. We always had a clear set of enemies. We always wanted a diversity of backgrounds, ideas and cultures. But we wanted to have commonality of purpose. A lot of those good leaders who came out of Sun understood and knew what I was trying to do when I picked an enemy, or when I picked a cause or when I put all the wood behind one arrowhead. It was about trying to align a bunch of really different people around a commonality of purpose. That's what really great leaders do. Steve Jobs does that with insanely great products. We did it with our commitment to eliminating the digital divide without doing harm to the planet and our focus on sharing. Those are very powerful ideas that can align a lot of different people with different backgrounds.

You were famous for "top 10" lists. What are your top 10 rules for managers?

I'll give you a few:

--Kick butt and have fun

--Be participative but not consensus

--To ask is to seek denial

--The right answer is the best answer, the wrong answer is second best. No answer is the worst.

--Yes or no?

I used to beg people to answer a yes or no question with a "yes" or a "no." If you watch any CEO ask a simple yes or no question of somebody on their staff, I don't care who they are, 999,999 out of a million won't say "yes," or "no." They'll launch into an answer. I used to laugh and say, "I'll take that as a 'no.'" or "Was that a 'yes'?

http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/26/mcnealy-sun-management-tech-enter-cx_ec_0126mcnealy.html

Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, January 08, 2009

The Seeds of the Satyam Scandal

Forbes.com

January 08, 2009
Forbes.com
How B. Ramalinga Raju's pride--and risk-taking--created India's Enron.

Until the past few weeks, the corporate headquarters of Satyam Computer Services was an island of calm a short drive outside the bustling city of Hyderabad, India. Flags of countries representing Satyam's customers line the driveway leading to the front door. Visitors to its center were treated to a multimedia display that showcased what Satyam felt were its core values: efficiency, flexibility, trust, reliability.

That facade dissolved Wednesday. Satyam Computer Services' 53-year-old co-founder and chairman, B. Ramalinga Raju, faxed a five-page letter to the company detailing how he'd faked revenues and earnings for years.

It was a horrifying turn for a man long considered one of India's self-made success stories--and active philanthropists. Other Indian executives are quick to contend this is an isolated case. Even so, a few quietly note that it's hard to imagine how a publicly traded company, which must comply with U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley disclosure rules, could have been mislead for so long by one or even two individuals.

Kris Gopalakrishnan, chief executive and co-founder of Infosys, says he is "saddened and dismayed" by the turn at Satyam. "The regulators in India have to act fast to get to the bottom of this and punish the guilty, if found guilty," he wrote in an e-mail to Forbes. "This should not be a reflection of India or India Inc. This is a one-of-a-kind situation."

"This is almost unthinkable," adds Manish Dugar, chief financial officer at Wipro Technologies in Bangalore. "I'd say it's very difficult" to pull off such a deception, "even if a lot of people colluded."

Raju had been a one-of-a-kind man, deeply loyal to his family, patriarchal toward his employees, benevolent to the poor. And yet, suggest some who have known him, Raju grew up in an environment that enjoyed gambling and so ran his career with the bravado of a gambler.

He was born in a tiny village Jalli Kakinada (population: 1,652), 250 miles southeast of Hyderabad. Jalli Kakinada didn't get electricity until 1965; phones came in 1991. A water purification plant for the whole village just got started within the past few years.

Within the village hierarchy, Raju's family was relatively well-to-do. His father juggled multiple businesses, ultimately moving the family to Hyderabad in the 1960s to cultivate grapes and start a string of construction businesses.

By the 1980s, Raju had earned a master's degree in business from Ohio University and began providing back-office support for Deere & Co. in Illinois.

Raju figured that the work could be done by well-qualified Indian engineers, but Deere was wary of outsourcing. In an interview, Raju recalled how he made a bet with Deere: If he couldn't get the work done at high quality yet more cheaply than Deere itself, the corporation wouldn't have to pay him.

Raju set up an office just down the street from Deere staffing it with a handful of Indian expatriates and ran it on Hyderabad time. They even ordered in curry. He won the bet.

By 1987, Raju returned to India and co-founded Satyam with one of his two younger brothers. The name means "truth" in Sanskrit. Deere was an early big customer. General Electric soon followed.

Satyam's timing was flawless. The combination of newly available satellite-based broadband communications and corporations' need to have programmers work out the kinks in old software programs threatening to go haywire as the end of the millennium approached helped fuel Satyam's rise.

The company became a skyrocket success, debuting on the Bombay Stock Exchange in 1991. It would acquire a company with a New York Stock Exchange listing in 2001. Raju built his generous corporate campus outside Hyderabad, which included sports pavilions, a swimming pool, a nine-hole golf course, dormitories and apartments for either single or married workers with families (the complex could hold up to 600 people) as well as a few animals in the equivalent of a mini petting zoo.

Even though public, Satyam remained a company dominated by Raju and his family. His brothers ran different groups within Satyam. In 2001, Satyam took a drumming for how it merged Satyam Computers and Satyam Solutions, and for patchy disclosure of employee stock options.

Around the same time--and also coincident with their father's death--Raju and his two brothers started a philanthropic foundation aimed at improving life in rural villages such as the one where they were born. Their Byrraju Foundation broadcasts English and math classes via satellite links and radio towers to more than 200 government-run schools. It has put computers in rural schools and supports vocational programs for plumbers, electricians and dressmakers.

The good-works list is long: Byrraju helped build toilets and water purification systems, fund health clinics, create an emergency response program and teach children.

In tiny villages such as Jalli Kakinada, Raju became a legend. When a reporter visited three years ago, the village elder shook his head, wondering why his children hadn't followed in Raju's footsteps. One of Raju's most creative initiatives was called GramIT. It involved "outsourcing" some of Satyam's work to centers in villages where there was little turnover and wages that were lower than the meanest rate in Hyderabad.

When Raju described the program, he became passionate about the positive implications of creating more jobs in the countryside. He was also clearly happy about the idea of saving on his labor bill.

In 2006, Satyam had about 23,000 employees and was reporting $1 billion in revenue. By 2008, the company was claiming it has surpassed $2 billion in revenue and had bulked up to 53,000 employees. Coincidentally, Raju now says that there is a $1 billion gap on Satyam's balance sheet, which "has arisen purely on account of inflated profits over a period of the last several years ..."

The risk-taker had taken one too many risks: "Every attempt made to eliminate the gap failed. ... It was like riding a tiger, not knowing how to get off without being eaten," Raju wrote.

Visible cracks began to appear in December. Satyam agreed to pay $1.6 billion to acquire two construction companies, in which Raju and his brother hold stakes, run by Raju's sons. Investors hammered the stock. Four directors resigned. The World Bank blacklisted Satyam in late December, suggesting it had offered bank employees bribes (or "improper benefits").

Whether Raju could have pulled off a multi-year deception single-handedly continues to torment Indian executives. "This kind of deception is beyond my imagination," says Wipro's Dugar.

PriceWaterhouseCoopers was the company's auditor. Satyam has issued a terse statement pledging to check its books. On Thursday, Indian government officials pledged to investigate as well.

Some observers suggest that Raju wrote the note to try to shield as many family members from the scandal as possible.

Indian executives insist that Satyam, once the country's fourth-largest outsourcing firm, is now in a class by itself. "Just like Enron or Madoff aren't representative of business, most people believe Satyam is not representative of India's IT business," says Jessie Paul, chief marketing officer for Wipro Technologies, who is working on a book on branding. "How could he go to bed every night with a company whose name means truth?" she asks.

Other Indian companies are preparing to share more information to reassure their clients. "Companies will have to be ready for greater due diligence, should be willing to share relevant data or answer questions to reassure customers and investors," notes Infosys' Gopalakrishnan.

Verghese Jacobs, who runs the Byrraju Foundation, hopes that his programs will continue. "I have never dealt at all with Raju the businessman, who has definitely dropped in global esteem today. But I still have great faith in Raju the social entrepreneur," Jacobs wrote in an e-mail to Forbes. He credits Raju with being an inspiration "not only to 1,500 employees of our foundation, but to the 1 million people we impact in our 200 adopted villages."

Sharath Choudary, who headed the GramIT program for the Byrraju Foundation and now runs an independent petroleum business, says he is shocked and disappointed. He figures that close to a million people will feel the aftermath of Raju's revelation--from employees and their families to customers to others touched by Satyam and Byrraju's work.

But Choudary believes Satyam can survive. "It wouldn't be a bad idea to let in clients to be a part of the process to ensure that they are confident that their money is not going to fill old holes," he notes. "The situation is terrible, but good leadership and grit can salvage it."

http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/08/fraud-satyam-raju-biz-logistics-cx_ec_0108satyam.html



Sphere: Related Content