(A) 破壞性 / (B) 任期 / (C) 操縱
Despite bedrock similarities, Hewlett-Packard and IBM have different philosophies. Both companies share a similar vision for success. And both face similar challenges, like a sluggish global economy and the rise of (A)disruptivenew technologies.
They all have gone through many leaders, and the leadership transitions have had a big impact on the two companies' strategies. While IBM has had the luxury of (1)laying out five-year plans, HP has shifted from hardware execs to software and then to e-commerce veteran.
領導者來來去去也是他們的常態，而領導階層的更迭也讓公司營運策略出現重大影響。當 IBM 丟出豪華的5年重建計畫，惠普也從硬體本業轉向軟體，更在近期著重電子商務。
Roger Kay, principal analyst with Endpoint Technologies Associates, said IBM is an example in how an established, top-tier company that hits a difficult point can revive itself. However, HP is faced with a particular hurdle if it wants to follow IBM’s lead; Big Blue, even throughout its tough years, continued to invest in research and development. However, starting under CEO Carly Fiorina’s (B)tenure and accelerating under her successor, Mark Hurd, R&D investment was drastically reduced, hampering innovation at the company and cutting it off from its legacy.
Endpoint Technologies Associates 策略分析師 Roger Kay 表示， IBM 是個頂尖企業轉型典範。而跟隨IBM腳步的惠普有一道難以突破的特殊障礙。就算是營運困頓的年代，IBM都會持續投資研發。然而惠普從 Carly Fiorina 就任執行長，經歷一段營運加速期之後，繼任者 Mark Hurd 卻開始大肆刪節研發經費，限制惠普創新的可能，也難以延續他的傳奇之路。