Would Stu Reed have been Hired to Lead Samsung's or Nokia's Handset Divisions?
Last Wednesday, less than 48 hours after we released a "Plan B" for Motorola - where the 5th point of the 5 point plan was to name a head of the struggling Mobile Devices Business - Ed Zander named Stu Reed the head of MDB. This came amidst the earnings shortfall for Q2, so you might have missed it.
Immediately, I started to receive comments or emails of complaints from MOT MDB employees. They weren't happy with Stu Reed'a appointment and - frankly - neither am I. Here's why.
Reed is - I'm sure - a very bright guy and would be an excellent executive in many roles, just not this new one. He was great to head up Supply Chain at Motorola. 20 years at IBM in supply chain, strategy, and process. However, he's only been at Motorola for 2 years, has no mobile experience, no turnaround experience, and (from what I can see in his bio) he has not run a business before.
What this means is that he'll be on a steep learning curve for the first year or two, instead of hitting the ground running. MDB needs more now. It's unlikely that Samsung or Nokia would hire this background for a similar role. Why should Motorola?
The first thing Motorola must do to turn the ship around is change the leader and several of the board members, as we indicate in our "Plan B.". What if a new Ceo is named soon? Won't they want to make their own call as to who should lead MDB?
It's a shame that Terry Vega - who did have significant telco experience - left after she was passed over too. From what I hear, she was well-liked. There is significant cynicism towards the rest of the Senior Leadership Team.
Much more work needs to be done at Motorola. The company started with point 5 of "Plan B" instead of point 1.
