Watching a Talent Management Strategy Destruct in Front of Our Eyes

5 comments

Watching what has been happening over at Yahoo over the past few months is sad.  It seems every notable blogger in and out of Silicon Valley has been critical of CEO Jerry Yang and board regarding the present (failed merger with Microsoft) and future (vision?) of Yahoo.

Back in May, a good friend, Jeff Nolan, posted a very critical observation of the company based on a meeting he had at their headquarters…

What struck me about the meeting was how little energy there is on that campus, it’s a dreadful place to be, even if just briefly. The other folks in the meeting just went through the motions. I saw the look in their eyes and knew what it meant, that “even though this may be a good idea, it ain’t gonna happen for reasons we have no control over.” In retrospect, I wish they just came out and said that from the get-go, we could have saved everyone’s time.

Fast forward just six weeks from Jeff’s post and what we have seen is literally the company and its executive ranks implode in front of our eyes.  In fact, three additional top executives resigned today.  TechCrunch has even begun to track the departed executives

So why the rapid and dramatic implosion?

  1. Drowning Stock options.  The Microsoft merger, at $38/share, would have been a nice reward to many of the executives sitting on loads of options.  Now that the merger has dissolved , the options are now worth around $22/share (today’s price), a significant reduction in each executives’ net worth.
  2. In-Demand Employees.  Yahoo is a nice brand to have on the resume.  Especially if it has been on there for more than 7-8 years.  Many of the executives are being wine-and-dined by the valley’s venture firms to either lead one of their portfolio companies or take a seat in their offices until they stumble on an idea, or company, to lead.
  3. The Entrepreneurial Itch.  Many of the executives at Yahoo came from one of their acquired companies.  These individuals have made lots of money and are idea creators not managers.

What could Yahoo have done to prevent the detrimental current state?  Good question. The Microsoft acquisition may or may not have helped.  Obviously, though, many of the executives have lost faith in the company and its leadership and it would be naive to think these exodus’ haven’t had an serious, negative effect on the entire workforce. 

What is (or should be) important to Yahoo right now is bench strength.  Since it will be virtually impossible to replace many of the leaders and exiting workforce, the company will be forced to rely on the support of their bench contributors to define the future. 

I guess we will quickly see if Yahoo can quickly adapt their talent management strategy.

Technorati Tags: , ,
  • http://talentedApps.wordpress.com Meg Bear

    great observation Jason. I was also thinking about this today. I somehow do not like to watch complete meltdowns. After awhile it just seems overkill to me.

    I do hope that they find this as an opportunity to let in some new ideas and grow some internal talent. That would certainly be the silver lining.

  • http://www.hrmdirect.com/hrm2/blog/ Colin Kingsbury

    “Many of the executives at Yahoo came from one of their acquired companies. These individuals have made lots of money and are idea creators not managers.”

    Makes me wonder if that isn’t a good part of the problem right there. When I look at Yahoo, I see a few core properties like mail, news, finance, and groups that are very clearly Yahoo. Then I see a smorgasbord of side dishes like Flickr and Delicious which for all intents and purposes might as well be separate companies.

    It’s interesting to note that one of the key reasons Flickr users shrieked at the prosspect of acquisition by MS was the fear that Redmond would integrate Flickr much more aggressively than Yahoo had done.

    To the extent that it takes an unusual passion, intensity, and vision to create those kinds of companies, I would expect their founders to be fairly strong advocates of maintaining independent brands and identities. Perhaps this was a deliberate decision on Yahoo’s part–maximize the value of the portfolio by maximizing the value of each piece on its own without regard to integration, particularly on the user side.

    If so, would it be too soon to declare that strategy a failure?

    The flip side of this is perhaps that the same passion and intensity which brought us Flickr and Delicious were not brought to coming together to build a bigger and better Yahoo.

  • nilofc

    Clearly, it is the breakdown of the Microsoft deal. The Microsoft deal would have been better for everybody. Now, Yahoo is pushing for a deal with Google.

    Some people would like to keep on fighting to the end, merging with a likely force to topple the enemy is a great strategy. But merging with your supposed enemy….I don’t think so.

    Yahoo!…might as well be…Piyooo!

  • http://www.enterprise20link.com/ Gopi Padakandla

    Good information and insight Jason.

    It doesn’t take a lot to see the importance of basics in business – need for clear business strategy, and its linkages to performance drivers and talent. Hopefully, Yahoo now knows what it takes to win as a company and turn the things around.

  • Jason Corsello

    TechCrunch now lists over 100 execs that have left the company since Jan 2007…

    http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/06/21/updated-yahoo-exec-tracker-114-execs-left-since-january-2007/

    Yahoo’s pain is now starting to make sense. Seems like anyone that walked in the door during 2005-2006 got a VP tag. I can’t imagine what that org chart looks like…

Previous post:

Next post: