[Hende Nicolas]

Those who are accustomed by now to Chen's media appearances will have noticed that he almost never uses the word 'we' when talking about the company. Instead, he uses the word 'I'. 'I need to work on this' or 'I can get this or that done'. It's an interesting thing to observe and one wonders whether CEOs spend enough time considering their own rhetorical skills. The instant he says 'I', Chen detaches himself from BlackBerry. He is the 'doctor' and BlackBerry is the patient. How can it be any wonder that people are struggling to trust BlackBerry or believe in its unity of vision or ability to engage with people?

Anyone who pays attention to Chen's words picks up in an instant that he is not a BlackBerry man. He is a man who is managing BlackBerry. As long as this is the case, we will almost certainly be missing the unity of vision, and sense of self belief that we see in a company like Apple. Chen doesn't believe in his own company strongly enough to not feel the need to keep his distance from it, just as he doesn't believe in his own products enough to market them enough for them not to be complete failures. It's quite something that every single BlackBerry 10 device has been a failure, and yet BlackBerry have done nothing to address this area.

There is a lot of optimism surrounding the idea of Chen on this site, but I'm afraid that until we hear him, or another CEO, speaking with the language of 'we', we will not see the BlackBerry we all hope to have one day.

Posted via CB10

[serbanescu]

Interesting analysis. You might be on to something here

[ljfong]

All Chen cares about is to make BlackBerry the company just profitable enough to recoup Prem's investment. Not an admirable goal but that's what Prem hired him for. If hardware will do it, hardware it is, software will do it, software it is. If he has to say the words security and enterprise in all interviews, he will say so. Think mercenary, rather than soldier.

[Hende Nicolas]

All Chen cares about is to make BlackBerry the company just profitable enough to recoup Prem's investment. Not an admirable goal but that's what Prem hired him for. If hardware will do it, hardware it is, software will do it, software it is. If he has to say the words security and enterprise in all interviews, he will say so. Think mercenary, rather than soldier.

Absolutely right. The problem is that that mindset isn't always the one that gets the best results. It would be wiser to be mercenary and at least seem to be in it all the way. Chen and BlackBerry are uncertainty all day long. Maybe we will do Android, maybe we will do hardware properly, maybe we won't, maybe this, maybe that. It's not a good message.

Posted via CB10

[BCITMike]

Those who are accustomed by now to Chen's media appearances will have noticed that he almost never uses the word 'we' when talking about the company. Instead, he uses the word 'I'. 'I need to work on this' or 'I can get this or that done'. It's an interesting thing to observe and one wonders whether CEOs spend enough time considering their own rhetorical skills. The instant he says 'I', Chen detaches himself from BlackBerry. He is the 'doctor' and BlackBerry is the patient. How can it be any wonder that people are struggling to trust BlackBerry or believe in its unity of vision or ability to engage with people?

Anyone who pays attention to Chen's words picks up in an instant that he is not a BlackBerry man. He is a man who is managing BlackBerry. As long as this is the case, we will almost certainly be missing the unity of vision, and sense of self belief that we see in a company like Apple. Chen doesn't believe in his own company strongly enough to not feel the need to keep his distance from it, just as he doesn't believe in his own products enough to market them enough for them not to be complete failures. It's quite something that every single BlackBerry 10 device has been a failure, and yet BlackBerry have done nothing to address this area.

There is a lot of optimism surrounding the idea of Chen on this site, but I'm afraid that until we hear him, or another CEO, speaking with the language of 'we', we will not see the BlackBerry we all hope to have one day.

Posted via CB10

At my first company Christmas party, CEO was giving his speech and made a funny comment to the effect "employees can take their ideas to me, and I will of course take the credit for the good ones". I'm not doing it justice, it was a dozen years ago, but it cracked up the room.

Posted via CB10

[asherN]

All Chen cares about is to make BlackBerry the company just profitable enough to recoup Prem's investment. Not an admirable goal but that's what Prem hired him for. If hardware will do it, hardware it is, software will do it, software it is. If he has to say the words security and enterprise in all interviews, he will say so. Think mercenary, rather than soldier.

I think Chen was hired to make the company an even more attractive take over target. Slowly getting rid of hardware does that. When BB is left with nothing but BES and patents, it becomes very attractive, as all that can be absorbed and moved anywhere.anywhere. Prem recoups his investment, Chen pulls the rip cord on his golden parachute, shareholders make money. win-win-win.

[Hende Nicolas]

Well, it's win, win, lose, because it's really a failure to survive that we are talking about. That's nothing to get excited about, really. The goal, then, is the end of BlackBerry. Success is failure. How boring.

Posted via CB10

[03_CTD]

Sometimes not being emotionally invested in the company you're running is the best recipe for success.

[jas1978]

Sometimes not being emotionally invested in the company you're running is the best recipe for success.

Very true. I've watched a few episodes of The Profit, and you see how the owners find it hard to change. They can't let go of the old products or old way of doing things. They're so emotionally invested that they can't see how damaged their company is. You have to love what you do, but it is still a business that requires tough business decisions.

Posted via CB10

[Hende Nicolas]

Very true. I've watched a few episodes of The Profit, and you see how the owners find it hard to change. They can't let go of the old products or old way of doing things. They're so emotionally invested that they can't see how damaged their company is. You have to love what you do, but it is still a business that requires tough business decisions.

Posted via CB10

I think there is that danger, but there is also a danger in not being invested enough in any kind of coherent vision for the company. Can anyone actually say what the BlackBerry vision is at the moment? Enterprise? Then what are all the cute stickers for? Consumers? Then why the anti-expansive subscription costs for BBM, and why the nonexistent marketing?

Right now, BlackBerry are a total shambles in this respect. No clear vision whatsoever. Chen gets up every now and then and smiled cheekily, as though he's got something special up his sleeve, but everyone knows now that he doesn't. It's embarrassing. And it's hilarious in a way that so many people can see what they need to do: focus on enterprise, of course, but also prioritise the expansion of the BBM user base, and SELL SOME PHONES. They keep making themselves look like prize idiots every time a phone is released. Z30? Leap? Passport? What does the average person think? Never even heard of them!

Posted via CB10

[KermEd]

I think Chen was hired to make the company an even more attractive take over target. Slowly getting rid of hardware does that. When BB is left with nothing but BES and patents, it becomes very attractive, as all that can be absorbed and moved anywhere.anywhere. Prem recoups his investment, Chen pulls the rip cord on his golden parachute, shareholders make money. win-win-win.

I'd say that's a concise summary of the situation

Posted to CB via my Passport | FileArchiveHaven

[Prem WatsApp]

I think Chen was hired to make the company an even more attractive take over target. Slowly getting rid of hardware does that. When BB is left with nothing but BES and patents, it becomes very attractive, as all that can be absorbed and moved anywhere.anywhere. Prem recoups his investment, Chen pulls the rip cord on his golden parachute, shareholders make money. win-win-win.

Win-win-win sounds good. But...

Remember, without Prem's attempt at taking the company private, and failing this, collecting funds and investing the $1.25b convertible debentures, BlackBerry would have probably been dismantled and divested now...

Now, even if sold, what would be the problem? Really depends on who the buyer(s) will be. I still favor Prem's original idea of taking BlackBerry private...

:-D


�   Pastaporto aglio e olio... Mmmhhh!   �

[lnichols]

Win-win-win sounds good. But...

Remember, without Prem's attempt at taking the company private, and failing this, collecting funds and investing the $1.25b convertible debentures, BlackBerry would have probably been dismantled and divested now...

Now, even if sold, what would be the problem? Really depends on who the buyer(s) will be. I still favor Prem's original idea of taking BlackBerry private...

:-D


�   Pastaporto aglio e olio... Mmmhhh!   �

Prem didn't want to take it private, it was a ploy to pull a buyer out and recover his money. If he wanted to take it private he could have, instead when the ploy didn't bring about a buyer he backed out of the taking it private and invested the money in a way so if the company folds he gets his first. Prem doesn't care about BlackBerry, he is only trying to find the best way to get out from underneath it and not lose money.

Posted via Z30

[mad_mdx]

This is some bug analysis bullcrap we see all over the place.
Let the man do his job whatever way he wants. Some people say I, some people say we, who cares? Clearly his English isn't even perfect so who knows, maybe in his native tongue people just say 'i' more often than 'we'?

Worthless analysts everywhere..

[Hende Nicolas]

This is some bug analysis bullcrap we see all over the place.
Let the man do his job whatever way he wants. Some people say I, some people say we, who cares? Clearly his English isn't even perfect so who knows, maybe in his native tongue people just say 'i' more often than 'we'?

Worthless analysts everywhere..

If you read the first post, you will see the point that was being made. You may disagree with it, of course, but at least in English there is a significant rhetorical difference between the two.

Posted via CB10

[Prem WatsApp]

Prem didn't want to take it private, it was a ploy to pull a buyer out and recover his money. If he wanted to take it private he could have, instead when the ploy didn't bring about a buyer he backed out of the taking it private and invested the money in a way so if the company folds he gets his first. Prem doesn't care about BlackBerry, he is only trying to find the best way to get out from underneath it and not lose money.

Posted via Z30

Still, even if you stick with this (negative?) point of view, having an investor tied up in there with an interest in preserving his (their) money/investment led to the positive side effect that BlackBerry WAS NOT dismantled, divested or sold for parts...

A value investor looks at things long-term.

:-D


�   Pastaporto aglio e olio... Mmmhhh!   �

[Prem WatsApp]

Back on topic,
Chen's use of "I" sort of gives me the impression he wants to make sure that people perceive or feel that at least ONE person is in charge and in control of BlackBerry, and that it's not aimlessly floating around.

Yes, it might also make the impression that he's kind of detached, or that there's no team spirit, or it's a top-down leadership thing. He commands, pulls the strings, and everything acts and reacts as told...

I'd rather see and look at the positive side. :-D

�   Pastaporto aglio e olio... Mmmhhh!   �

[Hende Nicolas]

I was concerned with how the general public were affected by it, but yes, looking at the positive side is the Crackberry thing to do

Posted via CB10

[lnichols]

Still, even if you stick with this (negative?) point of view, having an investor tied up in there with an interest in preserving his (their) money/investment led to the positive side effect that BlackBerry WAS NOT dismantled, divested or sold for parts...

A value investor looks at things long-term.

:-D


�   Pastaporto aglio e olio... Mmmhhh!   �

You are looking at it from a unicorns and rainbows view. Why didn't he take it private? Why withdraw the offer? No one stopped him. He wants to sell to get his money back out. He had to buy tons of shares when it dropped to reduce his exposure and offset the share he bought when high. Prem is no Knight, he would let BlackBerry be chopped to bits in a second as long as he makes out with a profit.

Posted via Z30

[BarracudaBob]

Personally, I think the use of "We" detaches a CEO from ownership more than "I". He is taking ownership of his decisions and he will be ultimately responsible for their success or failure. "We need to work on such and such" is way too soft in my opinion. "I need to work on this and that" is a much stronger statement. It's very easy to push "We" off on other people. My wife often says "We need to start laundry tonight" when she means YOU need to start laundry.

Chen seems to be taking a lot more responsibility for the state of things than either Mike, Jim, or Thor did.

[Deitzanova]

Interesting thoughts but if you observe more closely he does mention the phrase "my team" many times. Also, saying 'I' doesn't mean there is no unity there, it can also mean that he takes complete responsibility especially when talking to the media and all. And also as someone mentioned here, he may be looking at the company from outside which a good thing because you stay focused irrespective of the motivation levels of the employees.

Posted via CB10

[Prem WatsApp]

Personally, I think the use of "We" detaches a CEO from ownership more than "I". He is taking ownership of his decisions and he will be ultimately responsible for their success or failure. "We need to work on such and such" is way too soft in my opinion. "I need to work on this and that" is a much stronger statement. It's very easy to push "We" off on other people. My wife often says "We need to start laundry tonight" when she means YOU need to start laundry.

Chen seems to be taking a lot more responsibility for the state of things than either Mike, Jim, or Thor did.

Good one.
"We" seems non-committal in that light. If "I" fail, "I" fail, nobody else...

If he doesn't communicate the right things to his staff, it's not his staff's fault, it's his... :-)

�   Pastaporto aglio e olio... Mmmhhh!   �

[Prem WatsApp]

You are looking at it from a unicorns and rainbows view. Why didn't he take it private? Why withdraw the offer? No one stopped him. He wants to sell to get his money back out. He had to buy tons of shares when it dropped to reduce his exposure and offset the share he bought when high. Prem is no Knight, he would let BlackBerry be chopped to bits in a second as long as he makes out with a profit.

Posted via Z30

(Side topic)

Because he sees ***value*** can be created and unleashed from BlackBerry, if it stays in one piece. And that's Chen's job, to unlock this value. Sales and dismantling is only a last resort, and a bad one. Selling for scrap.

No one saw the value, that's why no other investors joined him (Prem) when he attempted to take it private. Time was of the essence, too, so the debentures deal is what he could cook up in a hurry. That's my view.

Let's leave it at that. Welcome to disagree. :-D


�   Pastaporto aglio e olio... Mmmhhh!   �

[jpoq]

Personally, I think the use of "We" detaches a CEO from ownership more than "I". He is taking ownership of his decisions and he will be ultimately responsible for their success or failure. "We need to work on such and such" is way too soft in my opinion. "I need to work on this and that" is a much stronger statement...

I agree with your opinion. Here in the land of the "we" which is Japan, local CEO's constantly use "we" in corporate communications. It becomes very hard to pinpoint who is behind key company decisions and who is accountable for strategic blunders. The sense of shared responsibility that the "we" implies dilutes the fact that C level staff decide the fate of a company despite what most of employees might think.


Posted via CB10 from Passport

[4ron]

John Chen has made the comment how the employees need to think of BlackBerry as a software company, instead of devices as in the past. I think Mr. Chen has to realize that he needs to walk both sides of the street. At least the financial reports say so. His own ego might be getting in his way.

Posted via CB10