RIM leaning toward new chairman: financial post sources

[bbpandy]

RIM leaning toward new chairman: sources | News | Financial Post

Not sure what to think about them as CEOs BUT I do think that constant the criticism of it’s CEOs is bad for RIM. I’m also not sure if it’s better to keep them or to replace them while in the middle of this mess…..What I do know is that their biggest critic, the “shareholder” from Jaguar is also a CO-CEO….something he doesn’t like to talk about, seeing as he is so critical of CO-CEOs.

I do think they have made some big mistakes…but that they are also working to fix those mistakes. They have worked as a team for 20 years, I think they have proven to be able to make decisions together.

Last month they were voted as the WORST CEO’s of 2011. Just 24 months earlier they had been voted as the BEST CEO’s of 2009. Isn’t it amazing what how things can change so much in 2 years?

[Dapper37]

It would quiet down some of the rhetoric about the structure. I for one believe their this far along in the transition they should keep the ceo's until after the BB10 launch.

[greatwiseone]

I think an independent Chairman (Chairwoman) will be good for RIM.

[BerryDiva]

It's clear that these two are slightly out of touch or believe that their viewpoint is current/on-trend/forward thinking. I don't believe that they're far off from what needs to be done to revive RIM however their biggest issue, as I see it, is that they don't understand how to execute their vision effectively or for the masses. I say this because if they had a good understanding of the consumer wants the marketing/implementation of the Storm would've looked drastically different.

The Storm was a good contender and had a shot of moving the existing BlackBerry customer over to a new platform. It was a good transition device for their base and a good introductory device for new-to-BlackBerry customer. However, it was plagued with so many problems that made it clear that, as a company, they would have problems competing with the momentum that was building with iPhones/Android devices. They needed to let go of the idea of a business consumer and a non-business consumer then - they were already blending into one consumer type.

Sometimes BODs need to let the CEO(s) go if it helps to better the shareholder's positions. Being in transition is as good a time as any to oust the CEOs and/or reduce their roles. It's nothing more than sending a message to shareholders that the Board is committed to reviving the stock price. A new CEO might actually help with a successful consumer (market) embraced launch of BBX. Companies are constantly in transition and there's rarely a good moment to replace a CEO when the price of the stock has been on a constant 3-year decline. I do believe that if they were a US based company, the CEOs would've been gone a long time ago.

[sleepngbear]

An 'independent' chairperson is definitely a good thing; one with a bit more technology expertise would be much better. There's big talk about Barbara Stymiest getting the Chairman role. My concrrn is that this is a paper move to appease the market (which it is doing already -- stock is up over 8% today -- even though nothing has officially been announced), but she could easily be pursuaded in the wrong direction by the more tech-savy CEO's, as the board has demonstrated it is vulnerable to. Time will tell what kind of teeth she'll have in her new role. But it's definitely better than the status quo.

[lnichols]

This isn't enough. Co-CEO's is still an issue. They need to have one, strong CEO running the company, and a separate strong Chairman running the board. And quite frankly Jim just needs to go. He has the qualities of a used car salesman and has done so much damage to RIM's credibility with his countless bouts of voxarhea! At best he should just be in charge of carrier relations and be taken out of the public view for everything else.

[EdS817]

It looks like they are making to wrong change. Let the two of them head the board and get them out of the CEO position. They need to bring a heavyweight tech person in to run the company on a day to day basis. These two guys should at this point just sit back and count their money. Unfortunately they lost so much over the past couple of years.

[sleepngbear]

Originally Posted by EdS817

It looks like they are making to wrong change. Let the two of them head the board and get them out of the CEO position. They need to bring a heavyweight tech person in to run the company on a day to day basis. These two guys should at this point just sit back and count their money. Unfortunately they lost so much over the past couple of years.

I have to politely disagree. The board of directors is there to represent the interests of the shareholders, and these two have proven beyond any doubt they are not capable of doing that. Of course they're well on their way to proving they can no longer manage day-to-day operations, too. But they can more easily be replaced in those roles with someone else at the helm of the board than vice-versa. This Ms. Stymiest seems to be a no-BS kind of exec. She did a good job of bringing the Toronto stock exchange out of obscurity into something of a formidable financial entity. I don't think she'll let the board just rubber-stamp every whim of those two buffoons.

[bbpandy]

18to7fiddy - I think I agree with you. If they do bring in someone else in, or promote a current board member what power would they really have? I don't see Mike or Jim giving up power. Even if they didn't hold the positions, I suspect they will still control it in the background (especially Jim)

The funny thing is, if she were to take over (even if only on paper) and then next year BBX takes off, you know everyone will be saying it's because she is running the company, even though it's all due to changes that M & J implemented during this long painful transition.

[kb5zht]

as I see it, is that they don't understand how to execute their vision effectively

Nothing more need be said. That's the sum total of rim's woes right now. Those two clowns got over their arrogant stubbornness whether they admit they had a problem or not, and finally started including up to date hardware and integrating features the public wanted (dont forget, up until two years ago they didnt even have flick scrolling).

That said, they just dont seem to be able to execute and follow through with their plans. For whatever reason... and they had ample time to prove by now they had the right stuff (sorry but "new OS" and "transition time" no longer cut it... they should be on track by now.)

So... its time for fresh ideas and new blood. Move them wherever they need to go, just put them somewhere where they can do no further harm. Put somebody in there who means what they say, can act with leadership, and most importantly sends the message that RIM is serious again.

I almost laugh now when I hear "amateur hour is over", like i do when i hear old sound bites of an ex president saying "read my lips". Now its "leap frog the competition" (?!?!?!). Somebody shut those guys UP please!

[dbw1000]

Originally Posted by EdS817

It looks like they are making to wrong change. Let the two of them head the board and get them out of the CEO position. They need to bring a heavyweight tech person in to run the company on a day to day basis. These two guys should at this point just sit back and count their money. Unfortunately they lost so much over the past couple of years.

Unlike some of the previous posters, I complete agree with you. They should let them head the board and replace them as active leaders in the day to day implementation and crafting of the near term product and market strategy. I don't think the two have a bad long term strategic view, but I do think they don't know what the current user base wants. They obviously know how to manage finances, investors, and longer term structural issues. The fact RIM has such a good financial footing depicts that. The product and market sides are different and need fresh leadership.

If half of the cultural issues in that scathing letter from an executive were true, it is the day to day engagement and culture that needs revamped. A Chairman of the Board has nothing to do with that. A broken culture, broken marketing plan/message, and products not garnering the users are dealt with by the leadership (e.g. the CEO), not the board.

I don't think anyone can say they have mismanaged RIM from a financial, investment or high level base. They meat and potatoes of how they maintain their footing in those areas is where they have messed up, and those are not board level. If they a driving a lack of honesty, intellectual integrity, etc, it won't go away with a new Chairman or even a completely new board. People in a company respond to the leaders they see every single day, not people they interact with monthly or quarterly.

I don't think RIM has bad vision, which is board level, I think they have a bad record of implementing it as was said. That is CEO stuff. When I see that futuristic RIM video series, I see no vision problems. When I think about their products, software and marketing the last 12 to 24 months, I see many implementation missteps.

[BerryDiva]

Originally Posted by EdS817

It looks like they are making to wrong change. Let the two of them head the board and get them out of the CEO position. They need to bring a heavyweight tech person in to run the company on a day to day basis. These two guys should at this point just sit back and count their money. Unfortunately they lost so much over the past couple of years.

I feel like this is the beginning and a CEO change will come soon enough. If the market has movement based on removing them as Chairman, imagine the movement it will have once they're ousted as CEOs. Quite honestly, this is the only move RIM has left to bring back investor confidence until they have a consumer deemed competitive device on the market.

[kevinnugent]

RIM close to stripping CEOs of chairmanship: report

[Darlaten]

Originally Posted by BerryDiva

I feel like this is the beginning and a CEO change will come soon enough. If the market has movement based on removing them as Chairman, imagine the movement it will have once they're ousted as CEOs. Quite honestly, this is the only move RIM has left to bring back investor confidence until they have a consumer deemed competitive device on the market.

Given that their stock prices rose with only the rumors of them being ousted, I think it's almost a given that their stocks will rise, perhaps substantially (relatively speaking of course), when the move actually happens. Personally, thinking about my own portfollio, the sooner they leave all together and I mean literally leave as in they have nothing more to do with RIM, the better my portfollio will be.

[sleepngbear]

Originally Posted by Darlaten

Given that their stock prices rose with only the rumors of them being ousted, I think it's almost a given that their stocks will rise, perhaps substantially (relatively speaking of course), when the move actually happens. Personally, thinking about my own portfollio, the sooner they leave all together and I mean literally leave as in they have nothing more to do with RIM, the better my portfollio will be.

I don't know if I'd go that far. Sure they've made some bad decisions, but not every decision has been wrong. They still have a lot of irreplaceable business knowledge between them that I don't think would be wise to just send packing. However, they do exhibit at least six of the seven cardinal sins of bad executives outlined in the story below; so while I don't think ties should be completely severed, at the very least they need to be reined in, if not replaced altogether. The only way that's going to happen is with some semblance of an independent board.

The Seven Habits of Spectacularly Unsuccessful Executives - Forbes