[akhenaton]

I think anyone who works at RIM might know about the existence of this meeting, but seems like something is brewing at HQ...maybe it's nothing? or it could be something...

[UrbanGlowCam]

I think anyone who works at RIM might know about the existence of this meeting, but seems like something is brewing at HQ...maybe it's nothing? or it could be something...

Can you be more specific? Where did you hear of this?

[the_sleuth]

My firm's CEO is having a lunch meeting tomorrow with so and so to discuss this and that, about how to handle it, what to do, and where to go from here.

I hope I haven't divulged too much.

[dynot]

Maybe Jim & Mike are announcing their resignations!!

I nominate any crackberry.com member who are probably more qualified for the position....except for the fanbois who think everything's peaches and cream.

[ekafara]

Very interesting. Could mean nothing, but it could mean something. Hopefully we'll have more news about this soon.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[blackberry-pimp]

Anymore concrete info about this meeting?

[world traveler and former ceo]

perhaps IBM to make a major investment in RIM ....

[southlander]

Maybe Jim & Mike are announcing their resignations!!



I nominate any crackberry.com member who are probably more qualified for the position....except for the fanbois who think everything's peaches and cream.

Yes. Any of you here that have built multi-billion dollar mobile technology companies from nothing, raise your hands please. Then we'll know who is more qualified.


Sent from my BlackBerry 9930 using Tapatalk

[_StephenBB81]

Yes. Any of you here that have built multi-billion dollar mobile technology companies from nothing, raise your hands please. Then we'll know who is more qualified.


Sent from my BlackBerry 9930 using Tapatalk

I'd actually like to see a CEO NOT from a technology company,
A CEO with a vision of what as a non techy he'd like from his mobile phone experience in both Enterprise and in the Consumer market,
UNDER the CEO I'd want people who are from technology company's to make sure things are possible and to grow the CEO with a technological understanding,

[ekafara]

I'd actually like to see a CEO NOT from a technology company,
A CEO with a vision of what as a non techy he'd like from his mobile phone experience in both Enterprise and in the Consumer market,
UNDER the CEO I'd want people who are from technology company's to make sure things are possible and to grow the CEO with a technological understanding,

Great idea.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[sleepngbear]

I'd actually like to see a CEO NOT from a technology company,
A CEO with a vision of what as a non techy he'd like from his mobile phone experience in both Enterprise and in the Consumer market,
UNDER the CEO I'd want people who are from technology company's to make sure things are possible and to grow the CEO with a technological understanding,

On-the-job training for the CEO? I have to politely disagree. They need someone with strong leadership and broad vision, but they have to have some kind of a tech background, though not necessarily mobile.

But I don't think that's what this is about. We'll find out soon enough, I'm sure.

[sam_b77]

I'd actually like to see a CEO NOT from a technology company,
A CEO with a vision of what as a non techy he'd like from his mobile phone experience in both Enterprise and in the Consumer market,
UNDER the CEO I'd want people who are from technology company's to make sure things are possible and to grow the CEO with a technological understanding,

Always a dangerous proposition. I remember a Tech company (I won't take the company's name ,lot of flamers here), which not too long back had hired a Cola selling dude to run it, he nearly finished the company off and made it the laughing stock.

[_StephenBB81]

On-the-job training for the CEO? I have to politely disagree. They need someone with strong leadership and broad vision, but they have to have some kind of a tech background, though not necessarily mobile.

But I don't think that's what this is about. We'll find out soon enough, I'm sure.

Please look up Ford, and Allan Mulally.

[ADGrant]

Please look up Ford, and Allan Mulally.

Not really a good analogy. The Apple/Sculley example is closer to what would probably happen.

[_StephenBB81]

Not really a good analogy. The Apple/Sculley example is closer to what would probably happen.

Please why is that a better analogy?

It is just another case. My stance is that IT CAN work, does it work every time, no, but to say they must come from a technology company is flawed.

[sam_b77]

Please why is that a better analogy?

It is just another case. My stance is that IT CAN work, does it work every time, no, but to say they must come from a technology company is flawed.

You have a point. Normally it is the CEO's job to run the company efficiently and enforce strategies that makes the company competitive and that can be done without someone having in-depth knowledge of the Product as such.
The future vision and path the company should set itself upon, is something a person not involved with the company and the product might have difficulty with.
Maybe a CEO to run operations and a Chief Mentor of sorts to align the company's longterm future and path. But even that was tried by Steve Jobs, with disastrous results.
The only way would be if a COO can be hired to run operations but who does not on the Board of Directors and has no say in the future vision and path of a company. Don't know how that would sit with the Company Board Regulators.

[_StephenBB81]

You have a point. Normally it is the CEO's job to run the company efficiently and enforce strategies that makes the company competitive and that can be done without someone having in-depth knowledge of the Product as such.
The future vision and path the company should set itself upon, is something a person not involved with the company and the product might have difficulty with.
Maybe a CEO to run operations and a Chief Mentor of sorts to align the company's longterm future and path. But even that was tried by Steve Jobs, with disastrous results.
The only way would be if a COO can be hired to run operations but who does not on the Board of Directors and has no say in the future vision and path of a company. Don't know how that would sit with the Company Board Regulators.

The CEO needs to foster an environment for the company to grow,
They do that with strategies and relationships, if you give the power to those under you to help you guide the strategies you don't need to know the industry,

What I feel RIM right now needs is leadership that is more focused on time lines, and marketing, and public relations. They need their Teams, and their CTO, and their R&D departments to bring ideas forward, and have those ideas OPENLY discussed with people in power, It really feels like looking from the outside in that RIM operates in a bunch of bubbles, and they mash together when it comes time, the fact RIM continually fails to meet deadlines set by the CEO's tells me the CEO's are A not involved with the process, or B, not informed of Progress. either way the CEO's are not fostering communication at all levels.

RIM has a great product offering in what COULD be BBX, but if they can't get the business running behind it, then it will have a hard time like WebOS did,
Could Mike and Jim continue to lead RIM to success? I think they could, but what they have to do if FIRE a bunch of those "technology industry" Managers, from AT&T, and hire some people who are from manufacturing, and marketing companies, and find ways to streamline product development, and get accountability for failed goals.

[sam_b77]

The CEO needs to foster an environment for the company to grow,
They do that with strategies and relationships, if you give the power to those under you to help you guide the strategies you don't need to know the industry,

What I feel RIM right now needs is leadership that is more focused on time lines, and marketing, and public relations. They need their Teams, and their CTO, and their R&D departments to bring ideas forward, and have those ideas OPENLY discussed with people in power, It really feels like looking from the outside in that RIM operates in a bunch of bubbles, and they mash together when it comes time, the fact RIM continually fails to meet deadlines set by the CEO's tells me the CEO's are A not involved with the process, or B, not informed of Progress. either way the CEO's are not fostering communication at all levels.

RIM has a great product offering in what COULD be BBX, but if they can't get the business running behind it, then it will have a hard time like WebOS did,
Could Mike and Jim continue to lead RIM to success? I think they could, but what they have to do if FIRE a bunch of those "technology industry" Managers, from AT&T, and hire some people who are from manufacturing, and marketing companies, and find ways to streamline product development, and get accountability for failed goals.

Would have to agree there.
They should have a Chief Operating Officer whose brief should be to deliver the goods in R&D at the decided timelines. Let the COO run the execution freely, but let the vision come from a person like Mike L.
How they separate the two functions so that neither steps on each other's toes is critical.
If they achieve that balance without either threatening the position of the other, it would be unbeatable.

[brucep1]

The CEO needs to foster an environment for the company to grow,
They do that with strategies and relationships, if you give the power to those under you to help you guide the strategies you don't need to know the industry,

What I feel RIM right now needs is leadership that is more focused on time lines, and marketing, and public relations. They need their Teams, and their CTO, and their R&D departments to bring ideas forward, and have those ideas OPENLY discussed with people in power, It really feels like looking from the outside in that RIM operates in a bunch of bubbles, and they mash together when it comes time, the fact RIM continually fails to meet deadlines set by the CEO's tells me the CEO's are A not involved with the process, or B, not informed of Progress. either way the CEO's are not fostering communication at all levels.

RIM has a great product offering in what COULD be BBX, but if they can't get the business running behind it, then it will have a hard time like WebOS did,
Could Mike and Jim continue to lead RIM to success? I think they could, but what they have to do if FIRE a bunch of those "technology industry" Managers, from AT&T, and hire some people who are from manufacturing, and marketing companies, and find ways to streamline product development, and get accountability for failed goals.

I respectfully disagree. Focusing on timelines and marketing would be shallow to me if the underlying product isn't finished.

The team needs to be focused on releasing a BBX phone that can compete in the market. RIM has already lost credibility with missing timelines, now they need to focus on quality of product. If they release a BBX phone with features missing similar to the PlayBook, but make the release date, what good does it do? It would simply hurt their credibility even more.

RIM, take your time, get BBX right.

[sam_b77]

I respectfully disagree. Focusing on timelines and marketing would be shallow to me if the underlying product isn't finished.

The team needs to be focused on releasing a BBX phone that can compete in the market. RIM has already lost credibility with missing timelines, now they need to focus on quality of product. If they release a BBX phone with features missing similar to the PlayBook, but make the release date, what good does it do? It would simply hurt their credibility even more.

RIM, take your time, get BBX right.

I think that Stephen is also saying the same thing just in different words.
His point about the CEO's not being involved or informed on the process side is the pointer here.

[MarketRide]

It'll probably just be another meeting that will end up screwing shareholders and consumers a like.

[_StephenBB81]

I respectfully disagree. Focusing on timelines and marketing would be shallow to me if the underlying product isn't finished.

The team needs to be focused on releasing a BBX phone that can compete in the market. RIM has already lost credibility with missing timelines, now they need to focus on quality of product. If they release a BBX phone with features missing similar to the PlayBook, but make the release date, what good does it do? It would simply hurt their credibility even more.

RIM, take your time, get BBX right.

I don't want them to rush out the BBX phone

and I hate that people keep pulling up the PlayBook for it's missing components and thinking that will relate to the smartphones, the PlayBook posed some VERY challenging back end things, that clearly are harder to fix than anticipated, the PlayBook is a test product line, it isn't their core business, phones have cell radios, and are not companion devices so registering them to the BIS and BES doesn't create issues like registering a Wifi only companion device that needs a second PIN entry into the BIS and BES for services.

do you Break your BES/BIS installations for a test item? I think not.

Now back to the Timeline focus.
Jim pipes up 60 days, it isn't met, PR crumbles.
They mention Summer/Fall/when ever. PR crumbles
The CEO needs to NOT be piping up about timelines in public, but needs to be ontop of timelines internally, they need to know where the hiccups are, and address those hiccups, is the issue man power? technical? research? allocate the resources before it is already late for an Internal deadline,

The CTO, and COO's and Product managers, and VP's need to be focused on the technology being complete and competitive, the CEO needs to RUN the business, and RIM's stumbling blocks have been CEO's running mouths off, lack of Public Relation communication, lack of Advertising, and Late products. Those are things the face of the company can be really addressing, it's not like the CEO sits down to code an OS

[TEdelman]

deRussett, I love the idea. RIM needs someone from the outside to help on the inside. If not as CEO but as a senior level adviser. Mulally is a great reference with the things he did for Ford. I don't want to sound like a deRussett fanboy but his posts are usually quite full of insight and substance. That doesn't take away from anyone else here on the sites opinions, and in addition to a new adviser, maybe RIM should consider a team of people to pour over CB to see where they are and need to go.

[sam_b77]

deRussett, I love the idea. RIM needs someone from the outside to help on the inside. If not as CEO but as a senior level adviser. Mulally is a great reference with the things he did for Ford. I don't want to sound like a deRussett fanboy but his posts are usually quite full of insight and substance. That doesn't take away from anyone else here on the sites opinions, and in addition to a new adviser, maybe RIM should consider a team of people to pour over CB to see where they are and need to go.

They would need a huge ignore list on CB. Lot of iTrolls here who have nothing happening on their forums

[_StephenBB81]

deRussett, I love the idea. RIM needs someone from the outside to help on the inside. If not as CEO but as a senior level adviser. Mulally is a great reference with the things he did for Ford. I don't want to sound like a deRussett fanboy but his posts are usually quite full of insight and substance. That doesn't take away from anyone else here on the sites opinions, and in addition to a new adviser, maybe RIM should consider a team of people to pour over CB to see where they are and need to go.

There is NO need for a team of people going over CB, or other fan sites.

they have a social media team, that team SHOULD be following and documenting BlackBerry related Trends on Facebook, twitter, Google+ and what ever other socialnetworks I am forgetting, a weekly scan of CB, and various other sites, can get an over all impression, but focusing on what fanboy's want, and what fanboy's of other platforms want would be a waste of resources and time,