Exactly. And your boss is your boss, not your friend.
It's nice enough that he does this once in a while and it's a positive move for both parties, but anyone who makes the mistake of thinking your boss is a "friend" or just "one of the team" or any of that BS is an idiot. The boss can't ever be 100% genuine, open and equal with the employees and the employees can never *really* say everything they think to their bosses. It's just the way the master/peon relationship works.
The boss should never act as a friend. But to sit during lunch with different people is a very good thing. It depends on the person. Some bosses are people friendly, and some aren't. I don't suppose sitting with Ellison during lunch would be comfortable. But sitting with Cook might very well be.
While my companies were much much smaller than Apple, employees liked having lunch with me from time to time. We could talk about what was happening, and what they thought might work. We all got a lot out of it.
Steve Jobs said Tim wasn't a "product guy"
Tim is a smart guy, and I think he would agree. None of the descriptions of Tim include hubris in thinking he could he be the "next Steve Jobs"; Tim never expressed any such desire. What that probably means is that Tim would continue to foster talented people, and preserve the aspects of Apple's culture that allow it to continue making a difference.
Really who care who he sits with ? & it sounds creepy to me
the word around the Apple campus is that he really never listens to what the people he is eating lunch with have to say, he is just doing it to steal their french fries.
Tim is a smart guy, and I think he would agree. None of the descriptions of Tim include hubris in thinking he could he be the "next Steve Jobs"; Tim never expressed any such desire. What that probably means is that Tim would continue to foster talented people, and preserve the aspects of Apple's culture that allow it to continue making a difference.
While he personally doesn't innovate as far as products are concerned, he probably knows "good" when he sees it. Or at the very least he trusts others on his team to tell him what is good (Ives.)
This quote is exactly what I thought would happen when Jobs left Apple:
Quote:
"In some cases Cook is taking action that Apple sorely needed and employees badly wanted. It's almost as if he is working his way through a to-do list of long overdue repairs the previous occupant (Jobs) refused to address for no reason other than obstinacy."
It's the low hanging fruit, and I suspect that Apple over the next 5 years will be better off with Cook than it would have been with Jobs because of this.
The 5 years *after* that, though, is a different matter -- that's when Cook will really be tested. My hunch is he'll pass the test with flying colors, but that's just a hunch -- there is risk.
More generally, Apple is heading into a new phase in its history. It's a phase where it is a massive company, not a start-up or a reborn company. While it's important for Apple to retain the things that allowed it to disrupt so many other big companies, it must also adapt to the reality that it is now a big company itself. This will be a tricky thing to balance. Steve Jobs was unique in what he accomplished. Tim Cook is by definition unique in that he is the man who is following Steve Jobs. It will be his job to thread that needle. I'm optimistic he can do it.
You're giving Steve Jobs way too much credit. I'm going to assume that you assume Steve was the driving force of everything Apple did? Well while he did do some things, most of the work from the people under him. You're only as good as the people around you and Steve (and now Tim) had great people around them.
Like others are saying, its not Tim's job to innovate. Steve didn't necessarily innovate either as much as you'd like to think he did. He just pushed others to innovate and he was the guy on stage talking about it.
Apple may be taking a cue from how some say the Catholic church picks popes. They rotate between popes that focus on rank-and-file Catholics, on church beliefs, and on administration. Pope John Paul II was a 'people pope,' so he has been followed by a theologian. Since both of those often let finances slip, the next one is likely to be a good budget balancer. I'm not Catholic myself, but I do find it impressive that Catholicism is not only the world's oldest formal organization, but that its entire 'hierarchy' has only six levels (pope to lay) for its billion-plus members. I've worked for Boeing and sometimes you find almost that many levels of supervision just within one building.
At Apple, it appears that Pope Jobs, the dogmatist, has been followed by Pope Cook, a people person who, fortunately for Apple, also seems to have a knack for administration. It is a fortunate move for the company. I can only hope that the people-centric Cook opens the company up to more outside contact. Apple's refuse to accept criticism from users is rapidly becoming its main flaw, witness its stonewalling about the bad features in Lion.
In a way that's cool and Cook seems like a nice guy but if I'm at lunch shooting the shit with fellow co-workers whom I likely consider friends and perhaps blowing off some steam about this or that and surely taking a break, having the CEO come sit with me for the duration of my lunch might not be the best thing.
Hmmm. Take advantage of the chance to spend a few minutes with one of the most powerful people in the world, or spend your lunch whining to the same people you do that with every day.
Hmmm. Take advantage of the chance to spend a few minutes with one of the most powerful people in the world, or spend your lunch whining to the same people you do that with every day.
Touch choice for an adult.
Don't get me wrong, I'd relish the opportunity but I assume that most people would act differently when around the CEO which means they are likely not being themselves and certainly not relaxed.
The boss should never act as a friend. But to sit during lunch with different people is a very good thing. It depends on the person. Some bosses are people friendly, and some aren't. I don't suppose sitting with Ellison during lunch would be comfortable. But sitting with Cook might very well be.
While my companies were much much smaller than Apple, employees liked having lunch with me from time to time. We could talk about what was happening, and what they thought might work. We all got a lot out of it.
The Boss should not act as your friend, but if s/he is your friend its fine as long as you can be grown up about it. It can be challenging but grown ups in a modern professional environment should be able to separate work and friendship. But personality like you say, is key.
Apple may be taking a cue from how some say the Catholic church picks popes. They rotate between popes that focus on rank-and-file Catholics, on church beliefs, and on administration. Pope John Paul II was a 'people pope,' so he has been followed by a theologian. Since both of those often let finances slip, the next one is likely to be a good budget balance...
This post seems like a bad joke IMO. Catholic Popes are actually picked in a sort of free-for-all like situation amongst the Cardinals. The guy with the most political pull wins (unless he subsequently fails the testicular examination intended to prove that he's "not a girl").
It has little to do with the particular qualities of the person involved (and yes, they are "persons" just like you and me), it's just plain old politics. The cardinals are often deadlocked for days while they each try to curry favour with each other and wrangle it out. There is a huge amount of documentation out there about this and in my experience, even many of the Catholic news agencies describe the process in a similar fashion when reporting on it.
The boss should never act as a friend. But to sit during lunch with different people is a very good thing. It depends on the person. Some bosses are people friendly, and some aren't. I don't suppose sitting with Ellison during lunch would be comfortable. But sitting with Cook might very well be.
While my companies were much much smaller than Apple, employees liked having lunch with me from time to time. We could talk about what was happening, and what they thought might work. We all got a lot out of it.
Agreed. It's a positive thing for both parties if done right.
FWIW, ever since I heard the (apocryphal?) story of being fired in an elevator by Steve for not being able to quickly explain how you help Apple, I've always had that elevator speech handy no matter where I work. Call me paranoid, but its a nice thing to have just for your own sake... 'Exactly what value do I provide here.' If you don't know that, you really should be somewhere else.
Thank you for over analyzing that quip. <slaps forehead>
Hey Herm, I liked your quip, but what's the problem in pointing out that Cook is gay? From hanging out on this site for a long time, it seems like the CEOs, including their personal lives, are of interest...
Cook interacted with investors when he was COO so he's just continuing in that role. Obviously Apple's culture is going to be different without Jobs. It's not like Cook was going to start shunning investors and acting like a dick towards employees because his title changed to CEO.
Exactly, Tim is being Tim just like he was before. He probably ate with random employees etc back then too. But he wasn't CEO so its not news.
As for the changes, some of them might have been Tim, some might have been Steve but for various reasons prep wasn't finished until after Steve died. Same with product designs and such
Frankly I think the media needs to get off the Tim Cook train. They are sliding into the same focus on the man not the products trap they created with Steve. And that was what killed he stock value a few years back because folks got to thinking Apple and Steve were the same. We don't need to repeat that with Tim, Scott, Sir J or anyone else.
Comments
The boss should never act as a friend. But to sit during lunch with different people is a very good thing. It depends on the person. Some bosses are people friendly, and some aren't. I don't suppose sitting with Ellison during lunch would be comfortable. But sitting with Cook might very well be.
While my companies were much much smaller than Apple, employees liked having lunch with me from time to time. We could talk about what was happening, and what they thought might work. We all got a lot out of it.
Steve Jobs said Tim wasn't a "product guy"
Tim is a smart guy, and I think he would agree. None of the descriptions of Tim include hubris in thinking he could he be the "next Steve Jobs"; Tim never expressed any such desire. What that probably means is that Tim would continue to foster talented people, and preserve the aspects of Apple's culture that allow it to continue making a difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryuk
Really who care who he sits with ? & it sounds creepy to me
the word around the Apple campus is that he really never listens to what the people he is eating lunch with have to say, he is just doing it to steal their french fries.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton
Steve Jobs said Tim wasn't a "product guy"
Tim is a smart guy, and I think he would agree. None of the descriptions of Tim include hubris in thinking he could he be the "next Steve Jobs"; Tim never expressed any such desire. What that probably means is that Tim would continue to foster talented people, and preserve the aspects of Apple's culture that allow it to continue making a difference.
While he personally doesn't innovate as far as products are concerned, he probably knows "good" when he sees it. Or at the very least he trusts others on his team to tell him what is good (Ives.)
This quote is exactly what I thought would happen when Jobs left Apple:
Quote:
"In some cases Cook is taking action that Apple sorely needed and employees badly wanted. It's almost as if he is working his way through a to-do list of long overdue repairs the previous occupant (Jobs) refused to address for no reason other than obstinacy."
It's the low hanging fruit, and I suspect that Apple over the next 5 years will be better off with Cook than it would have been with Jobs because of this.
The 5 years *after* that, though, is a different matter -- that's when Cook will really be tested. My hunch is he'll pass the test with flying colors, but that's just a hunch -- there is risk.
More generally, Apple is heading into a new phase in its history. It's a phase where it is a massive company, not a start-up or a reborn company. While it's important for Apple to retain the things that allowed it to disrupt so many other big companies, it must also adapt to the reality that it is now a big company itself. This will be a tricky thing to balance. Steve Jobs was unique in what he accomplished. Tim Cook is by definition unique in that he is the man who is following Steve Jobs. It will be his job to thread that needle. I'm optimistic he can do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by scotty321
Okay, he's a nice guy. But can he innovate?
You're giving Steve Jobs way too much credit. I'm going to assume that you assume Steve was the driving force of everything Apple did? Well while he did do some things, most of the work from the people under him. You're only as good as the people around you and Steve (and now Tim) had great people around them.
Like others are saying, its not Tim's job to innovate. Steve didn't necessarily innovate either as much as you'd like to think he did. He just pushed others to innovate and he was the guy on stage talking about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
As Tim is gay, I doubt a girl would I Teresa him that much. He doesn't seem to be the trawl the bar type. Besides, I think he's with someone.
Thank you for over analyzing that quip. <slaps forehead>
Apple may be taking a cue from how some say the Catholic church picks popes. They rotate between popes that focus on rank-and-file Catholics, on church beliefs, and on administration. Pope John Paul II was a 'people pope,' so he has been followed by a theologian. Since both of those often let finances slip, the next one is likely to be a good budget balancer. I'm not Catholic myself, but I do find it impressive that Catholicism is not only the world's oldest formal organization, but that its entire 'hierarchy' has only six levels (pope to lay) for its billion-plus members. I've worked for Boeing and sometimes you find almost that many levels of supervision just within one building.
At Apple, it appears that Pope Jobs, the dogmatist, has been followed by Pope Cook, a people person who, fortunately for Apple, also seems to have a knack for administration. It is a fortunate move for the company. I can only hope that the people-centric Cook opens the company up to more outside contact. Apple's refuse to accept criticism from users is rapidly becoming its main flaw, witness its stonewalling about the bad features in Lion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
In a way that's cool and Cook seems like a nice guy but if I'm at lunch shooting the shit with fellow co-workers whom I likely consider friends and perhaps blowing off some steam about this or that and surely taking a break, having the CEO come sit with me for the duration of my lunch might not be the best thing.
Hmmm. Take advantage of the chance to spend a few minutes with one of the most powerful people in the world, or spend your lunch whining to the same people you do that with every day.
Touch choice for an adult.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkling
Apple's refuse to accept criticism from users is rapidly becoming its main flaw, witness its stonewalling about the bad features in Lion.
This is unsubstantiated, of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
This is unsubstantiated, of course.
Of course.
Don't get me wrong, I'd relish the opportunity but I assume that most people would act differently when around the CEO which means they are likely not being themselves and certainly not relaxed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
The boss should never act as a friend. But to sit during lunch with different people is a very good thing. It depends on the person. Some bosses are people friendly, and some aren't. I don't suppose sitting with Ellison during lunch would be comfortable. But sitting with Cook might very well be.
While my companies were much much smaller than Apple, employees liked having lunch with me from time to time. We could talk about what was happening, and what they thought might work. We all got a lot out of it.
The Boss should not act as your friend, but if s/he is your friend its fine as long as you can be grown up about it. It can be challenging but grown ups in a modern professional environment should be able to separate work and friendship. But personality like you say, is key.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inkling
Apple may be taking a cue from how some say the Catholic church picks popes. They rotate between popes that focus on rank-and-file Catholics, on church beliefs, and on administration. Pope John Paul II was a 'people pope,' so he has been followed by a theologian. Since both of those often let finances slip, the next one is likely to be a good budget balance...
This post seems like a bad joke IMO. Catholic Popes are actually picked in a sort of free-for-all like situation amongst the Cardinals. The guy with the most political pull wins (unless he subsequently fails the testicular examination intended to prove that he's "not a girl").
It has little to do with the particular qualities of the person involved (and yes, they are "persons" just like you and me), it's just plain old politics. The cardinals are often deadlocked for days while they each try to curry favour with each other and wrangle it out. There is a huge amount of documentation out there about this and in my experience, even many of the Catholic news agencies describe the process in a similar fashion when reporting on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
The boss should never act as a friend. But to sit during lunch with different people is a very good thing. It depends on the person. Some bosses are people friendly, and some aren't. I don't suppose sitting with Ellison during lunch would be comfortable. But sitting with Cook might very well be.
While my companies were much much smaller than Apple, employees liked having lunch with me from time to time. We could talk about what was happening, and what they thought might work. We all got a lot out of it.
Agreed. It's a positive thing for both parties if done right.
FWIW, ever since I heard the (apocryphal?) story of being fired in an elevator by Steve for not being able to quickly explain how you help Apple, I've always had that elevator speech handy no matter where I work. Call me paranoid, but its a nice thing to have just for your own sake... 'Exactly what value do I provide here.' If you don't know that, you really should be somewhere else.
Find another picture of Tim... This one is WAY overused.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
Thank you for over analyzing that quip. <slaps forehead>
Hey Herm, I liked your quip, but what's the problem in pointing out that Cook is gay? From hanging out on this site for a long time, it seems like the CEOs, including their personal lives, are of interest...
Anyway I hear Cook likes asian guys :b
Exactly, Tim is being Tim just like he was before. He probably ate with random employees etc back then too. But he wasn't CEO so its not news.
As for the changes, some of them might have been Tim, some might have been Steve but for various reasons prep wasn't finished until after Steve died. Same with product designs and such
Frankly I think the media needs to get off the Tim Cook train. They are sliding into the same focus on the man not the products trap they created with Steve. And that was what killed he stock value a few years back because folks got to thinking Apple and Steve were the same. We don't need to repeat that with Tim, Scott, Sir J or anyone else.
According to my sources, Tim likes to let out nasty silent farts and claim Phil did it.
Seriously, give it time. If the media stays on this focus, less than fantastic stuff will eventually start turning up.