If a corporation has a non-fraternization policy, then leadership has to follow it. We can debate the merit of that policy all day, but it misses he point. If a mid-level manager violates the policy, they may be fired, or maybe get away with a reprimand of some sort. If the CEO violates the policy, that’s a different story. It strikes to the heart of the company. The culture of a company is based on what leadership allows to transpire. The CEO is a much greater influencer of culture than a manager.
As you say, the CEO has to model the process. If the CEO doesn't comply, how can expect others to comply.
I suspect that he had other reasons to leave as well [with absolutely no data to back this up]. He may have already achieved the best that he could hope for at Intel... with no upside in the near future. So why not leave now, work on the family, and try something else.
Haha. Speaking of Intel Inside, I believe cofounder Robert Noyce, brilliant and swashbuckling, found his second wife in the company’s personnel department. She later moved to Apple.
Maybe he’s he reason they put the policy in place. Every stupid rule has a stupid person responsible for its creation.
If a corporation has a non-fraternization policy, then leadership has to follow it. We can debate the merit of that policy all day, but it misses he point. If a mid-level manager violates the policy, they may be fired, or maybe get away with a reprimand of some sort. If the CEO violates the policy, that’s a different story. It strikes to the heart of the company. The culture of a company is based on what leadership allows to transpire. The CEO is a much greater influencer of culture than a manager.
No matter what steps are taken or rules are placed on people, they will eventually figure out a way to have sex with each other.
True. But if you play... you pay.
No argument, it's just an exercise in futility.
So is preventing murder, but we still enforce the rules. Not having 100% compliance is no reason to give up on a thing. That would be absurd...We'd live in a lawless society where nothing was ever enforced.
I find it odd that this article spends so much text talking about Intel, Intel CPU business, and history, rather than the actual subject of this story: a CEO leaving due to breaking a company rule. There's no discussion about what kind of violation it is, just the presumption that it's a dismissible offense.
The reasons for having such a policy (if the reasons given above by DAalseth are Intel's) do sound sensible, but where is Intel talking about it? Not in this article. Darwiniandude above suggests this relationship was in addition to the CEO's marriage. Do we know if it was cheating or an open marriage? If open, then any cheating controversy would be irrelevant.
I'm in agreement with larryjw: the workplace is one of the most common places to meet and develop relationships with people. The firing seems weirdly extreme. Is the offending relationship really what the firing is about, or is it just being used as an excuse to remove an executive that the board wants out for other reasons (but has been unable or unwilling to push out for those other reasons)?
I wonder (open and somewhat rampant speculation here) if there were other reasons. Sure, he violated the fraternization rules for managers (at some point in the past from the sounds of things) but maybe that's just the excuse. These rules often get enforced only when expedient to do so. "We say don't shag your subordinates, but we mean just do it discretely. As long as you don't get caught out too publicly, we'll look the other way." Meanwhile, the company has been having problems of late. Not clear that a change in CEO is what's needed, but it does look to the public and the shareholders like you're doing something. It also gives you an excuse to change the operations, like totally abandoning Tick/Tock, or migrating the x86 platform to a wholly different architecture.
If a corporation has a non-fraternization policy, then leadership has to follow it. We can debate the merit of that policy all day, but it misses he point. If a mid-level manager violates the policy, they may be fired, or maybe get away with a reprimand of some sort. If the CEO violates the policy, that’s a different story. It strikes to the heart of the company. The culture of a company is based on what leadership allows to transpire. The CEO is a much greater influencer of culture than a manager.
No matter what steps are taken or rules are placed on people, they will eventually figure out a way to have sex with each other.
True. But if you play... you pay.
No argument, it's just an exercise in futility.
So is preventing murder, but we still enforce the rules. Not having 100% compliance is no reason to give up on a thing. That would be absurd...We'd live in a lawless society where nothing was ever enforced.
This is where the adage of "Don't poo where you sleep" comes from. Was that relationship worth a multi-million dollar salary? If you date someone at work, you are playing a dangerous game. If things turn sour, and a bulk of relationships do this, then all it takes is an HR complaint, and your career is ended.
It is rare in the extreme for a man to file a sexual harassment complaint against a female coworker, especially after a relationship has ended; however the opposite is not true.
As a professional with over 25 years experience, I would advise you to find your dates OUTSIDE of where you work. The risk/reward ratio is not in your favor.
That may be true but it is something that needs to change!
Getting to point where monk robes and nun outfits are needed when we check in each day. Or maybe the exemplar should be robots. /s
While I would normally agree, there’s this:
“The resignation follows the revelation that Krzanich had a "past consensual relationship" with a company employee, which violated Intel's non-fraternization policy for managers.”
So...might be a good idea to read your contract. A lot of people—guys especially—can’t seem to engage their brains when they’re around someone to whom they are sexually attracted. They will deny it, lay blame at the foot of the other person, or play the victim. This is cowardice. Sadly, they are never courageous enough to take responsibility for making a bad decision.
Times are changing guys, and it’s no longer a good old boys club. Better start acting like responsible adult men.
A responsible a adult relationship to fit his needs finds. It shouldn't matter where that relationship starts. More so woman are supposedly equals now, as such they should be able to negotiate the emotional minefields of relation ships without this constant complaining that they where forced. Frankly this garbage has become a terrible joke, if a woman i afraid to say no maybe should should stay in her moms cellar.
Getting to point where monk robes and nun outfits are needed when we check in each day. Or maybe the exemplar should be robots. /s
While I would normally agree, there’s this:
“The resignation follows the revelation that Krzanich had a "past consensual relationship" with a company employee, which violated Intel's non-fraternization policy for managers.”
So...might be a good idea to read your contract. A lot of people—guys especially—can’t seem to engage their brains when they’re around someone to whom they are sexually attracted. They will deny it, lay blame at the foot of the other person, or play the victim. This is cowardice. Sadly, they are never courageous enough to take responsibility for making a bad decision.
Times are changing guys, and it’s no longer a good old boys club. Better start acting like responsible adult men.
A responsible a adult relationship to fit his needs finds. It shouldn't matter where that relationship starts. More so woman are supposedly equals now, as such they should be able to negotiate the emotional minefields of relation ships without this constant complaining that they where forced. Frankly this garbage has become a terrible joke, if a woman i afraid to say no maybe should should stay in her moms cellar.
The non-fraternization policy was clearly stated for managers, thus it was his onus to abide by, not hers. But don't let that stop you from blaming the woman because hey, if they just stayed in the cellar/kitchen/wherever right?
I’ve had two relationships with women I met at work. In both cases, I resigned before asking them out. Drastic? Nope, they were seriously hot and the jobs weren’t that great.
And much later in life, I worked at a company where a junior analyst was having an affair with the CEO. You couldn’t get this lazy moron to do anything. Any time the project manager pulled him up for some problem, he’d run straight to her office for sex and a complaint form.
And much later still, I worked for a company that made every employee take a course in Sexual Harrassment when they started. Yup, that’s what they called the course, like they were teaching every new starter how to do it properly.
The reality, and I prefer reality over myth, is that workplace is one of the most appropriate places in which people find relationships.
They had a rule. He broke the rule. Whether you agree with it or not, he did something he shouldn't have. and the penalty for breaking the rule was known when they did it.
Now there is a reason these rules are in place. When you are dealing with a worker/boss situation "consensual" gets to be a difficult area. The rule is there to protect both parties. It protects the worker from getting pressured into a relationship by someone who holds their career in their hands. It also protects them from retaliation, getting fired if they refuse or break it off. It also protects the boss from being accused of retaliation. It also protects the company from accusations of having an abusive working environment.
When rule following -- particularly arbitrary ones where no harm is done -- is more important than performance, a company is in trouble because they have their priorities screwed up.
Yes, there is a reason for non-fraternization policies -- because organizational harm can result from it. In this case there is no reason to believe that any harm was done.
A smarter policy would be to give the employee a warning and move on. Intel chose the stupid route. And, since they are one of the primary drivers of American tech leadership, I find this troubling. Hopefully Apple's transition to using A series processors in its laptops goes well and quickly...
This is pathetic. I understand some companies have non-fraternity guidelines at work. But, why corporations get into personnel life of employees unless it effects there job performance or others, job environment ? This was consensual relationship, not sexual harassment. Best, Brian should have used his influence in industry and help her to move to other similar/suitable job at other company nearby in silicon valley.
If a corporation has a non-fraternization policy, then leadership has to follow it. We can debate the merit of that policy all day, but it misses he point. If a mid-level manager violates the policy, they may be fired, or maybe get away with a reprimand of some sort. If the CEO violates the policy, that’s a different story. It strikes to the heart of the company. The culture of a company is based on what leadership allows to transpire. The CEO is a much greater influencer of culture than a manager.
Then don't hire females? That would solve the issue instantly. Oh the wage gap myth....
If a corporation has a non-fraternization policy, then leadership has to follow it. We can debate the merit of that policy all day, but it misses he point. If a mid-level manager violates the policy, they may be fired, or maybe get away with a reprimand of some sort. If the CEO violates the policy, that’s a different story. It strikes to the heart of the company. The culture of a company is based on what leadership allows to transpire. The CEO is a much greater influencer of culture than a manager.
No matter what steps are taken or rules are placed on people, they will eventually figure out a way to have sex with each other.
Men are getting closer and closer to being punished for sex in general. Don't be surprised if sex becomes illegal for men if they don't get up and do something about this crap.
If a corporation has a non-fraternization policy, then leadership has to follow it. We can debate the merit of that policy all day, but it misses he point. If a mid-level manager violates the policy, they may be fired, or maybe get away with a reprimand of some sort. If the CEO violates the policy, that’s a different story. It strikes to the heart of the company. The culture of a company is based on what leadership allows to transpire. The CEO is a much greater influencer of culture than a manager.
Then don't hire females? That would solve the issue instantly. Oh the wage gap myth....
If a corporation has a non-fraternization policy, then leadership has to follow it. We can debate the merit of that policy all day, but it misses he point. If a mid-level manager violates the policy, they may be fired, or maybe get away with a reprimand of some sort. If the CEO violates the policy, that’s a different story. It strikes to the heart of the company. The culture of a company is based on what leadership allows to transpire. The CEO is a much greater influencer of culture than a manager.
No matter what steps are taken or rules are placed on people, they will eventually figure out a way to have sex with each other.
Men are getting closer and closer to being punished for sex in general. Don't be surprised if sex becomes illegal for men if they don't get up and do something about this crap.
Men are the one that makes rules to protect women because looking over history and in current time many parts of world, women are vulnerable and prone,easy target for sexual harassment by men. In urban USA, things are bit different.
To the person who said this was the sort of thing that usually got someone a reprimand: not any more it isn't, especially if the power dynamic between the two was unequal, and in this case it certainly must have been (unless Intel had a female co-CEO nobody knew anything about). While I'm glad the relationship was consensual, it was kept secret for a reason: it was against the rules. The rules should apply equally to everyone, and so I'm glad Intel takes their rules seriously enough to take action when anyone -- including the CEO -- breaks them.
People have to work to live, they have no choice. And because of that they shouldn't be subject to sexual advances from their colleagues or bullying or prejudice or anything else, a workplace should be 100% neutral.
Just be professional around everyone and keep your social life and your work life separate. If you want a date join a dating site, don't go prowling around the office.
People have to work to live, they have no choice. And because of that they shouldn't be subject to sexual advances from their colleagues or bullying or prejudice or anything else, a workplace should be 100% neutral.
Just be professional around everyone and keep your social life and your work life separate. If you want a date join a dating site, don't go prowling around the office.
I don’t know how many jobs anyone else here has held, but like I said it doesn’t matter how many rules or laws are passed... people who work in close quarters all day, day after day, with other people are going to get into arguments, fights, relationships (both secret and not) and all of the other messy stuff that happens when people interact.
To the person who said this was the sort of thing that usually got someone a reprimand: not any more it isn't, especially if the power dynamic between the two was unequal, and in this case it certainly must have been (unless Intel had a female co-CEO nobody knew anything about). While I'm glad the relationship was consensual, it was kept secret for a reason: it was against the rules. The rules should apply equally to everyone, and so I'm glad Intel takes their rules seriously enough to take action when anyone -- including the CEO -- breaks them.
OK... If this unbendable, zero-tolerence rule applies to everyone, then why didn't they fire the girl?
If a corporation has a non-fraternization policy, then leadership has to follow it. We can debate the merit of that policy all day, but it misses he point. If a mid-level manager violates the policy, they may be fired, or maybe get away with a reprimand of some sort. If the CEO violates the policy, that’s a different story. It strikes to the heart of the company. The culture of a company is based on what leadership allows to transpire. The CEO is a much greater influencer of culture than a manager.
Then don't hire females? That would solve the issue instantly. Oh the wage gap myth....
If a corporation has a non-fraternization policy, then leadership has to follow it. We can debate the merit of that policy all day, but it misses he point. If a mid-level manager violates the policy, they may be fired, or maybe get away with a reprimand of some sort. If the CEO violates the policy, that’s a different story. It strikes to the heart of the company. The culture of a company is based on what leadership allows to transpire. The CEO is a much greater influencer of culture than a manager.
No matter what steps are taken or rules are placed on people, they will eventually figure out a way to have sex with each other.
Men are getting closer and closer to being punished for sex in general. Don't be surprised if sex becomes illegal for men if they don't get up and do something about this crap.
Comments
I suspect that he had other reasons to leave as well [with absolutely no data to back this up]. He may have already achieved the best that he could hope for at Intel... with no upside in the near future. So why not leave now, work on the family, and try something else.
The reasons for having such a policy (if the reasons given above by DAalseth are Intel's) do sound sensible, but where is Intel talking about it? Not in this article. Darwiniandude above suggests this relationship was in addition to the CEO's marriage. Do we know if it was cheating or an open marriage? If open, then any cheating controversy would be irrelevant.
I'm in agreement with larryjw: the workplace is one of the most common places to meet and develop relationships with people. The firing seems weirdly extreme. Is the offending relationship really what the firing is about, or is it just being used as an excuse to remove an executive that the board wants out for other reasons (but has been unable or unwilling to push out for those other reasons)?
I wonder (open and somewhat rampant speculation here) if there were other reasons. Sure, he violated the fraternization rules for managers (at some point in the past from the sounds of things) but maybe that's just the excuse. These rules often get enforced only when expedient to do so. "We say don't shag your subordinates, but we mean just do it discretely. As long as you don't get caught out too publicly, we'll look the other way." Meanwhile, the company has been having problems of late. Not clear that a change in CEO is what's needed, but it does look to the public and the shareholders like you're doing something. It also gives you an excuse to change the operations, like totally abandoning Tick/Tock, or migrating the x86 platform to a wholly different architecture.
I’ve had two relationships with women I met at work. In both cases, I resigned before asking them out. Drastic? Nope, they were seriously hot and the jobs weren’t that great.
And much later in life, I worked at a company where a junior analyst was having an affair with the CEO. You couldn’t get this lazy moron to do anything. Any time the project manager pulled him up for some problem, he’d run straight to her office for sex and a complaint form.
And much later still, I worked for a company that made every employee take a course in Sexual Harrassment when they started. Yup, that’s what they called the course, like they were teaching every new starter how to do it properly.
Yes, there is a reason for non-fraternization policies -- because organizational harm can result from it. In this case there is no reason to believe that any harm was done.
A smarter policy would be to give the employee a warning and move on. Intel chose the stupid route. And, since they are one of the primary drivers of American tech leadership, I find this troubling. Hopefully Apple's transition to using A series processors in its laptops goes well and quickly...
Was she fired? Oh wait, she's female. I bet we don't even get her name....
Then don't hire females? That would solve the issue instantly. Oh the wage gap myth....
Men are getting closer and closer to being punished for sex in general. Don't be surprised if sex becomes illegal for men if they don't get up and do something about this crap.
Just be professional around everyone and keep your social life and your work life separate. If you want a date join a dating site, don't go prowling around the office.