Bob Mansfield agreed to 2-year deal at Apple because of Scott Forstall's ouster - report
Bob Mansfield only agreed to take on the new position of senior vice president of Technologies at Apple after the company decided to part ways with its former iOS chief, Scott Forstall, according to a new report. Unnamed sources who spoke with John Paczkowski of All Things D indicated that Mansfield agreed to a two-year contract with Apple thanks, in part, to the ouster of Forstall. One person said the timing of Mansfield's return was "not coincidental." It's been a strange few months for Mansfield's tenure at Apple, as the longtime executive announced in June that he would retire from the company. But just a month later, Apple announced that Mansfield would stay in an advisory role to CEO Tim Cook. Cook allegedly persuaded Mansfield to stay by offering him a big payday. The Apple chief executive "nearly witnessed an insurrection" after Mansfield retired and his replacement, Dan Riccio, was announced, sources told Bloomberg last month.
Apple's Bob Mansfield. | Source: Apple
Employees at Apple reportedly felt that Riccio was "unprepared for the magnitude of the role." To keep Mansfield at Apple, Cook was said to have offered him around $2 million per month in cash and stock. But even with that payday, Mansfield was still at Apple in an advisory role only, until this week, when Apple announced that Forstall would be leaving the company. Forstall was a forceful presence at Apple that was said to have rubbed some employees the wrong way, and apparently Mansfield was among those. "Mansfield was not a fan of Forstall's confrontational management style, and sources said he generality tried to avoid the iOS exec," Paczkowski wrote, adding that Mansfield would only meet with Forstall "if Cook was present to mediate." One source reportedly said that Mansfield was "much more willing to commit two more years once he knew (Forstall) was on his way out." Mansfield is now in charge of Apple's new Technologies division, which combines all of Apple's wireless teams across the company in one organization. The group will also include Apple's semiconductor teams, which the company says has "ambitious plans for the future."
Comments
" To keep Mansfield at Apple, Cook was said to have offered him around $2 million per month in cash and stock."
I hope most of that is in stock, or he'll need a lot of help just getting that much cash to the bank safely. "Here comes Mansfield with his weekly satchel stuffed with hundred dollar bills; let's get him!"
By taking sides and a strong position, Cook is making a big gamble.
For the sake of Apple, I hope he is right. Regardless of his shortcomings, Forstall was a huge contributor and Jobs felt strongly enough to keep him around.
"Paczkowski wrote, adding that Mansfield would only meet with Mansfield "if Cook was present to mediate."
Poor Mansfield, must be difficult to have multiple personalities unwilling to work together! They should add some mental health to his "retirement" package.
The talk that Riccio couldn't handle the job is likely hyped up for the most part.
Mansfields bigger role likely is due to Forstall, but not personality wise as much as the restructure of divisions. This isn't a time to hire out and Mansfield is the best man for the job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider
....Paczkowski wrote, adding that Mansfield would only meet with Mansfield "if Cook was present to mediate."
I understand. I feel the same way. Paxman v Paxman is a bitch. Happens every day.
Apple has invented the Matrix!!!
removed
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant
Conflicts are present in every company. I think the bigger question here is why Tim Cook was not able to keep everyone happy and mediate between both parties as did Jobs.
By taking sides and a strong position, Cook is making a big gamble.
For the sake of Apple, I hope he is right. Regardless of his shortcomings, Forstall was a huge contributor and Jobs felt strongly enough to keep him around.
Cook isn't taking a big gamble at all. He's doing what needs to be done moving forward. Apple needs to have a single arbiter of design, someone with the vision to carry the company's products forward. Forstall wasn't that person, but he thought he was and wanted to be. In short, he was an obstacle that had to be removed. Jony Ive was the right person for that roll, and the only person at Apple who could fill Steve Job's shoes in that regard. Tim Cook simply did the sensible thing that needed to be done. You can't design by committee, and you can't design with competing camps at war.
Quote:
Originally Posted by replicant
Conflicts are present in every company. I think the bigger question here is why Tim Cook was not able to keep everyone happy and mediate between both parties as did Jobs.
How do you know they were happen when Jobs was there? You don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraSPARC
Mansfield would only meet with Mansfield "if Cook was present to mediate."
Apple has invented the Matrix!!!
No, they reinvented it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBillyGoatGruff
removed
Forstall?
Quote:
Originally Posted by winstein2010
You can be forceful and confrontational only if you are the owner of the company.
It's a public company, btw. But yes, I can see you mean Jobs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thadgarrison
"Paczkowski wrote, adding that Mansfield would only meet with Mansfield "if Cook was present to mediate."
Poor Mansfield, must be difficult to have multiple personalities unwilling to work together! They should add some mental health to his "retirement" package.
Why do you seem to be down on Mansfield when it seems to be Scott who was acting like an asshole? There are two solutions to that kind of a situation where one personality is an overbearing asshole ..... either he can try to be more accommodating ...i.e. co-operative, not combative or .... find a work-around .... which is what Bob, not Scott, apparently did. In my books, that makes Bob the adult and Scott the child.
Good point but why is Forstall an obstacle that should be removed only now? That is my question and my point is that this situation also speaks to Cook's management abilities as well.
Is Forstall easy to work with? Probably not. But is he the best person to lead iOS development? Most likely since he started it. Cook could have named Ive as the head of UI and the "arbiter of design" while keeping Forstall as head of iOS development. UI/UX design is not the same thing as software development. Forstall was a developer. I agree that you can't design with competing camps at war but as the leader your role is to make sure people work together and if they don't then you will have the final decision.
The iPhones and iPads have shown what they can do. And with the stronger ARM chips making them more powerful and capable, it will be interesting to see the progress.
BUT
Those ARM chips will be available to Apple's competitors, so it will be hard for them to stay ahead of the pack.
What needs to happen is Apple will have to come up with the next great thing. And with no spies from Google that will help.
But everyone at Apple will have to colaborate for that.