Android, Rubin, and the Google Management Circle
March 20, 2013
I read “Disconnect: Why Andy Rubin and Android Called It Quits.” I think the write up tells a great story. A human is an android. Now the human wants to turn his android talents to robots. A movie in the making.
I also noted this quote which I assume is spot on:
“I love working with Andy because he’s brilliant at setting big goals for the seemingly impossible – and then mobilizing small teams to achieve them,” Urs Hölzle, senior vice president of infrastructure at Google, said in a statement to The Verge. “He’s a great talent, very inspiring. I’m not sure anyone else could have made Android happen.” But Rubin was unwilling or unable to make big industry partnerships that could turn Android into a moneymaker for Google. While Samsung got rich off shipping phones built on Android, Google’s brand faded into the background and its influence was chipped away. “Andy is a solo artist who likes to run in a direction and ignore everyone else,” says one mobile industry executive who’s worked with Rubin. “When Android grew to a certain size and required interaction, collaboration and partnership both inside and outside of Google, he became frustrated and incapable of managing the business. Android has outgrown Andy and honestly, I don’t think he knows where to take it next.”
I read this with some interest because there are three issues bubbling under the surface of these snappy sentences.
First, Google has a management mafia. Some folks fit in; others do not. The ones who do not get an opportunity to find their future with robots or Yahoo. There are some similarities in the challenges too.
Second, the folks moving to the “consolidation” and “monetization” phase of Google’s game plan are not too keen on coming in second. Whether the threat is Apple or Samsung, some zip is needed. Zeal is good. Antipathy toward certain business practices can be helpful as well. Note that these skills do not require “mobile sensitivity.”
Third, the controlled chaos of Google is now becoming a fascinating feudal system. There are workers and their are leaders. Then there are the inner circle of managers who have one mission: keep those revenues going up. The inner circle, in my opinion, is triggering the hiring of “older stars” like certain university researchers and buying companies for “talent.” The idea is easy for me to understand. The existing workers are not able to make the leaps required to pump up those numbers, curtail escalating costs, and knock down pesky competitors.
Just my viewpoint. Quack.
Stephen E Arnold, March 20, 2013
Comments
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
