Here's the thing....

"The only people for me are the mad ones, the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time, the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn, like fabulous yellow roman candles exploding like spiders across the stars..."-Jack Kerouac

Sunday, September 24, 2006

HP: Somewhat of a right decision (Blog #4)

So, the Chairman of HP is gone now, and is not resigning in January as had been previously planned. She had been trying to plug a media leak that had been going on from the boardroom to print, but had also been going about it unethically.

So, when is the line crossed? I think that the intention there was good, but the way that it was done was entirely unethical. Obviously, things that go on in the boardroom are private. If leaked, however, a PR person would be there addressing the media and stating its point of view, making sure that it was published right along the "leak". I don't even think the investigation was wrong, because a company's confidentiality is in most contracts. However, the extent that she authorized was wrong, even if she claims that she did not know the extreme that the investigators went to.

"Determined to protect confidential board discussions, Dunn hired investigators who impersonated board members, employees and journalists to obtain their phone records. The detectives also spied on an HP director and concocted an e-mail sting to dupe a reporter for CNet Networks Inc.'s, an online technology site." Taken from the news article link above, this is an account of the extent that Pattie Dunn went to to figure out who was leaking information to the press.

The chairmanship will now be passed to the CEO, Mark Hurd. He is not on the list of people that will currently be prosecueted. However, the article states that he was the one that authorized the email sting, but that he did not authorize the software used to trace the reporterts computer. My question to Mr. Hurd is how he actually expected them to conduct the email "STING" if there was no trace used? Companies trace their employees computers all the time. In my opinion, it seems to be a lame attempt to cover up his part in the scandal. He did admit to attending a meeting about the investigations, but did not read the report that gave the leaker's identity and details of the investigation.

So, Mr. Hurd, what kind of CEO and now new chairmain will you make if you dont know exactly what is going on? Why not read a report that states all of this information? You are the CEO of Hewlett-Packard, which is a humongous computer company. Come on! I smell something very sneaky that is going on.

"Two other HP employees who played pivotal roles in the scandal are also being let go, according to a person familiar with the matter. They are Kevin Hunsaker, HP's chief ethics officer, and Anthony Gentilucci, who manages HP's global investigations unit in Boston". This quote was said by a person who did not want to be identified because the terms of their departure were still being negociated. Is that even ethical for this "person" to do that? He could have just said two other officers are being let go.

However, HP did make the correct move in letting go the ethics person and the manager of the investigation unit. These are two people that were heavily involved in the scandal.

Honestly, I think they should have just revamped the board. Is this plausible? No. Are there many "computer experts" out in the field? Yes. It doesn't make it plausible, though.


Post a Comment

<< Home