Patricia Dunn, L.I.P.
No, that’s not a typo. It’s L.I.P as in Live in Peace as opposed to R.I.P. Rest in Peace. And that’s what I wish for HP’s beleaguered ex-chairman and ex-board member. But before I get into that, I want to follow up on last week's blog ("Much Ado About the HP Board") and contemplate the so-called “scandal” that continues to rock the company.
Very simply, here’s what puzzles me. George Keyworth, the (now ex-) director who apparently did the leaking—he’s not the one that the press and the politicos are focusing their wrath on. Tom Perkins, the director who pushed Dunn to find the culprit, then pushed back at Dunn when his buddy Keyworth turned out to be the leaker—well, he’s also not on the hot seat either. (In fact, he wasn’t even fired from the board; he quit). The legal beagles at HP, who were kept appraised by Dunn but never made a big stink about her actions—they’re legally free and clear. And CEO Mark Hurd, who apparently knew a fair amount about what was going on—he remains, albeit embarrassed, the home-town hero. But it’s Dunn and Dunn alone who was summarily drawn and quartered and is now facing multiple criminal indictments by the California attorney general. Am I missing something about justice here?
There may be legitimate reasons to criticize Dunn’s overall performance as Chairman of the Board, but that’s not what’s at stake here. Dunn was not doing a Nixonian secret “enemies list” that undermined the integrity and stability of the entire corporation. The fact remains that she was doing the board’s bidding when she approved an investigation to determine who was leaking private information to the press. The directors were very clear: they wanted action on this problem, and they wanted results. Patricia Dunn earnestly tried to “fix” the problem by hiring investigators who used questionable and unethical means to find the culprit. She admitted her poor decisions (unlike Nixon) right away; and yes, she should have been reprimanded, there ought to have been some mea culpas and apoligies, and she should have stepped down from here Chairman position yet remained on the board. In other words, the press shouldn’t be sensationalizing this story and no heads ought to actually roll for it. But if they do roll, why is it only Dunn’s head that’s on the platter? Am I missing something about justice here?
Meanwhile, while all this is happening, Dunn is fighting her third bout with cancer and says she hopes to live to clear her name. I hope she does both. That’s why I say: Patricia Dunn. L.I.P.
Very simply, here’s what puzzles me. George Keyworth, the (now ex-) director who apparently did the leaking—he’s not the one that the press and the politicos are focusing their wrath on. Tom Perkins, the director who pushed Dunn to find the culprit, then pushed back at Dunn when his buddy Keyworth turned out to be the leaker—well, he’s also not on the hot seat either. (In fact, he wasn’t even fired from the board; he quit). The legal beagles at HP, who were kept appraised by Dunn but never made a big stink about her actions—they’re legally free and clear. And CEO Mark Hurd, who apparently knew a fair amount about what was going on—he remains, albeit embarrassed, the home-town hero. But it’s Dunn and Dunn alone who was summarily drawn and quartered and is now facing multiple criminal indictments by the California attorney general. Am I missing something about justice here?
There may be legitimate reasons to criticize Dunn’s overall performance as Chairman of the Board, but that’s not what’s at stake here. Dunn was not doing a Nixonian secret “enemies list” that undermined the integrity and stability of the entire corporation. The fact remains that she was doing the board’s bidding when she approved an investigation to determine who was leaking private information to the press. The directors were very clear: they wanted action on this problem, and they wanted results. Patricia Dunn earnestly tried to “fix” the problem by hiring investigators who used questionable and unethical means to find the culprit. She admitted her poor decisions (unlike Nixon) right away; and yes, she should have been reprimanded, there ought to have been some mea culpas and apoligies, and she should have stepped down from here Chairman position yet remained on the board. In other words, the press shouldn’t be sensationalizing this story and no heads ought to actually roll for it. But if they do roll, why is it only Dunn’s head that’s on the platter? Am I missing something about justice here?
Meanwhile, while all this is happening, Dunn is fighting her third bout with cancer and says she hopes to live to clear her name. I hope she does both. That’s why I say: Patricia Dunn. L.I.P.
posted by Oren Harari at 11:06 AM
1 Comments:
I was "surfing" for some information with regard to Bob Ulrich @ Target (for a somewhat vain purpose since we share the same name) and read you comments with regard to Patricia Dunn. I commend you for you observations and wish more "men" would, at the very least, have look at this situation with an open mind. I likened Patricia Dunn's mission to having your wife fix a problem and if the mission fails you (the guy) are not culpable. Maybe there is something primal in the male mind that triggers denial. (fight or flight or failure…hide behind the women and be safe). What happened to our "industry leaders"?
Over the last 30 years I have witnessed how difficult some male managers have made advancement for women very difficult. My wife has experienced the wrath of the "good ole' boys" club first hand. She has achieved high levels ( Dir. Of Sales, Manager of Retail Sales and VP of Sales) within two 3 corporations. She worked diligently through every assignment to successful conclusions only to be ridiculed and threatened with termination. She sacrificed many personal events for the "good of the company" with the goal of promotion and increased responsibility.
The travel was extensive of the last 25 years and little time was lost with the birth of our children. We have moved 5 times for her advancement. She have managed as many as 25 managers with 400 sales people reporting to them, nationwide. In many cases she has out performed her male counterparts and than chastised for her determination. This does not seen to be an expectable quality in the minds of some men.
Some managers have "boldly" indicated that she was a threat to their position and they than proceeded to increase her workload to a point that she would resign. Fortunately, that never happened. Unfortunately, managers found "just cause" to terminate her employment and we would move on.
The women at the top of their profession have, in most cases, worked harder, longer and more honestly than most of their male counterparts to arrive to the top of their industries. My view of Patricia Dunn and other female executives throughout the country is one of respect. This is not a popular view among a segment of the male gender. But then they have not lived through what my family has. We are stronger through perseverance…the sad part is that my wife "threw in the towel" and is now managing a cosmetic counter at Macy's. She has not given up, her sense of self is strong…I believe that the mental and physical aspects of the experience have taken there toll.
It is apparent that this is a subject that I am passionate about and I sincerely appreciate you allowing me to rant. Rarely, have I had the opportunity to put feeling and beliefs into words. I thank you for that opportunity.
Post a Comment
<< Home