A company overtaken by the pace of change
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.NO ONE doubted that turning round the world's largest capital goods manufacturer would take time. For John Akers, that time ran out yesterday, writes Larry Black.
The crisis that IBM faces today was barely on the horizon in 1985 when Mr Akers became chief executive. The huge company dominated almost every aspect of business computing and its vast spending on research and development, financed by steady profits from its mainframe business, seemed to guarantee its continued success.
But change came fast to the industry, as feverish competition transformed hardware manufacturing into a commodity business. Power and profitability shifted to nimbler companies that had either established monopolies in key niches - like Intel in semiconductor chips - or mastered the software and service aspects of information technologies, like Microsoft and Apple.
Mr Akers, who took office attempting to undo the decentralising efforts of his predecessor, himself started shedding bureaucracy and employees as early as 1987. But sales of mainframes - which still accounted for half IBM's profits as recently as 1990 - collapsed far sooner than anyone predicted, sweeping away the company's financial cushion.
Mr Akers' appeals for market responsiveness and productivity went largely unheeded among managers accustomed to dictating to customers, suppliers and competitors from a position of strength. His decision to break the company into 13 semi-autonomous units seems in hindsight to have been inevitable, and his successor is expected to spin off several divisions as stand-alone firms.
According to Richard Shaffer of Technology Partners, a consulting group: 'IBM almost always has the right idea. It just moves too slowly.'
(Photograph omitted)
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments