I've been trying to come up to speed on HP's decision to hire Mark Hurd, because I know very little about him. But after reading the stuff below, I question whether or not they made the right decision.
His name is Mark Hurd, 48, an executive whose management style and personality traits stand in stark contrast to ousted HP CEO Carly Fiorina. While she was a "celebrity CEO" known for her sales and marketing flair, Hurd is a low-profile, no-nonsense operations whiz. While many at HP felt Fiorina didn't mix enough with the troops, Hurd is known to walk the halls chatting with employees as he goes to get coffee. "He's not in some ivory tower," says an NCR colleague.
I'm not knocking them for picking someone who is great at execution. I think that is the single biggest failing of most business executives, yet the most important aspect of running a company. But notice that the article portrays Hurd as the opposite of Fiorina. Given that I just wrote about cognitive biases and how business people don't embrace them, I wonder if we are seeing a contrast effect. Did Fiorna leave such a bad taste in their mouths that the board went too far the other way and picked her polar opposite? Perhaps they really needed someone with all her qualities who was simply willing to delegate more and give up some control. I don't know. I'm just pointing out that based on what I've read, I think their is a high probability that they over-corrected their mistake. (Of course, maybe I'm mis-estimating the probability and suffering from base rate neglect!)