We need meaningful insight on this board. 9,600 employees seem relatively silent. Is there a rewarding career being offered at ADI or are you just clocking time looking for something better?
What is the corp. attitude like: positive or negative? How is current environment today versus past years?
Is there a positive tone that ADI is on the right path? How does the future look? Is the technology 2nd best? Do you really plan to retire based on your long-term investment in this stock? Considering the fall in market value, do you view this as temporary or will the trend continue? Real investors want to know.
If you are negative, what is a better alternative? Ex-employees can gripe too but who is sorry to leave? Need to get some balance. Looks like a good entry point.
here you have a technology company run by non technology people, top to bottom. And please don't say, "but so and so has a degree in whatever, it means nothing. Going from founder to the current CEO was glaring. This means the management makes decisions based on bottom line, quarter report basis. You will never grow a technical company this way. Although there are technical "vice presidents", there is no technical chain. the company grew under the current CEO, but comparing ADI's stock with its competitors, we see this was just the general market growth. Product lines are kept isolated, both in the information going up and down. Top managers have no real idea what's going on in the ranks and same going up. big change in stock will never occur without a big change in how the co is managed. IMHO adi is squandering its technical lead...
actually of all the companies in the valley, adi has the most technical management, starting with Stata and Fishman and down to Counts, most of them are very technical and were excellent engineers in their days
Your assertion is incorrect, Fishman is a EE from CCNY, so is most of the staff, save for CFO, etc, Indeed technical folks are highly valued. Further more, most of the marketing and sales folks are also EE's. This fact of course has no bearing on communications.Your argument here is invalid. (and no, I am not an ADI employee!)
I worked on the Norwood campus in marketing. Was laid off this past Summer. Some great people there. Skeleton crew. Management not clear about future or direction. Lot of good talent long gone. Golden era over.
I have yet to read one post that would encourage anyone to invest in this company. I saved a lot of money by taking a wait and see stance on ADI. The stock has done nothing but drop. Today was very telling and tonight's late story certainly makes you wonder if the company is run for the benefit of the shareholders, or do the shareholders supply the money to make the insiders rich? Not bad pay to run the stock into the ground.
"Analog Devices Inc.'s President and Chief Executive Jerald G. Fishman received compensation the company valued at about $9.7 million in fiscal 2007, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing on Friday."
You make an interesting observation, but, at the end of the day, ADI is at a crucial inflection point. What is now left is the core of its business (analog), with some std. DSP. ADI lost alot of ground in the analog space over the past several yrs.(as measured by market share in this space, since the "high end analog" is a mythical term with no 2 consistant definition). The investment in Power Mgmt, is no answer either since it is the most competitive segment second to commodity linear. A win here will not help the gross margins, since it is somewhere in the low 60s (ISIL, NSM). So... it is not clear what happens now, the only thing that is clear to me is that Fishman who is a "mechanic" capable of implementing a strategy, NOT defineing one, is the wrong guy to lead this co. This enourmous pay package is a reward for failur, and it is the board that bears the responsibiliy here.
Good ole boy behavior is VERY VALUABLE for individual
survival in a competitive culture where the SUPERVISORS
have few performance metrics imposed on them.......
design review on time? the supervisor is not responsible
design taped out on time? supervisor not responsible
design worked first pass? supervisor will take credit!!!
design generates $15M a year, after first 2 years of
history? supervisor will take credit!!! and want huge bonus.
So..............how to reward a supervisor???
As Scott Adams stated in his Dilbert
"Engineers need skills............but engineering managers
need no skills (other than brownnosing)"
How to grow useful technology supervisors, instead of
the parasitic hangers-on network that exists???
The WFMI story is interesting and entertaining. It certainly illustrates one of the reasons why a public company would want to discourage message board posts by employees. The potential for market manipulation and leakage of insider information is a source of legal risk.
On the other hand, the underlying principle behind the insider trading issue is an unfair advantage gained through acquisition of knowledge unavailable to other investors. If the information is truthful facts or honest subjective opinion, and if the information is posted in a public forum available to all investors, does this principle still apply? Blogs and message boards are a new phenomenon and it will be interesting to see how the laws and legal precedence regulating them evolve over time.
Of course, there is also the understandable consideration that companies desire a chance to fix issues before having their dirty laundry aired in public. However, discretion is all too often twisted into a license to continue foolish behaviors at the expense of the investors.
For an employee, posts are also risky as its all too easy for a corporate goon to call and say; "I'm so-and-so and forgot my email password...". The practice is called "pretexting". Pretexting is more widespread than the press is aware of and trackable through technical means.
From the outside, ADI is hard to read. I hear good things and bad and not a lot of either. Is ADI a good investment, supplier or employer? I dunno. Like everywhere else, it probably varies from one manager and internal business group to the next. I get curious and poke at ADI suspiciously from time to time but never seriously for lack of information.
I'm neither an ADI employee or ex but I am a veteran of the analog IC industry with prior business experience running a couple of startups.
These are my observations looking in from the outside. I remember when distributors were pressured to drop Maxim as a condition for continuing business with ADI in the 90's. This anti-competitive stunt came across as a cheap substitute for sound tactical execution. From 1999-2003, I hand-carried my resume to ADI 5 times and received no reply. Frankly, like many analog engineers I'm an educated individual with strong independent thinking skills and a propensity to make enemies of mediocre middle managers who resent tough questions. The silence implied that ADI filters for docile people who quietly do what they're told without thinking and values these qualities above technical or business prowess. Most recently, there have been rumors on the street of resignations and turnover but nothing specific. ADI is a company I view warily and with suspicion -its not high on my list of potential employers.
I will be surprised if you get a volume of replies. As a company strays from the right path, there are usually a few passionate people who speak up in the beginning. These are quickly silenced as "loud" and "disgruntled". The rest quickly learn the art of silence. They have children to feed and mortgages to pay.
If you really want to feel the pulse of your company, you need to implement bidirectional reviews in which managers at every level are also reviewed anonymously by their employees. A fundamental flaw that I've encountered repeatedly is that the unilateral review business methods adopted by industry are too easily subverted by cliques of middle managers for evading accountability. Its too easy for middle managers to collude and form political principalities for keeping their superiors out-of-touch. Implementing bidirectional reviews will correct this flaw and put you back in touch with your company again.
Ignoring the backdating issue, Maxim is a pretty good example of what can happen when lapses in accountability allow cliques of middle managers to dissinform their superiors. Gifford lost touch and now he's out.
The most intelligent people I have worked with have never
had to announce how educated they are. It does seem that you
are bitter about the 5 time strike out at ADI.Why you would
list them as not high on you list for potential employers
when you are really not on the list at all.
Are we going for number 6?
You ability to make enemies so quickly due to you enormous ego and high value you set for yourself would make you
a undesirable candidate for any company.
read your post with interest. can't help conclude that you are bitter for not gaining employment at ADI. your sweeping generalities sound like an HBS paper rather than practical experience. Your Maxim/distribution comment is a valid example (right or wrong) of the common practice in that time frame (you would have known that if you had the experience). In short, you do not offer any insight into the question.
ADI did indeed put in place bi-directional reviews in the late 90's. However, sr. managers would ask middle managers staff to submit their reviews directly to the sr. managers. Or at least that is what happened in my case. Needless to say I did not complete the review form on my manager. I had the distinct feeling that the sr. marketing director disliked the middle manager and was looking for ammunition to use against him. Who needs that b.s.!!
The good ole boys network will die when Jerry is gone and only then. So, in other words it'll be in place until the end of this company as we know it today.
I haven't worked there in years but I know for a fact that they have tried to intimidate employees to keep them off of this message board. Another example of dynamic leadership.