Sounds like a similar experience I experienced while working at Maxim. In about 20 years in the business, four semiconductor companies, Maxim had the worse infrastructure, most backstabbing mid-level management, and highly political environment. I have not seen this much brown-nosing, arrogance/hubris, and self-serving attitude in other working environments. It seem that most people were always scared and feared someone else; nice place. I'm not sure why people would work for a CEO who lined his pockets first (with a approval of a rubber stamp board) and lied to the employees at a regular basis. Linear Technology's Robert Swanson exuded integrity because he demanded as much from himself as he did with his employees, while John F. Gifford played favorites and pitted people against each other. Nice.
Stealth, replying after taking time out for a Si Physics exam, Tunc and I reviewed the paper trail in his office. What precisely is your definition of "directly involved"?
In all fairness, what I don't know is the depth of Tunc's involvement in the underlying intrigue: whether its 3 or 8 on a scale of 10. PS conspired with someone outside my department; "... and then I'll ask him to leave. But, he's been corresponding with him (Jack). We need to figure out a way to get this past him." The identity of this individual is an open topic.
From an investment perspective, the issue is; What would the business impact have been if political will had succeeded in pushing the new-products in question to market in an unmarketable state and how does this reflect on the integrity and business judgement of those involved? Certain persons would have received their bonuses. On the other hand, the products would have generated weak revenue and failed to yield a good return on the development investment. Furthermore, the designers wouldn't have learned from their mistakes and grown in sophistication of skills for implementing the next generation of products.
How history played out is that the products were forced back into redesign. Design experience gained while fixing a first product contributed to fixes to the MAX863 and the other product. The MAX863 was designed into several high volume strategic accounts by me and LS. Lessons learned contribited to design of a new generation of products, some of which became dominant products in their niche. Years later, when faced with competing against my earlier Maxim work from National the customer feedback as to why they preferred the Maxim part over the fancy National part with great specs was; "It works like a tank". They were right! Comparatively, the National part was a quirky piece of s#!t.
Maybe you should look up the word disingenuous. I meant every word.
I do not doubt what you say happened to you at Maxim - I have never worked at a place that was such a hotbed for politics and backstabbing. I only doubt that Tunc was directly involved, or, if he was, he was not in possession of accurate information regarding your case.
As for your last statement, I could not agree more, except that I thought that you stated, categorically, that Tunc was not a "founder."
More disingenuous baloney, Stealth?
Tunc was personally involved in the matter. He is high on my list of suspects for the "Fourth Man" that PS schemed with to destroy my career but I will probably never know with certainty.
Efforts to slip defective products past me after adoption of Jack's bonus plan included intimidation; "There is politics. If you fail the MAX863, your termination will be arranged" (PC), and falsification of lab results.
In the latter case, representatives from Tunc's department brought me into the design lab and attempted to deceive me into signing off on release of a certain product by falsely claiming that internal EMI triggered instability was caused by board layout and had been fixed though layout changes. What they really did was to find a very narrow supply voltage range where the pre-production Si stopped oscillating for the demonstration. As I suspected this immediately, my first response after reviewing the demonstration was to make them sweep the supply voltage across the rated operating range.
Tunc and CT responded by damaging me with false charges of delaying the MAX863 datasheet, which I refuted by presenting my paper trail to them face-to-face. At that time, draft datasheets were circulated between the reviewers with signed and dated coversheets. So, it was easy to demonstrate that my portion of the work was completed on time.
My point, in the context of the recent effort to award management above-market stock benefits, is that there appears to be a behavior pattern of gaming the system for personal enrichment at the expense of the company. This is not the behavior of a "founder" with a personal, psychological stake in the success of the company. I had hoped better of Tunc but he has chosen his path.
None of what I said was disingenuous, nor do I see how it could possibly be interpreted as "warped." Am I not allowed to post an opinion here?
I do not doubt the validity of your complaints, although you might ask yourself why the same issues seem to follow you around wherever you go, including your stint at Home Depot!
I am only suggesting that your problems at Maxim probably involved various managers under Tunc and not Tunc himself. Isn't that an accurate depiction? How many personal audiences did you have with Tunc in which he complained about something you were doing?
It is more likely that ambitious, unqualified, scheming managers (or even co-workers) jockeyed to take credit for what you were doing, or took offense at whatever you tried to do to prevent defective parts from going into production, even if it was only to protect their bonus.
Stealth, from your warped and disingenuous reply, I can only wonder what ulterior motives drive your twisted little mind.
Personal problem? Identifying and reporting defects in pre-production silicon was the job I was paid to do.
Pushing defective products to market for bonuses is bad for business.
Ultimately its an issue of integrity and business judgement.
Did Jack have a beard? LOL!
If you want to pick nits, Jack was THE founder - he brought who he needed with him to do the dirty work.
No offense, but your issue with Tunc sounds like a personal problem. My dealings with Tunc were all positive - the problem came with his underlings who were all jockeying for power and influence at any expense.
I suspect that this was actually the root of your problem as well.
"Who would you consider a founder?"
What would you consider a beard?
The founders include Bingham, Fullagar,...etc. Tunc was not among them in the photo. Nor is he of the same stature of character and intellect.
The impression on my side of the fence is that Tunc played a role in the effort to wreck my career to game Jack's new-product bonus system. Pushing defective products to market for "first Si works" bonuses is bad for business. As long as this impression remains, Tunc fails to command my respect.
"My recollection" does not justify a comment like "No, he is not," does it?
Also, who would you consider a founder? Only the first five or six that came over from Intersil, or anyone who started in the first month?