Want to know why Stephen Elop lost out on the Microsoft CEO position?

Want to know why Stephen Elop lost out on the Microsoft CEO position?
For a while, the rumors made it sound like Nokia's Stephen Elop had the inside track when it came to securing the Microsoft CEO position following the acquisition of Nokia. But, over time Elop fell out of favor for the position, and eventually Microsoft's vice president of the Cloud and Enterprise group, Satya Nadella was chosen to be the new CEO. Now, we're getting an idea why.

The information isn't exactly official, but comes from long-time Microsoft reporter Mary Jo Foley, so it is fairly reputable. Essentially, it sounds like Elop was simply too controversial a figure. The first bit of trouble surrounded Elop's exit from Nokia as part of the Microsoft acquisition. Elop presided over Nokia as it dropped precipitously in mobile market share; so, when word came out that he would be receiving a $25 million exit fee. Not surprisingly, this deal enraged the Finnish public because it was designed like a U.S. CEO contract, not a standard Finnish one, which wouldn't have included such a large exit fee.

As if that wasn't enough, Elop's candidacy essentially came to an end when news came out that he was in favor of selling off both the Bing and Xbox divisions of Microsoft. Microsoft's management has said that the company should not abandon its consumer properties, so Elop's vision just didn't mesh with the direction Microsoft wanted to take. 

source: ZDNet

FEATURED VIDEO

43 Comments

1. aayupanday

Posts: 582; Member since: Jun 28, 2012

Elop hurt Nokia badly... Nokia could've easily jumped the ship to Android years ago if he wasn't there...

3. Finalflash

Posts: 4063; Member since: Jul 23, 2013

Yea, but hey, hindsight is 20/20. Some MS fanboys still think WP was the proper route.

7. cdgoin

Posts: 614; Member since: Jul 28, 2010

It was over android.. they would just be another Android OEM..

13. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

I doubt Nokia would ever "just be another...", their quality is too good for that. Could they be better than Samsung if they had gone the Android route? Possibly. Another thing to consider, if Nokia had gone Android, Samsung would have had to step up their game big time in order to compete. The playing field would be much different (and better) if that would have been the case.

33. Mittal

Posts: 494; Member since: Dec 14, 2011

Agree fully to that, but Android world seems to be happy currently anyways. I feel its good for overall competition that Nokia went with Windows as it has turned it into the 3rd serious OS out there. It would have been much tougher for Windows otherwise... and seeing that Windows share is increasing steadily, Nokia will be a comfortable king in that space But yes, had Nokia gone with both Android/Windows like Sammy and HTC, the mobile share space would have been VERY diffferent right now

41. Sonny_09

Posts: 49; Member since: May 24, 2013

Yes, I agree. Their differentiation in camera and HERE navigation would surely offer them an advantage over the other competitors. Not to mention their solid build quality. It serve that Elop well that other candidate gets to be CEO of Microsoft.

30. whysoserious

Posts: 318; Member since: Jul 20, 2012

An android smartphone with THE BEST camera that could ever ever be possibly throw on it? Yeah it will probably be just another android oem. Just by imagining it already gives me the goosebump.

10. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

and some droid fans think that if Nokia chose droid they would be #1 and not Samsung.... As you state hindsight, yet it seems that only droid fans lack the idea that droid was not gaurnteed. The only thing we can do is speculate, as it stands without MS at this time being, Nokia was in a very bad spot, even before MS came in. Not only that, what cellphone company is number 1 by providing a stock android experience? None, so they would still be pumping money into software, MS allieviated that for them to some extent over droid, IMO.

29. alterecho

Posts: 1106; Member since: Feb 23, 2012

Not as bad as after MS/Elop came in.

38. PhoneLuver

Posts: 481; Member since: Jul 05, 2010

Quite frankly Elop's very lucky to have a job at Microsoft. I don't know which company would hire Elop after his disastrous tenure at Nokia. His decisions basically caused the downfall of the number one Cellphone OEM in the world!

6. cdgoin

Posts: 614; Member since: Jul 28, 2010

Nah.. improving Symbian would have been better. Symbian for a while was larger than iPhone and Android. But they were too slow in improving it.

9. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

and the updates were lacking to what others were providing and cost.

42. Sonny_09

Posts: 49; Member since: May 24, 2013

2011 N8 is still powered by 680Mhz single core processor when the dual-core technology is available for them. Every now and then, they always make wrong mistake bout the internal of their phone. I mean, look at Lumia 1020, it clearly need a quad-core processor, yet they only give it dual core, which is a bit sad actually.

11. Liveitup

Posts: 1798; Member since: Jan 07, 2014

I am at a loss how so individuals who are in tech do not understand why Nokia went with WP its been explained time and time again. Elop did not hurt Nokia Elop saved Nokia, who hurt Nokia was the CEO before Elop who failed to adopt and keep pace with Apple and Android until it was to late. Nokia going with Android could not keep pace with Samsung, they did not have the money to compete with Samsung Elop himself has said this, MS helped out Nokia financially, please to anyone who keep saying the same incorrect thing over and over please do yourself a huge favor and read the "Burning Platform" memo.

14. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

And who wrote that "burning platform" memo? The guy that got a $25 million parachute.

24. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

Agreed Elop actions is now text book example of what not to say if your truly want to save a struggling business entity.

36. Liveitup

Posts: 1798; Member since: Jan 07, 2014

Even if Elop got paid $ 1 billion dollars that does not change the fact that Nokia was in a dire situation, Nokia was in a bad situation before Elop came aboard , that is what the "burning platform" memo is about. Money is unrelated, that came after. Your point about money is misplaced.

39. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Nope, they could have sold just as many, or even a lot more phones if they had gone with Android. Too many pro WP users here think going the MS route was the only option, which is ludicrous. Samsung didn't pick up steam until later on with Android, had Nokia jumped in early on, Samsung would have had a much harder time, possibly even not becoming the top Android OEM. I do agree, Nokia was in desperate shape when Elop took over. Going WP wasn't the only option though.

32. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

Don't be surprised if Elop is ex of MS in a few years. What is he going to do now that he has missed out on the top job? Sell phones? Really?

40. DontHateOnS60

Posts: 872; Member since: Apr 20, 2009

They were worried about protecting their assets (Here being the most important one), and jumping into a market filled with Android phones already. I think they underestimated their brand strength massively though. Everybody knows Nokia around the world and even if others had produced phones with nifty features (Samsung), Nokia's camera prowess would have carried them from nothing to a big time player. I have no doubt that they'd easily be sitting at #2 behind Samsung by now if they went with Google's Android. It's crazy to think that if Nokia had gone to Google's Android, WP may either be dead or struggling to survive, completely changing the company's future outlook.

43. NokiaFTW

Posts: 2072; Member since: Oct 24, 2012

I have always said it and I will say it again: Nokia would have been and is better off being af the top of WP, than playing second fiddle to Samsung in the Android arena.

2. Finalflash

Posts: 4063; Member since: Jul 23, 2013

Didn't he back away from his Xbox and Bing culling rumors? I think he didn't get selected because he's just down right incompetent at running a successful company (unless they need him to run it into the ground).

4. mrblah

Posts: 577; Member since: Jan 22, 2013

Because Elop is too close to flop?

5. tedkord

Posts: 17463; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

In a just world it would be because he ran the last company he helmed into the ground then skipped off with $25 million. But this isn't a just world.

8. elitewolverine

Posts: 5192; Member since: Oct 28, 2013

This happens all the time. Even workers do this, just ask GM how much worker insolvency they had. 92cents of every dollar received went to workers allowing nothing but a deep dark hole that Gov had to bail them out. They had 90% pension packages after retiring. CEO's usually get an exit amount not exit pensions. A CEO's job is not protected under labor act as they are considered except employee's and a bunch of other things. Fair and unjust is for those that think the CEO has full authority, that is yes and no. And they can easily be voted out. If anything Nokia ran themselves into the ground.

12. tedkord

Posts: 17463; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

The CEO is where the buck stops. They damned sure take credit (and financial reward) in good times, they should not be rewarded if they don't lead the company in a positive direction. They can be voted out, but that is rare (especially as they usually stack the board with cronies) and even when they are they are given a golden parachute. In Elop's case, going exclusively WP was his strategy. He brought it to the company, he owns the failure.

15. tedkord

Posts: 17463; Member since: Jun 17, 2009

The CEO is where the buck stops. They damned sure take credit (and financial reward) in good times, they should not be rewarded if they don't lead the company in a positive direction. They can be voted out, but that is rare (especially as they usually stack the board with cronies) and even when they are they are given a golden parachute. When the average CEO makes roughly 360 times the average worker (equivalent to a workers full year salary every day) , what protection is needed? In Elop's case, going exclusively WP was his strategy. He brought it to the company, he owns the failure.

16. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Because Satya Nadella was a superior candidate. Elop can't compete against that Nadella.

18. snowgator

Posts: 3621; Member since: Jan 19, 2011

Thank the Good Lord someone said it. Satya Nadella is sharp, successful at every single stop and project he has had, is enthusiastic about Microsoft, and inspires the people under him to be creative and think smart. He was the right choice. Not that hard to connect these dots.

19. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Indeed. It's been a while since I was excited about MS, but after seeing the interview and reading up on the guy, I'm excited again.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.