Putting aside the negativity and history, if YOU were given the keys to netapp and 12 months to improve things, what exactly is the magic plan? It seems to me no matter what the leadership says or does, there is aloud push back, often vitriolic. Seems a bit harsh and no-win scenario for them. The reality is that the storage business destroys empires and that cloud is but a flash in the pan and temporary fantasy. Maybe a pivot into selling managed on-prem? Companies want to outsource their compute, but they want more control, security and to be independent. I personally think netapp will be fine and come out the other end of the cloud/on-prem random fashion toggle just fine. But yeah expect more layoffs before the storm passes I reckon.
19 replies (most recent on top)
There are two reasons why NetApp has an abysmal track record in making acquisitions successful since the early 2000s:
- As others have mentioned, NIH syndrome. Everything has always revolved around Data ONTAP, and always will.
- What I referenced about the average tenure of an SVP. An SVP acquires a startup, and leaves shortly thereafter. A new one comes in and says, "What's this?" and offers no support so it withers. Rinse and repeat.
No leadership continuity means that strategies get abandoned with the next VP that comes in. Remember, there's only so much you can do as a VP in the years you have at NetApp to get the stock price up. The founders of the startups probably benefit but the rank and file who become NetApp employees end up getting shafted.
on a rocket ship.
... to where, pray tell? Netapp is like a ship with a running engine; going on pure inertia and doomed to stop ... soon.
The problem is the "not WAFL, not relevant" mindset.
If it was me, I'd fire (AKA layoff) a lot of leadership. They tried. It didn't work. Time for something else. There's plenty of good engineers at netapp, but management is just poor... this has been going on for YEARS and is bringing the company down. The verizon/novell vultures continue to eat another roadkill. If all the good engineers had good management, this company would be on a rocket ship. These engineers aren't allowed into leadership roles because of politics and favoritism. They are treated like blue collar workers...netapp rather get someone with a nice fake resume and an MBA to be in charge than someone who knows the technology and company they worked at many years.
It is inexcusable how netapp buys companies like solidfire and spot, then run them down, laying them off and discontinuing the offering. WHY did we buy these companies just to delete them?
Again...leadership is just plain junk at netapp. It's a sad story because years back many people liked their filer and still do. The old days were was very different than today. Many have moved on past netapp. It's a shame because this storage company has so much potential if leadership was better.
Netapp is just lucky that companies need storage but they will die out soon like Novell Networks and most of their 90s counterparts did years ago.
Leave before the market gets so tight no hiring will happen until the current recession is finished
I mean, think about it - the average tenure of an SVP in Silicon Valley is probably 2-3 years. To implement a truly innovative strategy takes investments that span twice that. Even if you figure you're going to actually last your full 4 year vesting period, the likelihood of "getting credit" for something that takes 4-5 years is nil so every decision is based on what is going to keep the stock price up for one more quarter. One more vesting period.
Most executives come in and their results for the next 2 years are pretty much built on work done by everyone that came before them. When they leave, the next person comes in, etc. But after a series of 2-3 year stints, the company strategy is just a mish-mash of random ideas by the last "smartest guy in the room" who passed through the halls. This is why it takes a half dozen of these cycles to destroy innovative companies. It's like renters coming in and trashing the place. After enough of them, the company isn't recognizable.
You can bi--h about the Jobs', Musks, and Bezos' of the world but there is a reason why they built the most valuable companies on the planet. A) They're smart, B) they don't tolerate bullsh*tters, and C) they make decisions quickly, even if they're not always right because they understand the important of iteration.
Here are 5 easy questions you can use to grade your boss. Most will fail.
- How quickly can they make their own decisions vs "run it up the flag pole?"
- How much time to they spend with their boss vs you?
- Could they explain what you do and what makes you good or bad at it?
- How good are they at avoiding accountability when things don't turn out as planned?
- Can they articulate your company and group strategy and vision in a way you can understand it?
Cloud ki-led NetApp 20 years ago they just didn't know it. Since then, just like most companies past their prime, the company has been used as a stepping stone by careerists who are feasting on the dying carcass like parasites. I was at Brocade and HPE in their golden eras and saw their similar decline. Executive after executive whose best skill is self-promotion carving millions out of the company and leaving the company worse off when they leave, not better. How can you actually master anything when you switch jobs every 2-3 years? There are only a handful of real product innovators at any company, but most executives couldn't even tell you who they are much less what they do.
This is a ridiculous question given the forum is supposed to be about layoffs. That being said there is no magic bullet. You could have asked the same question at SUN years ago when Jonathan Schwartz presided over its decline. They had better products and market share than NetApp has ever had but eventually the industry passes you by.
The question you should be asking is if you're an employee are you going to ride the ship to the bottom, waiting until your tapped on the shoulder ..... Or be smart and leave for a company that has growth in it's future.
BTW I wouldn't put it past management to use this forum for better ideas than they can come up with themselves. They troll this board regularly to shut down negative feedback.
Seems like if another company acquired us then they could use the technology- which is really ontap. Not sure what else is salvageable.
Fix the comp plan. Fire people who think we’re a storage company in the early 2000s. The ride is over. Adapt or leave. If you want things to be like they were at netapp years ago build a time machine.
Consider releasing individuals who have been in engineering, management, or comparable positions for more than 20+ years and are no longer making an active contribution. In the test group, some people are running redundant tests, while others are only conducting regression tests. It is worthwhile to evaluate if their roles are still required in light of the capabilities of modern processes and tools. Consider getting rid of them and opening up opportunities for new talent acquired through acquisitions to introduce fresh perspectives and innovative ideas.
NetApp has talent - both old and new.
The issue is lack of direction and fractured r&d, both problems are coming straight from the top, but go all the way through to middle management.
The solutions:
- Properly delineate product line - ontap has s3, but we also have storage grid, whats the difference between eseries and aff ontap? Teach marketing and sales the differences so they can market and sell properly. Get rid of overlapping functionality.
- Build 1 management plane with 1 consistent api language, dont need 10 competing UIs or inconsistent api terminology across products (eseries management is nothing like ontap)
- Cloud is ok to branch into but shouldnt be everything (we are a storage company not a cloud company but things like snap mirror to s3 or virtualized ontap running in hyperscalers provide value)
- Undo everything Anthony did (bye bye spot)
- Get rid of harv
- Get rid of gk
When acquiring companies, it's essential to have a clear plan in place and assemble a team of exceptional technical directors, sales, and marketing professionals who are adept at promoting new products beyond their comfort zone. The talent pool in these companies is outstanding, surpassing even the core engineers of ONTAP, who are often reluctant to embrace novel concepts. Technical directors who only understand ONTAP and panic during acquisitions due to their lack of understanding of future prospects should be replaced. Relying solely on ONTAP and veterans is what has led us to our current situation. Therefore, we must be open to new ideas and adopt a learning mindset. Let go of the know-it-all mentality and embrace the unique offerings of these newer companies. NetApp could benefit from a refresh and the addition of a new generation of talent.
- ) Rollback all the bullsh-t acquisitions (Spot.io, Solidfire, Instaclustr, CloudChecker). The reasons given were (what do we do with all our excess capital.
- ) Stop this bullsh-t 'Switch to the Cloud' stiff. NetApp is known for one thing in the industry and that is STORAGE.
- ) Being back On-Premise
- ) Fire GEORGE, he's a worthless WOKE CEO.
- ) Get rid of the security department and replace them with an MSP. They provide NO VALUE, immense overhead and the VPs leading them are total d-mba$$Es..
- ) Beat Bill Miller with a stick. We all know he's in Marketing now but he and his arrogant ways cannibalize IT.
- ) Get rid of Debra McCowan. She is a spineless bi--h that needs to move on.
- ) Get a real CFO and send Mike Berry away to tell the world what a wonderful job he did mixing in areas that are not apart of his department.
My grand idea: become a cloud provider (serious!)
I foresee another company acquiring NetApp and cutting all of the R&D / low ROI products. Mature products like ONTAP offerings will stay and be maintained with minor fixes and innovations.
One person trying to save a failing product line isn't going to do jack sh-t. So if I was in a leadership position, I would maximize my earnings and use my position as fuel for my new position elsewhere.
Fixing is beyond the realm. Storage is now a commodity. You have a bag of features and different vendors patch those features together and call it their product. Ultimately they all look the same albeit with different shades of lipstick and hair applied.
Enterprise storage is saturated and not growing. It's still needed because enterprises still need reliable, resilient and highly-available storage. But that sector isn't growing. What is growing is the hyperscallers, and they roll their own with cheap commodity cr-p replicated N ways.
Netapp can and will "continue" but it doesn't need new products and certainly doesn't need all the R&D staff. Same with Sales and Marketing.
You can fill in the dots for yourself.
I would get rid of the enormous middle management, by taking a look at the no. of lines of code written, no.of Confluence kb articles written, no. of code reviews received, and code reviews given - just like the way I was removed from the company.
Essentially, will do Elon Musk on the company and bring the overall strength on par with Pure - increase the pay enormously and will then conduct hunger games.
have another company acquire us and once they acquire us -
get rid of leadership the MS, IBM - not good. Get a new leader instead of GK
Same old WetNap. Layoff, rinse, repeat.