I obviously have no idea if he will be good at his job and will hope for the best, but from a distance this is a terrible hire.
Stanford athletics is struggling to find its way in the radically-new and fast-changing environment of college sports, and we've hired a 65 year-old ex-consultant with a spotty and limited corporate history who basically is semi-retired and sits on boards for a living. And is clearly super wealthy so not exactly burning with hunger to grind hours to the extent needed, nor needs to work.
This commentary from a Fortune article about his Nike tenure seems relevant too: "But with Donahoe, [Nike] chose a CEO who lacked any deep knowledge about sneakers and sneaker culture, and no retail experience in stores, leading to the current disaster. He underestimated the importance of partners like Macy’s, DSW and Foot Locker in selling its running shoes. And as a former management consultant, cost-cutting proved to be his go-to tactic, but one that only worsened Nike’s problems."
Put another way, Stanford athletics has a top line problem (revenue), not an expense problem despite some bloat, and is trying to survive in a new, wild west environment. Yet we hired a retirement-age figurehead consultant to turn around the "company." We'll probably see some layoffs in the athletic department, but cutting-edge, outside-the-box and/or transformational changes? I doubt it. And what would he ever know about hiring coaches. I hope I'm wrong, but I kind of hate this hiring.
Stanford athletics is struggling to find its way in the radically-new and fast-changing environment of college sports, and we've hired a 65 year-old ex-consultant with a spotty and limited corporate history who basically is semi-retired and sits on boards for a living. And is clearly super wealthy so not exactly burning with hunger to grind hours to the extent needed, nor needs to work.
This commentary from a Fortune article about his Nike tenure seems relevant too: "But with Donahoe, [Nike] chose a CEO who lacked any deep knowledge about sneakers and sneaker culture, and no retail experience in stores, leading to the current disaster. He underestimated the importance of partners like Macy’s, DSW and Foot Locker in selling its running shoes. And as a former management consultant, cost-cutting proved to be his go-to tactic, but one that only worsened Nike’s problems."
Put another way, Stanford athletics has a top line problem (revenue), not an expense problem despite some bloat, and is trying to survive in a new, wild west environment. Yet we hired a retirement-age figurehead consultant to turn around the "company." We'll probably see some layoffs in the athletic department, but cutting-edge, outside-the-box and/or transformational changes? I doubt it. And what would he ever know about hiring coaches. I hope I'm wrong, but I kind of hate this hiring.