Business Blog: Hoover’s Business Insight Zone

We’d all like to have an easy formula for what makes a good leader. “Hard” skills, or “soft” ones? Big vision, or an eye for details? Sending the company in bold new directions, or making the trains run on time? Et cetera.

Yet we can’t even agree on how to assess the past performance of CEOs whose tenures are matters of historical record. Since I also study history, this doesn’t surprise me — smart historians can’t agree on President Polk, much less leaders closer to the present.

A business case in point: Carly Fiorina. When she became HP’s CEO in 1999, she was hailed for bringing a new vision to a staid company. She masterminded the gigantic acquisition of Compaq. Yet she left in ignominy in 2005 . . . which hasn’t kept her from rebounding as an author and speaker.

It also hasn’t kept a diversity of opinion from flourishing in her wake. Consider three examples:

1. Tom Peters: Enough, for God’s Sake, of the Hurd Mentality

I am not taking away from Mr Hurd’s operating performance, which probably exceeds Fiorina’s. But if we are primarily celebrating HP’s megabulk, as the heavy in computerworld, and its fashion consciousness as engine of soaring PC margins and profits, then we are celebrating Carly Fiorina.

2. InfoWeek in 2006: Hewlett-Packard’s Taskmaster: Heir to the chairmanship, Mark Hurd stays focused on growth and efficiency.

Though much remains to be done, Hurd has effected a remarkable turnaround already, largely through a relentless focus on improving operations and raising morale. When Carly Fiorina was CEO, it was unclear whether HP would survive intact without being diced into smaller companies. Hurd has untangled Fiorina’s matrix management structure to give salespeople more responsibility and clearer lines of reporting. He’s shunned the press interviews and celebrity hobnobbing Fiorina thrived on–no trips to Davos or on-stage appearances with Gwen Stefani.

3. Michael S. Malone: Carly Fiorina’s HP Legacy

One is hard-pressed to think of anything [Fiorina] did during her time at either Lucent or HP that wasn’t designed to burnish her own image — at the sacrifice of anyone who got in her way. Indeed, that’s exactly what she’s doing now with her self-exculpatory book: blaming the victims — that is, everyone but herself — for her failings as a manager.

What do you think? Where does the weight of the evidence lie?