The Strategic Importance of Intel’s New CEO

This morning Intel finally announced the successor to current CEO, Paul Otellini. Otellini steps down later this month and new CEO, Brian Krzanich, who is currently their COO, will then become CEO.

Here is a short background on Krzanich:

Brian M. Krzanich is executive vice president and chief operating officer for Intel Corporation. He is responsible for Intel’s global manufacturing, supply chain, human resources and information technology operations.
Previously, Krzanich was responsible for Assembly Test from 2003 to 2007. From 2001 to 2003, he was responsible for the implementation of the 0.13-micron logic process technology across Intel’s global factory network. From 1997 to 2001, Krzanich served as the Fab 17 plant manager, where he oversaw integrating Digital Equipment Corporation’s semiconductor manufacturing operations into Intel’s manufacturing network. The assignment included building updated facilities as well as initiating and ramping 0.18-micron and 0.13-micron process technologies. In 1996 and 1997, Krzanich was the Fab 6 plant manager in Arizona. From 1994 to 1996, he was a manufacturing manager for Fab 12 in Arizona. He also served as a process engineer at various Intel locations. Krzanich joined Intel in 1982.

Krzanich was presented an Intel Achievement Award in 1999. He holds one patent for semiconductor processing.
Krzanich received a bachelor’s degree in Chemistry from San Jose State University in 1982.
They also named Renee James President of Intel.

So what does this new leadership change mean for Intel’s future?

We believe this move is quite strategic and sets up an important new phase in Intel’s history. Brian’s strong role in running manufacturing will help Intel drive even more aggressive research and potential partnerships to keep their fabs running at full capacity. Intel is moving fast from 22 nm to 14 nm process designs, which fundamentally says Intel is doubling down in mobile and see’s this as their real future.

It is important to note that Brian’s role is to drive Intel’s strategy and be responsible for what R&D focuses on and anticipate future demands of their partners and what consumers will want in the future. This is what Otelinni has been doing and this top focus will now be in the hands of the new CEO. However, Brian’s intimate understanding of manufacturing and what makes the fabs tick is just as strategic.

We have heard that with the slowdown in the PC industry, most PC semiconductor fabs are not running at full capacity. However, from a bottom line standpoint, fabs need to run at full capacity if they are to be profitable. Intel recently announced the Intel Custom Foundry, which they offer fab manufacturing to fabless companies and has already started doing work for some small fabless design firms. However, Otellini has said that over time they could do work for big companies. I believe Intel’s top priority is filling the Fabs with their own chips, but one possible reason for this move is that over time Intel’s Custom Foundry could become even more strategic to Intel’s future.

Intel has also been criticized for not have a strong succession plan in place. I believe naming Renee James as president is also strategic. Intel has to deal with the possibility that if anything happened to Brian, Renee James could step in and a transition to new leadership in this situation would be seamless. One could decipher from this that James could be the next Intel CEO when Brian leaves the office (Intel has an age cap on CEOs) but I don’t think this necessarily so. I suspect her role as president could set her up for this but strategically speaking, this is in probably in place to protect a line of succession for the immediate future.

We are entering a new era in personal computing and quickly moving to what Steve Jobs called the post PC era. While PCs are not going away, mobile and embedded processors need to be the future of a company like Intel. Brian will have a daunting task to migrate Intel from its PC past and into a new era of personalized computing. I believe this move is the right one for Intel and naming someone with a long history at Intel and a strong manufacturing background is best for Intel at this time.

Published by

Tim Bajarin

Tim Bajarin is the President of Creative Strategies, Inc. He is recognized as one of the leading industry consultants, analysts and futurists covering the field of personal computers and consumer technology. Mr. Bajarin has been with Creative Strategies since 1981 and has served as a consultant to most of the leading hardware and software vendors in the industry including IBM, Apple, Xerox, Compaq, Dell, AT&T, Microsoft, Polaroid, Lotus, Epson, Toshiba and numerous others.

404 thoughts on “The Strategic Importance of Intel’s New CEO”

  1. I’m sorry to say this Tim, but the piece is rather fluffy.
    Intel needed a new CEO because soon they won’t be a monopoly anymore.

    It should be common knowledge that an OEM partnering with Intel and Microsoft is as profitable as a peasant partnering with their king and feudal lord: you get to survive and prosp… well… you get to survive, maybe until the next consolidation.

    There’s a new world dawning in computing, a world where Intel must act very differently to get any play into; a world that regards them with mistrust and can easily afford to shun them.
    They needed a new CEO because they need a new face that has a chance at credibility in front of the gatekeepers to the growth market.

    1. The two parts of note are somewhat buried. He glanced over them but I think they are important. They are Intel’s custom foundry initiatives and the appointment of Renee James as President. Rene is most likely being groomed and her background is in mobile.

      Intel faces many challenges and in terms of priority it will be interesting to see how they keep their fabs full, cause it won’t be with just x86 (hence their custom foundry) and how they tackle mobile with their architecture.

  2. “Intel is moving fast from 22 nm to 14 nm process designs, which fundamentally says Intel is doubling down in mobile and see’s this as their real future.”

    This was an interesting read. My brother and I were just discussing Intel the other day. I used to believe Intel was one of those companies that wouldn’t die no matter how dire the situation. They were just too smart. Math issues with their chip? They’ll figure it out and fix it faster than anyone else could and the financial and PR hit will be minimal.

    However, here I can’t help but feel Intel is I a bit of a similar situation as MS. Few (if any?) of their customers have more than a casual presence on mobile, either tablets or phones. The big players are using ARM. While I do feel, if anyone can put their collective minds to something like ARM and offer a viable solution/alternative, Intel can. But who will use it? Why would they shift from one architecture to another? It might become a lifeline to their current OEM customers and MS, but neither of them are showing any significant positive impact in mobile.

    I could be wrong. But from my non-professional, hobbiest-at-best, but-always-looking-for-the-next-bull-stock perspective I can’t see Intel having much success at this point. As in all things tech, things could change in a moment. The next big thing could make ARM irrelevant in a heartbeat. But that isn’t now and I don’t have any reason to have confidence that Intel can figure that out.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *