The Intel style – Only the paranoid survive?

Intel is a company that we all know because it comes every day in our lives (by the way, stands for Integrated Electronics Corp. ) but few probably know by whom it was created. I do not for a historical reason for its own sake but because it often to understand the spirit of the companies need to understand the men who work in companies, because companies are made by people.

Intel was created by three key characters, very different one from the other. But was this the secret, complementarity. Robert Noyce, who grew up in a series of tiny country towns of Iowa, came from a family of Congregationalists. From Noyce student he was fond of madrigals (the madrigals need not lead vocals and solo artists, are polyphonic compositions that weave together different voices and melodies, none of which is dominant). This suggests the reason for his management style, which was not authoritarian, against the clashes and uninterested in trappings of power. So how was Gordon Moore (yes, the one of the homonymous law). The two were compensated well. Noyce knew hypnotize customers with the halo effect that characterized him since he was a child, while the staid and thoughtfully Moore liked being in the laboratory; Noyce excelled in the strategy and in the overview; Moore knew the details, especially technology and engineering.

As little interest in power, however, the two sinned a key ingredient: the resolve. Because of their desire to be appreciated, they were reluctant to be tough. They led people, but not motivated. If there was a problem or an internal conflict, they did not like face, or rather, did not do it right.

But at this point comes into play the third character Intel Key: Andrew (Andy) Grove. Andras Grof was jew, he was born in Budapest and did not come from a family or Congregationalists was fond of madrigals. He spent his youth in Central Europe during the Fascist regime. When he was eight years old his father was taken to a concentration camp and he and his mother confined in a tiny housing for Jews. Fled to America, he learned English by himself, he graduated with top honors from the City College of New York and later received a doctorate in chemical engineering at Berkeley. Moore raised it in Intel directly from Fairchild.

We must say that the Grove mantra was: “Success breeds complacency. Complacency generates failure. Only the paranoid survive. ”

Grove was the management styles of Noyce and Moore totally inadequate to lead a company. He had one diametrically opposite style. He was authoritarian and he loved the clash, if honest. What Grove did not catch it right away that he realized afterwards is that to have an effective management does not always need to have a strong leader, but it can be enough just the right combination of talent at the top. As in a metal alloy, if you find the right mix of elements, the result can be powerful.

And from this mix of different but complementary personalities, it was born the Intel style, which influenced the entire Silicon Valley and that still is the management style used in innovative companies wich look for the full involvement of all resources. In Intel there were no reserved parking, all working in the same positions, organizational chart plate. According to Noyce, the more open and unstructured work environment, the more quickly the new ideas are born, spread, and are applied. Instead of proposing plans to senior management, the Intel business units were encouraged to act as if they are small and agile independent companies. The decisions were often taken with impromptu meetings between the various departments and without involving the upper floors.

In this seemingly anarchic context, those who imposed the discipline was Grove; But he did not try to impose a hierarchical discipline to what Noyce had created; rather, he helped to spread a culture of ambition, concentration and attention to detail. Grove from her had the fact of owning a pixie charisma and an exuberance that was impossible to not appreciate. And so he knew impose themselves more easily. Egalitarian approach of Noyce and Grove alongside an element of “constructive dialogue.” The same approach that later would take Steve Jobs: brutal frankness, maximum concentration, excellence as a precisely defined goal. However, despite the differences in style, Noyce, Moore and Grove had one thing in common: the ‘unshakeable ambition to flourish Intel innovation, experimentation and entrepreneurship.

Everyone can give the sense that wants this brief history. For me, the meaning could be that when searching for a new company to work, you must try to understand the people who created it, or those that have governed or govern it still.

The only Groove companies, Moore and Noyce are probably not the best that can be found. At the end is always the “team play” to win.