Collaboration and Leadership at CISCO Systems
COLLABORATION AND LEADERSHIP AT CISCO SYSTEMS
“I believe that only those companies that build collaboration into their DNA by tapping into the collective expertise of their employees—instead of just a few select leaders at the top—will succeed … This sounds easy, but it is incredibly complex.” That is what John Chambers, CEO of Cisco Systems, told an interviewer in 2008. A year later, he was even more adamant that collaboration, teamwork, and a supportive technology would be the hallmarks of the company’s future. “If they’re not collaborative,” he said, speaking of potential future employees, “if they aren’t naturally inclined toward collaboration and teamwork, if they are uncomfortable with using technology to make that happen both within Cisco and in their own life, they’re probably not going to fit in here.” And yet, as Chambers was the first to admit, he was not always so comfortable with teamwork and collaboration himself.
Cisco, widely recognized as “the Internet behemoth,” designs, manufactures, and sells Internet‐protocol networking and other byproducts related to the communications and IT industry, and provides services associated with those products and their use. Founded in 1984 by a Stanford‐based husband‐and‐wife team (seeking a way to connect the computer systems in their two departments), Cisco grew so rapidly that, at the height of the Internet bubble (2000), its market value made it the third most valuable company in the world (behind Microsoft and GE). Chambers became CEO in 1995 and helped drive that growth. When the bubble burst in 2001, Cisco experienced what Chambers called “a near death experience.” Layoffs and cutbacks helped Cisco survive, but Chambers was determined to do more: Cisco would thrive by understanding market trends and responding earlier than its competitors, or even its customers.
Chambers came to believe that the only way to stay ahead of the markets was by “tapping into the collective expertise of all our employees.” That meant building cross‐functional collaboration and teamwork throughout the entire organization. An elaborate network of councils and boards brought together “groups of people with relevant expertise” who could “work together to make and execute key decisions supported by networked Web 2.0 technologies.” All well and good, but Chambers also realized that neither he nor his top executives were quite prepared to make the transition themselves. “I’m a command‐and‐ control person,” Chambers admitted. “I like to be able to say turn right, and we truly have 67,000 people turn right.” His top executives were the same.
COLLABORATION AND LEADERSHIP AT CISCO SYSTEMS
“I believe that only those companies that build collaboration into their DNA by tapping
into
the
collective
expertise
of
their
employees
—
instead
of
just
a
few
select
leaders
at
the
top
—
will
succeed … This sound
s
easy,
but it is incredibly
complex.”
That
is
what
John
Chambers,
CEO
of
Cisco
Systems,
told
an
interviewer
in 2008.
A
year
later,
he was
even
more
adamant that
collaboration, teamwork,
and
a
supportive technology would
be the
hallmarks
of the
company’s
future.
“
If
they’re
not
collaborative,”
he
said,
speaking
of
potential
future
employees,
“if
they
aren’t
naturally inclined
toward
collaboration
and
teamwork,
if
they
are
uncomfortable with
using
technology
to
make
that
happen
both
within
Cisco
and
in
their
own
life, they’re
probably
not
going
to
fit
in
here.”
And
yet,
as
Chambers
was
the
first
to
admit,
he
was
not
always
so
comfortable
with
teamwork
and
collaboration
himself.
Cisco,
widely
recognized
as
“
the
Internet
behemoth,”
designs,
manufac
tures,
and
sells
Internet
-
protocol
networking
and
other
byproducts
related
to
the
communications
and
IT
industry,
and
provides
services
associated
with
those
products and their use. Founded in 1984
by a
Stanford
-
based
husband
-
and
-
wife t
eam
(seeking
a
way
to
connect
the
computer
systems
in
their
two
departments), Cisco grew so rapidly that, at the height of the Internet bubble (2000),
its market value
made
it
the
third
most
valuable
company
in
the
world
(behind
Microsoft
and
GE).
Chambers
became
CEO
in
1995
and
helped
drive
that
growth.
When
the bubble burst in
2001, Cisco experienced what Chambers called “a
near
death
experience.”
Layoffs
and
cutbacks
helped
Cisco
survive,
but
Chambers
was
determined
to
do
more:
Cisco
would
thrive
by
understanding
market
trends
and
responding earlier than its competitors, or even its
customers.
Chambers came to believe that the only way to stay ahead of the markets was by “tapping into
the collective expertise of all our employees.” That meant building cross
-
functional
collaboration and teamwork throughout the entire organization. An elaborate ne
twork of
councils and boards brought together “groups of people with relevant expertise” who could
“work together to
make
and execute key decisions supported by networked
Web
2.0
technologies.” All well and good, but Chambers also realized that neither he
nor his top
executives were quite prepared to make the transition themselves. “I’m a command
-
and
-
control person,” Chambers admitted. “I like to be able to say turn right, and
we
truly have
67,000 people turn right.” His top executives were the
same.
At fi
rst, Chambers found that his top executives did not much like the
pro
cess of collaboration
and would have “opted out” if allowed. “But I didn’t give them
a
choice
in
the
matter,”
he
noted,
“I
forced
people
to
work
with
others
they didn’t get along with.”
He also tied executive
COLLABORATION AND LEADERSHIP AT CISCO SYSTEMS
“I believe that only those companies that build collaboration into their DNA by tapping into the
collective expertise of their employees—instead of just a few select leaders at the top—will
succeed … This sounds easy, but it is incredibly complex.” That is what John Chambers, CEO of
Cisco Systems, told an interviewer in 2008. A year later, he was even more adamant that
collaboration, teamwork, and a supportive technology would be the hallmarks of the company’s
future. “If they’re not collaborative,” he said, speaking of potential future employees, “if they
aren’t naturally inclined toward collaboration and teamwork, if they are uncomfortable with using
technology to make that happen both within Cisco and in their own life, they’re probably not going
to fit in here.” And yet, as Chambers was the first to admit, he was not always so comfortable
with teamwork and collaboration himself.
Cisco, widely recognized as “the Internet behemoth,” designs, manufactures, and sells
Internet-protocol networking and other byproducts related to the communications and IT
industry, and provides services associated with those products and their use. Founded in 1984
by a Stanford-based husband-and-wife team (seeking a way to connect the computer systems in
their two departments), Cisco grew so rapidly that, at the height of the Internet bubble (2000),
its market value made it the third most valuable company in the world (behind Microsoft and
GE). Chambers became CEO in 1995 and helped drive that growth. When the bubble burst in
2001, Cisco experienced what Chambers called “a near death experience.” Layoffs and
cutbacks helped Cisco survive, but Chambers was determined to do more: Cisco would thrive
by understanding market trends and responding earlier than its competitors, or even its
customers.
Chambers came to believe that the only way to stay ahead of the markets was by “tapping into
the collective expertise of all our employees.” That meant building cross-functional
collaboration and teamwork throughout the entire organization. An elaborate network of
councils and boards brought together “groups of people with relevant expertise” who could
“work together to make and execute key decisions supported by networked Web 2.0
technologies.” All well and good, but Chambers also realized that neither he nor his top
executives were quite prepared to make the transition themselves. “I’m a command-and-
control person,” Chambers admitted. “I like to be able to say turn right, and we truly have
67,000 people turn right.” His top executives were the same.
At first, Chambers found that his top executives did not much like the process of collaboration
and would have “opted out” if allowed. “But I didn’t give them a choice in the matter,” he
noted, “I forced people to work with others they didn’t get along with.” He also tied executive