A perspective from guest blogger, Ed Covannon.
With humility, three caveats about the following commentary on my Kodak experiences.
“All happy families are alike; each unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”
― Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina
I've found Tolstoy's observation sadly true when I've tried to unpack the dynamics that have led the individuals and organizations I've experienced. I've also found that persistence in applying analytic rigor, adequate data collection and contextualization sometimes provides useful ex post insight. Or at least the illusion that such activities can make some sense out of what has happened.
My second caveat is that blame is not the name of the game being played here. Hindsight bias dogs commentary on past events. Pre facto, there were advocates and objectors to the decisions, but the reality of the moment was that no one had a sense of certainty in the outcome at the time...that sense of obviousness which unpacking the situation afterward possesses.
Per my experience with complex systems - systems needn't break all at once or even at all. They may accumulate short sighted modifications that cumulatively cause the system as a whole to fail. Like straws breaking the camel's back, the order and specific straws are not critical. And knowing one is placing a straw at the time of placement is often impossible.
Third caveat. Entries must have a narrative focus, and so will be restricted in scope to a particular dynamic. In reality, many actors played many roles, including the systems themselves where both no one was responsible and everyone was responsible. Many individually well-intentioned but inadequately informed actions combine to create a breakdown. Grid-locked traffic is a case probably familiar to everyone. Every participating car was responsible, no one wanted it, yet in every car, everyone contributed to it. The hope is that even a little insight, provided here, will be instructive. Knowing something of the early indicators could convince you to turn your car in a different direction.
Focus: CEO Intent
The happiest Kodak I experienced was Kodak under George Fisher.
![]() |
| George was happy, too! |
He brought warmth, confidence and energy to the company in ways worth study and documentation. He was in every way, an exemplary CEO. Kodak stock prices were at their highest under Fisher before the steady decline that marks Kodak in the 21st century.
Under Fisher a significant paradigm shift occurred and major reorganization.
Kodak was transformed into a new company. The business units were given high levels of autonomy while the corporate core and non-core businesses would be moved to lesser direct decision making.
For R+D, the transformation from monolithic corporate resource to becoming multiple R+D labs dedicated to these new leaders was challenging and destabilizing. In the culture of labs was the conviction that the labs "laid down the tracks" down which the engine of the company was bound to travel. Suddenly, multiple separate tracks were being demanded, and demanded immediately. And the tracks branched out in numerous new directions.
In the meantime, the newly powerful business units focused, or perhaps better said, were forced to focus on near term profitability. - cutting anything resonant with the old corporate overhead and inefficiency.
This bold reorganization set the stage for what followed.
Expect more insight from Ed in the future.




The Leadership at the top failed to see the future,and did not focus on it. It was not in Printing. A company poorly led at the top by a charming guy and a charmed Board. A disastrous pick, Fisher should have married Motorola and Kodak. That’s where it all started. The decline. --- A Kodak Retiree
ReplyDelete