Probably the most frequent question I’ve been asked over the last year or so is “Who runs Linden Lab?”
It’s actually a very tough question to answer.
We’re not really talking about who defines the company organizationally and handles day-to-day running, but who is actually calling the shots strategically.
Corporations come in a few shapes and sizes. Sometimes the board makes all the strategic decisions. Sometimes it’s the cadre of vice-presidents. Other times it is the set (or a subset) of the company officers. Sometimes it is something different. Sometimes the CEO is in charge, and sometimes they’re strategically powerless. Every company works a little differently.
For the Lab, it used to be that most of the major decisions seemed to be made at the board level. Voice? Windlight? That was the board.
I’m inclined to think that it’s still the board, and that the executives have very little real impact on strategy.
Somewhere around 2007, though, something changed. The legal team at the Lab started to assert itself, and through the next few years, produced things like the gambling ban (multiple revisions), the new trademark policies (multiple revisions) and various revisions to the terms-of-service that some Lab executives said they were powerless to prevent or mitigate.
Clearly the execs were being overridden and the legal team was allowed its head.
Strategically, the Lab hasn’t shown any strategic changes since then (at least not from where I’m sitting… how about you?). So I’m assuming that the CEO’s role is mostly day-to-day grind and the important stuff is handed down from the board.
What do you think? Who’s been calling the shots?
I Think your right. I think its a lot like.. for instance President Obama doesn’t run The US. He is a major influence and maybe (when successful) he can steer things in the direction he wants.
Like the CEO of Linden Lab.in a way..
When Phillip Rosedale left you could see a change in direction and when he recently came back you could sense a slight change. But nothing major. It all takes time but a CEO does influence a company aside from the daily grind of a CEO position.
Philip’s also a key board-member, so if the board is calling the shots, then there’s likely been little change in who is actually calling them for a couple years now.
(second try at this as the first attempt was wiped after submission. grrr. it says i’m supposed to “sign in.” where?) you say, “Strategically, the Lab hasn’t shown any strategic changes since then…” i suppose you are just attempting to provoke discussion but, erm… there have been *many* strategic decisions. are you serious?
1. the decision to develop (and outsource) Viewer 2.0 was a strategic decision.
2. the decision to purposely design Viewer 2.0 so that it is incompatible with popular 3rd party viewers was a strategic decision.
3. the decision to attempt to control the export of content to other grids is a strategic decision.
4. the decision to attempt to control the operation of 3rd party viewers is a strategic decision.
5. the decision to continue the ban of megaprims is a strategic decision.
6. the decision to support SL artists with the Linden Endowment for the Arts is a strategic decision.
7. the decision to end the Linden involvement in the annual Burning Life festival is a strategic decision.
8. philip linden’s announcement that the Lab’s emphasis should be on improving the user’s experience is a strategic decision.
in M Linden’s own words, “We undertook a *strategic* [emhasis is mine] restructuring to strengthen our business.”
that sounds like a strategic change to me.
What I meant by strategic changes was “changes in direction”. Whatever the Lab’s goal is, they don’t seem to have significantly deviated from whatever direction they’ve been following for the last couple years, IMO.
Viewer 2 started before M’s tenure. The Arts Endowment was also conceived back then, though it has taken much longer to reach any kind of fruition.
All of this seems to be a progression along a line, rather than actually any alteration of strategy. Where that line ends, I’m not sure.
@Wizard Oh, and sorry about the confusion with the comments. First time commenters always go to moderation, and I was away from the keys.
replacing your CEO i think would be considered to be a rather drastic strategic change.