Corporate hypocrisy by HP

I’m reading a bunch of blogs about HP’s board and, man, does it get worse and worse.

Check this out: testimony in front of the U.S. House of Representatives by HP’s Scott Taylor, Chief Privacy Officer. What did he tell them? “First and foremost is that privacy is actually a core value at HP. As a company, HP is 100 percent committed to excellence in consumer and employee privacy…” 

Now compare that to what Patricia Dunn, chairwoman at HP apparently did. Lying. Breaking the law. And invading people’s privacy.

If Patricia Dunn is ever hired to a company I’m working for I’m instantly quitting. She should be fired. Instantly. Without cause. Without a severance check. Without ANYTHING. (She should listen to Paul Kedrosky, who calls on her to resign, and save HP and its shareholders from this trouble).

HP, do you have no shame?

Hewlett and Packard are twisting in their graves tonight. What a shame. Whatever happened to “the HP way?” It died today.

UPDATE: congrats again to Tom Perkins, the guy who walked out in disgust. The letter he sent to HP’s board is now online.

UPDATE 2: Dave Taylor, who worked at HP with both Hewlett and Packard, gives us the historical context behind why this can be traced back to Carly Fiorina’s time running HP. The Washington Post also reports that HP is saying that the “leaker” also leaked info leading up to Carly’s firing.

119 thoughts on “Corporate hypocrisy by HP

  1. Robert,

    Do not put words in my mouth, read what I wrote!
    I am not wrong because I have just stated facts as opposed to opinions (there is a difference).

    opinion
    1) i don’t think the means justified the ends–neither did patricia. What was done was clearly unethical (in my view), and possibly illegal.

    fact
    2) The board was informed when the chair authorized an investigation and agreed that it needed to be done. They were apprised that the investigation was ongoing at every board meeting. They (including the chair) did not know the details.

    question
    3)Who is culpable?

    1) nobody on the board
    2)jsut the chair
    3) the entire board

  2. Robert,

    Do not put words in my mouth, read what I wrote!
    I am not wrong because I have just stated facts as opposed to opinions (there is a difference).

    opinion
    1) i don’t think the means justified the ends–neither did patricia. What was done was clearly unethical (in my view), and possibly illegal.

    fact
    2) The board was informed when the chair authorized an investigation and agreed that it needed to be done. They were apprised that the investigation was ongoing at every board meeting. They (including the chair) did not know the details.

    question
    3)Who is culpable?

    1) nobody on the board
    2)jsut the chair
    3) the entire board

  3. bwu: there’s a big difference between using lawful methods (and a voluntary lie detector test IS lawful) and doing private snooping and breaking into people’s privacy (including that of reporters). The fact that you can’t see the difference and that you justify the means because of the end mean we can’t have any further conversation on this issue. You’re wrong. Patricia is wrong. She’s a cancer here and the fact that you think the means justify the ends demonstrates why this cancer needs to be purged.

  4. bwu: there’s a big difference between using lawful methods (and a voluntary lie detector test IS lawful) and doing private snooping and breaking into people’s privacy (including that of reporters). The fact that you can’t see the difference and that you justify the means because of the end mean we can’t have any further conversation on this issue. You’re wrong. Patricia is wrong. She’s a cancer here and the fact that you think the means justify the ends demonstrates why this cancer needs to be purged.

  5. Robert,

    The question is, what did she know? She requested that a secret investigation of all boardmembers be initiated. She did not want to know the details of the investigation because she herself was being investigated, and, incidentally, all the other board members knew that there was a secret investigation going on and agreed to do it. If the investigation resorted to illegal and/or unethical means (i think pretexting is legal but definitely unethical) and yet she did not know any of the details, is she culpable? If the other board members (including Keyworth and Perkins) knew about the investigation, arent they culpable as well?

    Perkins wanted an aggressive investigation (including a lie detector test for all board members) “until” he found out it was his buddy. Then he changed his tune and now he is trying to rewrite history.

    A real bad apple as far as I can see–along with his leaker buddy.

  6. Robert,

    The question is, what did she know? She requested that a secret investigation of all boardmembers be initiated. She did not want to know the details of the investigation because she herself was being investigated, and, incidentally, all the other board members knew that there was a secret investigation going on and agreed to do it. If the investigation resorted to illegal and/or unethical means (i think pretexting is legal but definitely unethical) and yet she did not know any of the details, is she culpable? If the other board members (including Keyworth and Perkins) knew about the investigation, arent they culpable as well?

    Perkins wanted an aggressive investigation (including a lie detector test for all board members) “until” he found out it was his buddy. Then he changed his tune and now he is trying to rewrite history.

    A real bad apple as far as I can see–along with his leaker buddy.

  7. bwu: I’m not gonna stick up for the leaker either, but he didn’t break any laws that I know of. He also didn’t hand over social security numbers of his fellow board members and tell a private firm to go digging.

  8. bwu: I’m not gonna stick up for the leaker either, but he didn’t break any laws that I know of. He also didn’t hand over social security numbers of his fellow board members and tell a private firm to go digging.

  9. Alot of uninformed, stupid people here who don’t seem to read.

    I’ll put all of us in the chairpersons position:

    What would you do if you had a person leaking confidential information on your BOD and you didn’t know who it was?

    Would you:

    a) try to find out who it was.
    b) ignore it because the stock is doing well.

    If you answered a), would you:

    a) Ask each of the people whether they had leaked information

    b) go to a seance and ask a spirit.

    If you answered a) and nobody stepped forward and admitted leaking anything would you:

    a) create an outside committee that not even you were on (because you may be the source of the leak) and ask them to use all legal means to investigate the source of the leak.

    b) go to a seance.

    As I read the reports, patricia dunn chose a) in all cases. I assume that most of the angry comments on here would prefer seances.

    As a sidenote, the real bad guys in this are the leaker and his best buddy perkins (who had to know of the leaks) who put HP in this position to begin with.

  10. Alot of uninformed, stupid people here who don’t seem to read.

    I’ll put all of us in the chairpersons position:

    What would you do if you had a person leaking confidential information on your BOD and you didn’t know who it was?

    Would you:

    a) try to find out who it was.
    b) ignore it because the stock is doing well.

    If you answered a), would you:

    a) Ask each of the people whether they had leaked information

    b) go to a seance and ask a spirit.

    If you answered a) and nobody stepped forward and admitted leaking anything would you:

    a) create an outside committee that not even you were on (because you may be the source of the leak) and ask them to use all legal means to investigate the source of the leak.

    b) go to a seance.

    As I read the reports, patricia dunn chose a) in all cases. I assume that most of the angry comments on here would prefer seances.

    As a sidenote, the real bad guys in this are the leaker and his best buddy perkins (who had to know of the leaks) who put HP in this position to begin with.

  11. LayZ, you’re correct – my use of the word “fire” was completely inappropriate. Replace it with the word “dismiss”, okay?

    Dunn has clearly damaged the reputation HP has and likely has hurt their stock price too. There are proper – and legal – procedures in place for HP to terminate the relationship. They should be actively seeking such avenues TODAY.

    Robert, my words about you reading in between the lines were not due to whay Dunn may – or may not – have done or known to be illegal.

    Rather, they were in your inference that Keyworth resigned because of this versus other actions of Dunn’s like bypassing proper channels.

  12. LayZ, you’re correct – my use of the word “fire” was completely inappropriate. Replace it with the word “dismiss”, okay?

    Dunn has clearly damaged the reputation HP has and likely has hurt their stock price too. There are proper – and legal – procedures in place for HP to terminate the relationship. They should be actively seeking such avenues TODAY.

    Robert, my words about you reading in between the lines were not due to whay Dunn may – or may not – have done or known to be illegal.

    Rather, they were in your inference that Keyworth resigned because of this versus other actions of Dunn’s like bypassing proper channels.

  13. Scobble you are really funny:

    “Now compare that to what Patricia Dunn, chairwoman at HP apparently did. Lying. Breaking the law. And invading people’s privacy.”

    Your nations administration is doing this now for nearly 8 years and nothing happens, after all it’s leadership by example that defines the values of a society. Forget about HP Way and all this other marketing blabla, its same as Fox News…. EMPTY words. Look at what they do and not at what they say and you will realize what person or nation you are facing. After all it’s just about MONEY in corporate america. The rest is just decoration, to make it not look too ugly.

  14. Scobble you are really funny:

    “Now compare that to what Patricia Dunn, chairwoman at HP apparently did. Lying. Breaking the law. And invading people’s privacy.”

    Your nations administration is doing this now for nearly 8 years and nothing happens, after all it’s leadership by example that defines the values of a society. Forget about HP Way and all this other marketing blabla, its same as Fox News…. EMPTY words. Look at what they do and not at what they say and you will realize what person or nation you are facing. After all it’s just about MONEY in corporate america. The rest is just decoration, to make it not look too ugly.

Comments are closed.