This post is “inside baseball” and written that way… but if you like baseball, cheers.
______

Two key questions remain after Jony Ive’s promotion. They’re not new questions, but they’re worth re-visiting:

Is Jony Ive now more involved or less involved in evaluating future Apple products and categories?

What person or persons are Apple’s “product pickers”?

Earlier, I mentioned how:

No one expects Apple to name projects and specify details but, if Ive was going to stay meaningfully involved with products, you’d expect some additional language and emphasis in that regard. It’s a sign, in my view, that his future contributions while of some importance, probably won’t be on the critical path to shipping a product.

From the “original” senior leadership team, only Cook, Schiller, Cue, and Ive remain. This matters in the sense that they learned a lot from Steve Jobs and from each other (and taught Steve Jobs, in many ways, I’m sure). Of these, my guess is that Schiller and Ive have both the deepest and most rounded product sense. I think there’s little question they’ve been the face, heart, and hands guiding Apple products for the past few years, no doubt with support from a broad cast of talented employees.

So, what’s the answer to the questions above? I have no idea. None. These things are rarely that clear; the Steve Jobs era(s) were the exception, and even then “clear” is the wrong word. Perhaps “clear-er”. If I had to guess, here’s my hunch: Jony Ive will continue to give his senior leadership vote, as he always has. And Phil Schiller will continue to drive product definitions, with Kevin Lynch continuing to be on-point for the watch.

This is what transition at Apple looks like: slow, smooth, hopefully imperceptible from a business standpoint. And yet very apparent from a human standpoint, as one era transitions to the next.

So nothing changes? Not quite. Richard Howarth (industrial design) and Alan Dye (interface design), Jony Ive’s direct reports now have a (bigger) voice and more respect. They’re not “new”, but they’re new to the senior leadership team. With Ive transitioning from day-today management, you can be sure they’ll be in senior staff meetings. The direction, detail, and questions in key discussions will be different. Better or worse? Of course we won’t know, at least for a while. But different.

Oh, and Phil and Eddy, they might be edging off a bit, too. Again, of course I’m guessing. But this is what transition at Apple looks like: slow, smooth, hopefully imperceptible from a business standpoint. And yet very apparent from a human standpoint, as one era transitions to the next.

[Richard Howarth and Alan Dye] are not “new”, but they’re new to the senior leadership team.

We can view Jony Ive’s promotion to Chief Design Officer (Stephen Fry’s article and Tim Cook’s memo) at Apple thru the following lens:

Why does a company create a new position?

Several reasons, in order of most mission-focused (and most frequent) to least:

1. To provide more formal and senior oversight to a critical area
2. To accommodate an executive’s strength or weakness
3. To retain an executive (e.g., match a prior role)
4. To move an executive off the critical path of the company’s operations
5. To honor an executive

Which of these might apply in this situation?

1. Nope. Design was already a formal area, and Jony Ive was already in charge.

2. Nope. Some of Ive’s comments to Stephen Fry might appear to support this (i.e., that the move accommodates Ive’s design strength by freeing him from administrative and management work). But, in fact, as Senior Vice President of Design, he was already able to pick and choose how he applied his time and talent. If this was truly about reducing time spent in meetings, performance reviews, and resource planning, it wouldn’t require a promotion to “Chief” anything.

3. Nope. Not an issue.

4. Likely, in my view. For the same reasons that Seth Weintraub of 9to5mac speculates about: that Ive probably wants to spend more time with family. Ive’s promotion makes for a smoother transition. Important when you’re the world’s biggest company, and when your stock is particularly sensitive to news.

5. Likely, in my view. If you read Tim Cook’s memo, it’s not about citing new information (accomplishments) as the promotion drivers. It’s about rewarding Ive with the title that matches the influence he’s had all along. It’s an acknowledgment; an honor. And he uses general language that, while in the present tense, also sounds commemorative. In fact, this is a strong indication that this “memo” was really meant for public consumption. And by “public”, I mean “investors”.

But between Cook’s memo and Fry’s article, talk about the future is glaringly absent.

But wait, doesn’t Tim Cook’s memo also say that Jony Ive will now focus “entirely on current design projects, new ideas and future initiatives”? Yes.

But between Cook’s memo and Fry’s article, talk about the future is glaringly absent. In Fry’s piece, Ive only went so far as to inform him about helping with the store re-design and the campus.

Let me state this more clearly: Ive, to-date a product-critical executive has been promoted into a more senior and impactful role, and the discussion about his future is limited to stores and work spaces. (To be clear, the stores are absolutely critical to Apple’s success and, arguably, in need of a meaningful re-design. Vital work. Interesting work. Odds that it makes the best use of Ive’s time and talent? Low, I would say.)

Ive, to-date a product-critical executive has been promoted into a more senior and impactful role, and the discussion about his future is limited to stores and work spaces. […] a sign […] that his future contributions, while of some importance, probably won’t be on the critical path to shipping a product.

Granted, no one expects Apple to name projects and specify details but, if Ive was going to stay meaningfully involved with products, you’d expect some additional language and emphasis in that regard. It’s a sign, in my view, that his future contributions while of some importance, probably won’t be on the critical path to shipping a product.

So, to repeat: it appears that Ive is gently stepping aside, being duly honored by Tim Cook, and reserving the right to make an impact here or there, on the project and level of his choosing. If this — and, to emphasize — it’s obviously speculative — if this is true, it’s certainly an immensely well-earned, well-timed taper to an incredibly-impactful and inspirational career.

If [his stepping aside] is true, it’s certainly an immensely well-earned, well-timed taper to an incredibly-impactful and inspirational career.