Years ago, when Mike Calil was President of Invensys, he told me, "London is like gravity. It just is there." Calil left shortly thereafter. Many pundits have seen Invensys PTY as a boatanchor weakening the performance of what is now Invensys Operations Management.
Apparently, the Invensys Board of Directors now agrees. In a move Sir Nigel Rudd, Invensys' Chairman, implied would provide more autonomy to the three Invensys businesses, the Board yesterday removed Ulf Hendrickson as CEO. In recent months, Hendrickson had made some embarrasing statements that at least temporarily raised acquisition questions, which the Board deflected.
Invensys stock dropped precipitously on the news. Go here for an article on the firing of Hendrikson: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/8405257/Invensys-shares-plunge-as-Ulf-Henriksson-ousted.html
Some analysis might be useful. IOM supporters and detractors alike will probably agree that more autonomy for IOM is a good thing. Some pundits are already saying that the Board is positioning themselves to break up Invensys Pty. Maybe. Maybe not.
The issue is whether this new organizational situation will make Invensys Operations Management a better or more difficult acquisition target. I don't think it is one. And if it is, as Clayton Christensen said in the March 2011 Harvard Business Review aquisitions fail at the rate of 70-90% and rarely if ever boost the revenues of the acquiring company, leading to stockholder unhappiness.
Hopefully, without the well-known micromanagement of Ulf Hendrickson, IOM will continue to advance as it integrates its four divisions into a single operating unit. It would be greatly to the benefit of end users if Invensys Operations Management were to continue to move forward and regain its position as one of the top automation suppliers in the world.
