Consensus versus Confrontational

One of the questions which I have been thinking about is Apple after Steve Jobs. Very seldom in large companies are founders still there. CEO’s are hired guns, they don’t own a lot of stock, they aren’t the brand although they would like to be, they haven’t picked the board members and they can’t operate like the founder.
 
Is Consensus slowing Apple down?
 
Yes, I think it is. Or so it seems that way. It bothers me that Apple has all that cash and they don’t buy more businesses. Why is that? A big one is fear of failure. On the other hand their cash is earning maybe 1.5% per year, like the interest on a big savings account.
 
Consensus builds support, takes more time, and preserves your job.  If it’s wrong, its everyone’s fault, and they can’t fire everyone. Can they?
 
Are the most successful Tech companies ruled by Consensus or by Confrontation? I think greater leadership can be confrontational. But that’s OK. You need leadership, not everyone’s opinion, or do you? Starting to end up like Velvetta. Like when to hire high priced consultants. They never learn. The old experienced guys in the suite close the deal and then a bunch of wonks, just out of business school, do the work. They outsource both the decision and the responsibility. The consultant is hired to be fired and you still have your job. I bet a database of companies outsourcing decisions to consultants do worse than those who make them themselves.
 
Also consensus takes time and personal agendas may influence decision making. In a fast moving industry like Technology you need more responsibility and if it comes with confrontation, fine, but it’s all about speed to market.
 
I just wish Tim Cook had a stiffer spine and would make it happen quicker.