How is it that the departure of well-known Apple designer Jony Ive undermined departmental resilience so much that former Apple staffers are now accused of stealing trade secrets and covering up the crime?
The latest chapter in the ongoing litigation between Apple and OpenAI involves fresh accusations by Apple that former engineer Chang Liu not only attempted to destroy evidence but also created an AI agent to run simulations based on confidential Apple circuit board schematics.
None of these claims look good, and it’s doubtful Apple would make them if it doesn’t think they can be proved. Apple wants to obtain expedited discovery in the case, which OpenAI claims to be “meritless.” The next big date will be Oct. 1, when Judge Edward J. Davila will need to weigh OpenAI’s denials against Apple’s forensic evidence.
It is interesting that much of OpenAI’s defense seems to revolve around what I call the “cookie jar” argument that it only took information from Apple because Apple’s protections weren’t strong enough in the first place. Perhaps the judge will take the attitude that a loose lid does not justify fingers in the jar, even if it is proved that the lid was actually loose in the first place.
That’s the court case, but what Apple’s new CEO, John Ternus, will need to consider as he moves into his new office is what has motivated 400+ former Apple employees — including many from its much-storied design department — to jump ship to its competitor. It’s a challenge he reportedly takes seriously, with recent reports suggesting that restoring the design group back to a cohesive whole is one of his priorities.
He’s going to have to take a very honest look at events; doing so means he will inevitably need to challenge some of Apple’s most sacred cows.
Take Ive. There could be a reality in which some of this instability began with his departure. One argument might be that his leadership was what kept the design group together, and once he moved on the cadre collapsed. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t responsible; it was his department and it was his challenge to create a strong succession plan on his departure. Since leaving Apple and forming his own design company, Ive seemed to recruit many of his former staffers, many of whom now work at OpenAI following the sale of his AI company, io, to Apple’s competitor.
It is hard not to see that Apple’s design department post-Ive delivered little success, and while a lazy media class insisted on blaming then-CEO Tim Cook, the truth is that the CDO (Jony Ive was Apple’s Chief Design Officer before he resigned) held his throne long enough to have crafted a more successful approach. Identifying and developing successors is a key task of management anywhere, including in design departments. Problems should be managed down, not managed up.
His subsequent move at his own company to rehire many of his old team — including Evans Hankey, his anointed successor as design lead at Apple (and co-founder of io), the company sold to OpenAI for over $6 billion — represented the shattering of design team cohesiveness at Apple.
Another way of seeing it might be that Apple under Cook failed to inspire the design department to such an extent that many of its original members became disaffected and left to work with a competitor. When they did, they found themselves working with their former boss, and his chosen successor as design department lead, Hankey.
The nature of reality is that one, both, or other arguments may be true. But Apple’s new CEO will need to consider all of them as he plans his next moves. Because while defending Apple’s future in the case against OpenAI is an existential necessity, Ternus must also secure the company’s future by inspiring every department to coalesce around his leadership. That task will include convincing Apple’s remaining designers that the future is better at Apple than elsewhere. That’s going to mean change and it will require a fresh vision for everyone to get behind.
You can follow me on social media! Join me on BlueSky, LinkedIn, Mastodon and subscribe to The Core.