The Hewlett-Packard firing of Mark Hurd provoked a lot of reactions. It won some plaudits for firing Hurd as CEO in the wake of a near-scandal involving an attractive woman, expense account fudging and a harassment suit.

But it was also excoriated by some defenders of Hurd for rushing to judgment. One of those critics was Oracle CEO Larry Ellison who promptly hired Hurd, which will now lead the charge against his former employer.

The fact that H-P allowed this to happen has prompted one New York Times columnist to write "the H-P board can now lay claim, officially, to the title of the Most Inept Board in America. It's going to take a yeoman effort to dethrone these guys."

In California, non-compete agreements are frowned on by state courts. But California companies have learned how to provide strong incentives for departing executives to shun employment by competitors for specific periods of time. They can stagger severance payouts, for example, stagger options vesting dates, and those sort of things. H-P gave Hurd $12.2 million about a month after he left.

This may be hard for H-P to fight. It is certainly a wake-up call to companies faced with a departing CEO. Companies need to explore non-compete options, and what they want out of them.

The whole episode is turning out to be quite embarrassing for all parties involved. We may see some shareholders agitate for new directors, but it seems that in the end the board will not be shaken up, merely shamed.

For more:
- here's the article

Related Articles:
Mark Hurd and Sarbanes-Oxley
Was the Hewlett-Packard board fair to Mark Hurd?
SAP teams with CA; Scandal claims H-P CEO