Francis Lorentz, deposed chief executive at Groupe Bull SA is proud of his term although, of course, there is an enormous amount yet to be done. He says he wishes to be remembered for confronting real problems, adding that they were in large part caused by the evolution of the industry. Talking to the French business journal La Tribune de l’Expansion in an interview on his 10-year span with the company, Lorentz describes Bull’s fortunes from his arrival in 1982 when the company was in a traumatised state. Nationalisation had forced the break with Honeywell Inc, when 60% of products were sourced from the US; the company was running at a loss, and growth was limited geographically, with access to less than 30% of the world market. Jacques Stern and I decided to give the enterprise a new project, put the people back to work, and inaugurate a big investment programme, notably in research and development. In 1985 Bull changed direction. It launched its first MS-DOS personal computer and achieved financial stability. But when Honeywell decided to get out of the computer business in 1986, financial stability was shaken once more. With the consent of the then Industry Minister, Alain Madelin, Bull bought the business, despite scant financial resources and the absence of a strong reputation in the US as a high-tech enterprise. It was for this reason that NEC Corp was brought in as a shareholder in Bull HN. The speed and extent of change within the computer market necessitated further changes to the company’s products and to its commercial, administrative and manufacturing structures. Plants were cut to five from 13. Staffing levels were reduced to 35,000 from 48,500 between 1990 and 1992. I do not see how we could have been any quicker or tougher.

Dead weight

There’s a limit beyond which key people get discouraged and quit the company. And, this year, an operating equilibrium should be achieved, despite rumours to the contrary. In June, the level of half-year losses will be at the level of our plan, which is compatible with breakeven at the operating level at year-end. In reply to accu-sations that Bull was a ‘dead weight’, Lorentz said detractors failed to compare the company adequately to its competitors. IBM was in the red, Siemens was implementing lay offs and Nixdorf’s information systems subsidiary was yet to announce break-even; the top 10 global information systems suppliers lost $10,000m last year. The most important question was whether Bull had done better or worse than its competitors in the formidable revolution undergone by the industry since 1989. In his opinion, Bull has done better than certain others. But these last two years have been difficult in terms of our business plan. Our strategic choices were constantly debated in the public arena, and the actions of the president of the company were regularly called into question. It gave our competitors cause to rejoice. And, during this period, Sir Leon Brittan never asked Siemens to justify the money it invested in Nixdorf, and the deliberations of IBM’s board of directors on its strategic choices remained confidential. Bull’s future may be looking more stable; Lorentz’s is an unknown quantity as yet – suffice to say that he doesn’t imagine quitting the industry; I like it a lot.