[jason-phillips]

I was a software engineer and did not work in LSI, so I cannot comment on that in a way which would be most informative, but I will try from a different perspective. An accurate answer would be incredibly complex, obviously.

Samsung, from my perspective, mostly focuses on this year's production and developing next year's model. Yes, there is work done planning for new fabs and global supply chain systems, but 98% of cycles are spent on this year's production and designing next year's model.

Samsung accounts for a huge percentage of South Korea's GDP, about 20%. Therefore, Samsung needs to favor stability over taking risks associated with living at the bleeding-edge of innovation. Samsung always did play the safe game when I worked there (and for good reason when you're babysitting a $20 billion factory with $100 million of product that could be scrapped at any time).

Again, I wasn't in LSI but this is my perception overall having worked there, traveled to Korea and learned Korean culture.

[dylan522p]

Good thing the article even says Samsung is a well oiled machine in many areas outside of the ones with issues discussed in this article. Almost like large companies can have varrying success and culture.

[jason-phillips]

Absolutely. It's a very complicated subject.