> Apple had two separate teams competing against each other on this topic
That is a sign of very bad management. Overlapping responsibilities kill motivation as winning the infighting becomes more important than creating a good product. Low morale, and a blaming culture is the result of such "internal competition". Instead, leadership should do their work and align goals, set clear priorities and make sure that everybody rows in the same direction.
It’s how Apple (relatively famously?) developed the iPhone, so I’d assume they were using this as a model.
> In other words, should he shrink the Mac, which would be an epic feat of engineering, or enlarge the iPod? Jobs preferred the former option, since he would then have a mobile operating system he could customize for the many gizmos then on Apple’s drawing board. Rather than pick an approach right away, however, Jobs pitted the teams against each other in a bake-off.
But that's not the same thing right? That means having two teams competing for developing the next product. That's not two organisations handling the same responsibilities. You may still end up in problems with infighting. But if there is a clear end date for that competition and then no lasting effects for the "losers" this kind of "competition" will have very different effects than setting up two organisations that fight over some responsibility
That is a sign of very bad management. Overlapping responsibilities kill motivation as winning the infighting becomes more important than creating a good product. Low morale, and a blaming culture is the result of such "internal competition". Instead, leadership should do their work and align goals, set clear priorities and make sure that everybody rows in the same direction.