Intel’s announcement that CEO Pat Gelsinger is retiring with “immediate” effect marks a pivotal moment in the semiconductor giant’s history. The decision was surprising but inevitable, marking the end of an era that began with Gelsinger’s return to the company in 2021. As the company grapples with a challenging market and internal constraints, the question arises: Can Intel regain its edge in a highly competitive industry? Or has it lost the “paranoia” that once made it an unstoppable force?

Only the paranoid survive—But has Intel forgotten?

Legendary former Intel CEO Andy Grove famously stated: “Only the paranoid survive.” Under his leadership, this mantra became the company’s guiding principle. Grove’s paranoia wasn’t about fear; It was about constant vigilance and the tireless drive to innovate. This thinking transformed Intel from a struggling memory chip maker to the leader in microprocessors, where it dominated the market for decades.

When Pat Gelsinger returned as CEO in 2021 after successful leadership roles at EMC and VMware, the hope was that he could restore Intel’s innovation edge and strategic clarity. A seasoned technologist with deep roots at Intel, Gelsinger took on the daunting task of revamping the company’s fortunes. His bold IDM 2.0 strategy aimed to turn Intel into a manufacturing powerhouse and foundry leader. But despite his clear vision and undeniable passion, the results fell short of expectations.

Intel shares have plunged over 50% this year, and the company suffered a record loss of $17 billion last quarter and laid off over 15% of its workforce. Its production delays and AI missteps left the company far behind rivals like Nvidia, which has taken the lead in AI chips, and TSMC, which has become the dominant force in chip manufacturing. Making matters worse, Intel was removed from the Dow Jones Industrial Average earlier this year, a symbolic blow to a company that was once at the forefront of tech innovation.

While Gelsinger inherited significant challenges, his inability to maintain the pace required in today’s rapidly changing technology landscape led to his expulsion. Intel, once the leader in the semiconductor world, is now struggling to regain its footing.

The end of an era – and the beginning of a crossroads

Gelsinger’s sudden departure following the board’s decision to replace him marks the end of an era at Intel. Although Gelsinger’s efforts to restore the company’s production capabilities and restore its competitive advantage were admirable, they ultimately failed in a market where innovation waits for no one. Intel’s board became frustrated with the pace of change and made the difficult decision to part ways with its CEO.

With CFO David Zinsner and Client Computing Group GM Michelle Johnston Holthaus stepping in as interim co-CEOs, Intel finds itself at a critical juncture. The next permanent CEO will face the daunting task of charting a new course for the company. Intel’s future depends on how well it adapts to new market realities and copes with fierce competition in the semiconductor space.

Three questions about Intel’s future have emerged:

1. Will Intel continue to push its foundry model or should it refocus on core competencies like chip design?
2. Can the company regain lost ground in AI and edge computing, or is it too far behind Nvidia to catch up?
3. Will Intel need to restructure, spin off parts of its business, or even consider a merger to survive in the long term?

Rediscovering the paranoid mind

For Intel to succeed, it must rediscover the spirit of paranoia that has served it so well in the past. Grove’s mantra wasn’t about fear – it was about staying one step ahead and anticipating disruption before it happens. In an industry where technological cycles are measured in months, not years, survival requires constant reinvention.

Intel needs a leader who can reignite its hunger for innovation and disruption, one who can act with the same urgency that characterized the company in its heyday. The next CEO must be someone who understands that complacency is the greatest risk in today’s world. We don’t have time to think about past glories.

What lies ahead

Pat Gelsinger’s sudden departure is both a reflection of Intel’s troubles and a moment ripe for renewal. The company now faces a crucial question: Will it regain the vigilance and boldness that once made it a powerhouse, or will it join the tech industry’s growing list of cautionary tales?

As Andy Grove said: “Success breeds complacency. Complacency leads to failure. Only the paranoid survive.” Intel’s survival depends on how deeply it can reconnect with that ethos – embracing a culture of relentless innovation and adaptability before outside forces dictate its fate.

The tech industry offers countless examples of once-dominant players failing to transform in the face of disruption. Intel’s challenges illustrate a universal truth for leaders: Nostalgia and legacy, while inspiring, are not strategies. Success requires not only vision but also flawless execution, especially in industries where the pace of innovation is relentless.

For Gelsinger, this is a bittersweet end to a remarkable career at the forefront of technological change. For Intel, it’s a stark reminder that even industry giants aren’t immune to irrelevance if they don’t adapt.

As the world watches, Intel must answer the critical question that Gelsinger himself posed at MIT just a year ago: “Are we going to create the future?”

The stakes couldn’t be higher. The tech industry — and its next chapter — depends on what happens next.