Hurd: I don’t think compensation is the only thing that drives behavior. If you went into your own employees, you could ask the question. And compensation isn’t the No. 1 thing that drives our employees. Sometimes they say it is, but in the end it’s being part of a winning team. When you’re part of a winning team, we all know, go look at an analogy of a sports team. There are plenty of examples of people who take a cut in pay so they can be on a team that wins the Superbowl. Why do they do that? They like to win. So you can’t show up with just a compensation plan. You’ve got to show up with winning products. You’ve got to show up with a winning environment, where partners feel like they can go to the marketplace and they can win. So one of the real risks you have when you go through the channel—there's very few of these，but we actually have a few bad actors. If they use our brand as the lead, fill it up with non-HP product, so they can get more margin, but what sits in front of that consumer is the HP brand, then what happens is a huge failure rate in that product. We take a lot of accountability for that. So one dimension that gets some of the direct mania that you see out there is better control structure over all that. I have better control structure over the elements of the solution that go to the customer, I have better control over the support that goes to the customer. You’ve got to bank on your partners doing the right thing, and most of ours do.

Reporter: Obviously there’s nothing wrong with any company wanting its solution provider partners to sell more of its product. I mean that’s kind of a basic tenet of business. But what do you say about somebody who's doing maybe $100 million or more in HP but has large practices in some of your competitors? Is it any different for them than for anyone who might be 100 percent-dedicated to HP and maybe smaller?

Hurd: Well, we think it’s easier if you’re 100 percent-dedicated to HP. But the world isn’t 100 percent HP. We’d like it to be. But I think it’s not an objective for at least my tenure. But yeah, we have to deal with a world that's mixed but partners have to decide. To get back to your earlier point, our compensation program in isolation isn’t going to drive anybody to buy, by definition, more HP. It’s got to be because our products and solutions and our support are compelling. So in the end that’s what’s going to be the primary driver. I think all the compensation program tries to do is get them more engaged with HP. of the direct mania that you see out there is better control structure over all that. I have better control structure over the elements of the solution that go to the customer, I have better control over the support that goes to the customer. You’ve got to bank on your partners doing the right thing, and most of ours do.

Reporter: Obviously there’s nothing wrong with any company wanting its solution provider partners to sell more of its product. I mean that’s kind of a basic tenet of business. But what do you say about somebody who's doing maybe $100 million or more in HP but has large practices in some of your competitors? Is it any different for them than for anyone who might be 100 percent-dedicated to HP and maybe smaller?

Hurd: Well, we think it’s easier if you’re 100 percent-dedicated to HP. But the world isn’t 100 percent HP. We’d like it to be. But I think it’s not an objective for at least my tenure. But yeah, we have to deal with a world that's mixed but partners have to decide. To get back to your earlier point, our compensation program in isolation isn’t going to drive anybody to buy, by definition, more HP. It’s got to be because our products and solutions and our support are compelling. So in the end that’s what’s going to be the primary driver. I think all the compensation program tries to do is get them more engaged with HP.