From the article: "His appointment was heralded as a turning point for Intel with many lauding the decision to put a proper engineer rather than a bean counter at the helm.". Sadly, that approach has been reversed with two bean-counters (Both Mr Zinsner and Ms Holthaus have degrees in finance, etc).
As others have stated, technology (especially at this end) requires long-term vision to deliver rather than the 'fast buck to make the quarter') mentality that the stock-market gauges a company by.
AMD was in the doldrums for over a decade (Athlon was released in 1999 and Zen in 2017) after and it took Dr Su and her team some 3 years to bring the change - with a lot of outsourced technology (GloFlo and then TSMC fab processes, assembly of the 'chiplets' the permitted Zen to scale from low-core-count Ryzen to mega core Threadripper and Epyc design with just a handful of unique die). Intel has started down a similar road and also implemented the mix of P-cores and E-cores to balance performance and efficiency.
Not saying they have the right approach but it is probably good for the world not to be totally at the mercy of TSMC and international politics especially with Taiwan's big neighbour. Yes there are other fab companies (Jazz, GloFlo, TI, Tower, ADI, Denso, Canon, Samsung etc) but they are non-CPU (controllers, memory, power, etc etc). The UK is a history lesson of what happens when the the only 'economy' is dictated by the banks and the stock market - a pure service economy. Remember Ferranti, Marconi, GEC etc etc?
Yes I'm glad that AMD is doing well for now, and they have given Intel some healthy competition; however it's not good if the pendulum swings too far.