Conference 7.286::digital

                           by Dyan Machan
                  (FORBES Magazine, March 23, 1987)

    In many ways Digital Equipment Corp. is a big company in small company
    clothes.  It doesn't believe much in hierarchy, rule books, dress
    codes, company cars, executive dining rooms, lofty titles, country club
    memberships or most other trappings of corpocracy.  It doesn't even
    have assigned parking spots.  Only the top half-dozen executives have
    sizable offices.  Everyone else at the campuslike headquarters in
    Maynard, Mass. makes do with dinky, doorless cubicles. 

    Sometimes it seems as if founder and President Kenneth Olsen is still
    running the firm with borrowed lawn furniture at the company's unusual
    digs, a renovated woolen mill dating back to 1847.  For a grown-up
    company DEC's size--it ranks 87th in The Forbes 500, with 1986 sales of
    $7.6 billion--it does hang on to some youthful habits. 

    But no one's complaining, least of all shareholders (who include a
    large portion of the 100,000 employees).  Net income is up 115% for the
    calendar year, and the employee turnover rate is the envy of
    competitors--only 5%.  That's less than half the industry average. 

    The reason DEC can foster such loyalty lies with its founder.  Ken
    Olsen, 61, is a no-frills type who ignores the titles of chairman and
    chief executive, using only that of president.  He drives his own Ford
    to work and likes to say that whatever he learned about managing came
    from teaching a Sunday School class.  He's a religious man, a deacon at
    Park Street Church in Boston and, quietly, gave 800,000 share of his
    DEC stock, today worth $123 million, to the Stratford foundation, a
    private charity. 

    Digital disdains flash.  Before enlarging the mill's reception area,
    the company fretted that the glass-enclosed are might give off the
    wrong signals--that is, that the company was getting fancy. 

    Olsen fights to maintain a working environment much like his old lab at
    the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he earned his
    bachelor's and master's degrees in electrical engineering.  He wanted,
    he says, "a very generous, very trusting and very challenging
    environment."  So Digital's bustling building more resembles a large
    student union than a high-tech headquarters. 

    In fact, it's hard to know who's who in the pecking order.  When
    Personnel Director John Sims joined the company 13 years ago, he sat in
    on a meeting and could not determine who was the boss.  Says Winston
    Hindle Jr., senior vice president of operations, "From the beginning we
    believed that a company's intelligence is more in the front lines than
    in the executive suite." 

    Decisions are often made at the lowest levels, and ideas are expected
    to bubble to the top.  In the early 1980s, for example, DEC started
    building computers to customers' specifications rather than trying to
    predict their equipment needs from the planning committee.  That puts a
    lot of responsibility on lower-level staff.  They must know what
    customers want and communicate it to the design team. 

    Employees think nothing of jumping several levels of authority to get
    support for an idea.  Some newcomers have written lengthy memos to
    Olsen himself, to which he has responded. 

    Small wonder Digital is considered an engineer's paradise.  Engineers,
    called "independent contributors," have essentially the same status as
    managers.  Many have flexible hours and can work from modems in their
    homes.  Says Victoria Triolo, a senior engineer in mid-range VAX
    computer systems, "You always get the feeling the engineer is number
    one." 

    Additional education and training are strongly encouraged.  In fact,
    engineers seeking advanced degrees can take sabbaticals to attend
    approved schools at full pay and with tuition paid by DEC. 

    Lots of training goes on in-house, too.  Engineers are expected to
    spend at least five days a year attending training sessions, and
    salespeople must spend at least twice that amount boning up on company
    products and services.  DEC has an educational services department that
    provides instruction for employees and customers alike. 

    DEC prefers to train and develop its managers in-house, rather than go
    outside.  It runs its own grueling, three-year financial development
    program for new hires interested in management.  Recruits are rotated
    through three one-year job assignments and spend one day a week in
    formal classroom study. 

    But the company prefers its new salespeople to have some seasoning
    already, preferably computer industry experience and a technical
    background.  When it does find a green grad with sales potential, he or
    she has to undergo a six-month training course.  Those with experience
    attend a 90-day session before active duty. 

    As in any democracy, freedom of expression can also create chaos, and
    Hindle is the first to admit it.  Projects started at first-rung levels
    can overlap and bump into each other.  And at some jobs, employees may
    have dotted-line responsibility to several bosses. That's great for
    creative exchange, but it's trying when an employee can't be in two
    places at once.  "Our company is more frenetic than others," Hindle
    allows. 

    And that may be one reason the company promotes so much from within.
    DEC's structureless, informal environment could drive outsiders nuts.
    Only two of six members of DEC's executive committee have worked for
    other companies.  It's not a place where credentials earned
    elsewhere--M.B.A.s, Ph.D.s--have much weight.  Jack Shields, the senior
    vice president in charge of sales, services and marketing, didn't even
    finish college.  Technicians lacking degrees can work as engineers at
    DEC by passing a peer review. 

    No one joins Digital just for the pay, although it's competitive, or
    for the perks--there aren't many.  The biggest exception is for
    salespeople, who just recently started getting bonuses that can amount
    to 10% to 20% of their salaries.  The bonus program, only in its second
    year, represents a bit of a compromise.  DEC has always insisted that
    salespeople shouldn't encourage customers to buy equipment they don't
    need.  Hence, the company has shunned traditional commissions.  The
    customer still comes first.  In fact, salespeople are evaluated each
    year by their own customers. 

    Top performers throughout the company are also invited on DEC's annual
    business/pleasure trip to a resort (last year it was Interlaken,
    Switzerland), but it's the stock program that is the primary benefit
    for DEC hands.  More than a few long-term employees are millionaires:
    Since 1965, the stock has risen from $22 to $2,800, adjusted for
    splits.  Every employee is permitted to set aside from 2% to 10% of his
    pay to purchase stock at a 15% market discount.  The company also
    awards stock options to top performers at senior levels.  Says Hindle,
    "We can buy our country club memberships." 

    DEC's unorthodoxy has its downside, of course.  Because of
    decentralization, the company pays a price in its recruiting effort,
    according to MIT career services director Robert Weatherall. Also though
    he considers the company "marvelous, technically and humanly," he says
    a good recruiting effort for a large company must have "some degree of
    centralization."  DuPont and competitors like Hewlett-Packard and IBM
    all have better recruiting groups, Weatherall says. 

    But the priority at DEC is clearly making and selling computers, which
    it has been doing better than anyone else of late.  Says Hindle: "We're
    not trying to preach.  Our system may not work for other companies."
    But it certainly does work for DEC.
    
    Forbes,  March 23, 1987
    (Reprinted without permission)

  I believe that Digital's advantage over run-of-the-mill competition is
  exactly the same as a free democracy's advantage over other forms of
  government.  The advantage is that individuals have the freedom to excel.

  In other words, here at Digital it is possible to do the right thing.
  That doesn't mean that it is easy -- but then it never has been and
  probably never will be easy.  But it is *possible*. 

  While it may not be possible for a given individual to excel in a given
  organization (for a variety of reasons, not all of them sinister), I
  strongly believe that it is possible for an individual to find an 
  organization in which to excel.  

  I work in ZK and whenever we lose a valuable person to another company
  -- often because that person either doesn't agree with the goals of an
  organization or because he or she doesn't think the organization is
  doing "interesting" things -- it saddens me.  I think that people who are
  feeling frustrated in a job should look around for something that needs
  doing (and that they would enjoy doing).  That is, find a contribution
  that needs to be made and become an individual contributor.  

  The difference between Digital and traditional bureaucracies is that
  the bureacracy is designed to function in spite of its employees (it
  has been noted that the Byzantine Empire outlasted the Western Roman
  Empire by 1000 years because of the inertia of its paperwork).  Digital
  is structured, at least in part, so that it depends on the intelligence
  and resourcefulness of the people in the front lines.

  In a very real sense, Digital's organization mirrors its product line.
  We're into decentralization of control.  Individuals have to figure out
  what the right thing is and then do it.  And note that doing the right
  thing is not the same as doing things right.  Doing the right thing may
  mean that you change the definition of "doing things right."

  I guess I've blithered enough for now.  Don, thanks for bringing this
  subject up -- obviously you hit one of my hot buttons.
 
  JP

    I would agree with the comments made in .1 and .2. I have done some
    research over the last 2 1/2 years on the DEC culture, and more
    recently, on the social, cultural and organizational impications
    of computer networks. In this latter research, it became very clear
    to me that IBM's current difficulties stem form their culture(mirrored
    in their approach to networking). Having spent 11 years at IBM and
    now, 10 at DEC, it appears to me that our culture (and our networking)
    permit much greater creativity, adaptability and foster greater
    morale and enthusiasm amongst the workers than IBM's top-down,
    hierarchical approach. In a time which requires these latter qualities
    to compete and to respond to the accelerated rate of change in our
    society and marketplace, IBM just doesn't have the right culture.
    
    
    Pete

	I think, but I am not totally sure, that I am the first person from 
the field to reply to this.  I know Don just left my District for the AEC, and 
if either of the other two respondees are field people, my apologies!

	From a field perspective, that is, from an organization that DIRECTLY 
contributes to the company bottom line, I find the ability of the Unit and 
District managers to make decisions somewhat limited, and certainly not with 
the freedom of engineering.  For example, on pricing Fixed Price projects from 
Software Services, the DSWM could come up with a competitive, margin-meeting 
price based something other than MLP prices, and COUNTRY would OVERRULE that 
price if it was LESS than one based on MLP!  And, for your education, NO Fixed 
Price bids can go to a customer WITHOUT a Country level approval!  That's 
democracy?????

	There are some other examples I have seen, but the open nature of this 
Conference makes me reluctant to detail them, as names of the guilty are 
impossible to conceal.  In a nutshell, those people who day to day life 
revolves around making DEC a profitable company with satisfied customers are 
restricted by a bureaucracy (official AND unofficial!) that limits creativity, 
and in some cases, makes us LESS successful than we could be, both in profit 
AND customer satisfaction.

    Having successfully escaped from the field organization within the
    past 18 months, .4 struck a note with me in that it's difficult
    to believe that I'm still working within the same company.  From
    my perch, I see & experience much of what the other replies have
    said; ie, creative freedom, lower-level decision making, and *placing
    the customer is #1 priority*, etc.  It seems a shame that those
    same traits often don't get "down" to the field organizations.
    
    One of the things that I didn't notice in previous replies is something
    which KO says frequently; in fact, I believe it's stated in the
    front page of either this years or last years annual report: Digital
    tries to make computing fun.  By doing the RIGHT thing at ALL levels,
    I believe that Digital has achieved this, at least from my own
    perspective.
    
    In talking with "seat-mates" on airlines or out of town, a very
    common question is "where do you work".  Of course I tell them Digital,
    which always prompts the response "how do you like working for such
    a large company".  Again my response is that I love it.  It's
    surprising how many people cannot understand how a person can "enjoy"
    their job, instead of just viewing it as a method of getting bread
    on the table at home.
    
    Always trying to do the RIGHT thing --
    Jon

    I'm more pessimistic than the previous repli(ers), but this is in
    the hope that a danger or trend can be recognized and dealt with.
    In a software management course I took several years ago, the
    instructor contrasted the corporate culture of young, small, startup
    companies and older, larger companies.  Young companies allow (and
    expect) a lot more initiative from employees: indeed, someone's
    promotion and salary are a direct reflection on their ability. 
    Older, larger companies place a premium on harmony, stability, and
    "team-spirit".  Young companies do not have the resources to do
    some things, so some dreams never get off the ground.  Older companies
    have the resources, but stifle rogue thinking because large
    organizations are already difficult enough to manage.
    
    DEC is in transition from a small to large company (actually, I
    think that happened about ten years ago...).  Some signs are the
    new policies on system use and security, and I personally see a
    lot more difficulty in getting new projects started.
    
    There are some hopeful signs: the previous reply mentioned KO's
    get-out-of-the-way style of management, and I have seen him quoted
    in various articles about how he would like to see more independent
    thinkers in upper management.  NOTES itself is an indication of
    DEC's corporate attitude: this discussion in a (semi)-public forum
    would be unthinkable in every other company that I know of.  Maybe
    DEC can beat the odds and create a new corporate style.
    
    When I first came to DEC, I was struck by the number of people who
    really loved working here.  I soon became one of them, and haven't
    changed my mind since.

    Reality is the organizations whose results are immediate and easily
    measured such as mine, Software Services, and Sales, of course are run
    in 180-degree opposition to the tone of the FORBES article and the
    previous replies.
    
    Our management (Sales, Field Service, Software Services, Educational
    Services) laughs at the quaint ways of Maynard, Merrimack, and the
    rest. Reality is hierarchy, rule books, dress codes, and lofty titles:
    Digital's field offices have it now!
    
    I only wish we could all be a bit more honest about these changes than
    to think nothing's changed since the days we broke into the Fortune 500. 

    Re: .6
    
    Pete, you sounded pretty 'up' to me.  A key point is that you still
    love Digital as I believe almost all of us do.
    
    Re: .7
    
    Pat, as usual, is quite perceptive.  One's local environment has a major
    bearing on one's perspective.  Jon Arnold and I both lived in the field
    as Pat and Jack now do.  It is easy to see the HUGE difference between
    the field and the 'other' Digital that, as Pat points out, the
    management in the field laughs at.  I recall a senior manager in the
    field saying a few years ago that Ken Olsen was senile and living in
    the past.  I have really been tempted to call this quite successful
    field manager and ask him if Ken still looks senile.
    
    Pat is one of the people who made me think of the term activist
    in the base note.  Pat has far more power in Digital than I believe
    he could have in any other company of the same size.  Pat is an
    advocate (not sure if devil's advocate fits perfectly) and very
    picky and, of course, very vocal.  In a normal organization someone
    like Pat would have been put down or out.  A normal organization
    does all it can to stifle dissent and Pat appears to cause dissent.
    
    In fact, Pat's great benefit in many places within Digital is to
    cause dissent by being picky.  He can certainly be a pain in the
    tail and has more than his share of enemies.  However, he has had
    some very positive impacts.
    
    More importantly, he is doing this coming from one of the most
    downtrodden organizations in Digital.  I suspect that not only does
    his management not know how much activity he spends in advocating
    in these forums but would discourage it if they did.  Pat does the
    RIGHT things even if it doesn't help him immediately or if his
    organization is actively trying to stomp out the right things.
    
    I don't mean to pick on or embarrass Pat by saying what an asset
    he is.  My point is that we ALL have enormous power to affect Digital.
    In many respects, VAX Notes provides us with concurrent town meetings
    throughout Digital.
    
    Digital is clearly not perfect and has reduced the freedoms available
    over the past years.  I certainly wish that the field could be more
    like the rest of Digital.  I certainly glad I escaped but I'm sad
    that I HAD to in order to work for the real Digital.
    
    Or is it that Pat's Digital is the 'real Digital'?
    
    Don

    
    I guess the time on this note tells you how I feel about Digital.
    How many companies have their employees conferencing late on off
    hours about their corporate culture?
    
    Ran my own business for 15 years and never felt this free.
    It is fun to contribute and see the results of your work.
  
   

    I keep hearing about this vast difference in culture between the
    field offices and central engineering.  Clearly there seems to be
    a lot more job satisfaction in the culture of central engineering
    than that of the field offices.  
    
    In reading the replies to this base note, I've noticed three recurrent
    perceptions which may be a part of the problem.  First, field offices
    are percieved as being "lower" than engineering.  At the same time, it
    is percieved that field offices generate revenue while engineering
    doesn't.  Finally, there is the attitude that what works in engineering
    is totally out of touch with the "real world". 
    
    In point of fact, *Digital* generates revenue and depends upon
    engineering to design good product, manufacturing and SDC to build it,
    and the field offices to deliver it and tailor it to the customer's
    needs.  Top talent and hard work is needed in all of those places or
    the revenue won't be there.  "Words and music -- we need each other." 

    Since two of these perceptions are seen to be false, this naturally
    leads to the question "Is the third one false also?"  Can the kind
    of culture we experience in engineering work in dealing with the
    real world and selling what we make?  Or is the harsher culture
    of the field offices really necessary if DEC is to be profitable?
    
    (Please, reply to this one only if you are in a field office or have
    recently left one.  I don't think those of us who've spent the past
    five years or so in the heart of engineering are in a position to
    judge.) 
    
    							Ralph

    It is somewhat disheartening that the features of the field
    organization that everyone complains about (hierachies, dress codes,
    lofty titles) are precisely the features of the "new DEC" that the rest
    of the business world seems to admire.  A large part of our recent
    success is attributed to our new "more professional" marketing and
    sales organization.  To get their respect, we (at least the part they
    see) have had to become more like them.  Remember, IBM didn't get its
    image from the guys in R&D... 
    
    The "new DEC" field organization is composed largely of people hired
    from the sales forces of other computer and office vendors - not
    folks who grew up on DEC.  How can you expect them to maintain a
    culture they've never been part of?

This probably belongs in WAR_STORY, but what's a rathole among friends:

I started my career at Dec as a field sofware specialist; back during
Dec's "we're all engineers" days.  One of the first major (i.e., IBM)
accounts we penetrated was a factory control system for a large
automobile company.  If we got the contract, I would be responsible
for modifying RSX-11D so it could talk to their existing 5-channel
teletypes. 

I was sent on one of the many sales calls to discuss this.  Midway
through the meeting, the customer asked me about this.  Sitting there
in my better sport jacket, I said that wouldn't be any problem,
"except for one thing."  "What's that?" "Well, the existing system
uses a microswitch to detect paper out, and that won't be easy to add
to the terminal driver."  "That's ok, we use a different interface to
watch that signal." 

We got the contract, implemented the system, and the customer lived
happily ever after. 

A few years later, I was visiting the customer (on another matter),
and ate lunch with their v.p. for data processing.  "Do you know why
Dec won that contract?  When it was clear that IBM was losing, their
salesman asked what we needed.  I said we wanted to talk to your
technical people, not just your salesmen." 

"`No problem,' the IBM guy said, `I'll bring our best technical people
up from Brussels.'

"When their plane arrived, I went to the airport to greet them.  From
300 feet away, I could tell by their shoes that they were salesmen."

Instead of sending only salesmen, Dec sent out the non-slick person
who would be responsible for the implementation; and he told the
customer both the good news and the (potential) problems.

The moral is that Dec's old-time engineer virtues are appreciated
by customers who understand them.  It's not clear that they can
be retained (or how to retain them) when we've grown from 7,500
people to over a 100,000; but I hope we don't forget them.

Martin

    
    One of my complaints about my current organization is that our
    engineering management does not properly value the direct contacts
    we have with the field. I am impressed by the many people I have
    met from the field. They are - to a person - hard working and
    interested in giving our customers the best possible solution.
    My impact in the field is tremendous. Both the customers and the
    field personnel appreciate the time engineering takes to help them
    out. Saved a large network sale to a bank holding company in Topeka
    just that way. 
    

    Out in the field, you live or die by the numbers.  Sometimes it's
    very hard to do the right thing for a long term business relationship
    when you're worried about making this quarter's budget.  I still
    see folks in the field doing the right thing, but I also see more
    and more emphisis on the short term numbers.  Hopefully, we'll never
    let the "we've got to make the numbers" attitude win over the "let's
    do the right thing" attitude.
    
    re .11: 
    You're right.  One reason Digtial is now perceived as having a "more
    professional" salesforce is because we've nearly doubled the sales
    reps in the last two years (and have more than doubled sales support
    software specialists).  Most of these folks just haven't had the
    time to learn about the Digital culture, much less live by it. 

    A couple of thoughts-
    
    One of the previous relies discussed the influx of new hires and
    their exposure to DECculture.  A very important point, being
    disregarded by some in field management, is that by synergizing
    - mixing the better points of the 'olde' people and their culture
    and the different experience and exposure of the 'new' people -
    we can ALL grow and become better.  There is a risk and some tendency
    to differentiate and divide the old and the new and even 'replace'.
     That will not help anyone.
    
    The Field vs. greater Maynard perceptions have been a battle for
    years and will never end without major cross-pollinization.  One
    possibility would be a decent rotation program.  A friend was hired
    as a regional controller for Burger King.  Even though he is an
    accountant and was hired into a 'high management' position, his
    first two weeks were spent behind a counter cooking and serving
    hamburgers - like ALL new hires.  Their philosophy was - that is
    our business and EVERYONE must understand it.  The cost of living
    in Mass. is one of the reasons field folk are reluctant to go North
    (or East).  It is a fact of life that the higher in the organization-
    the more removed from the 'real' business and 'real' customers and
    the more the involvement in politics vs. serving the direct, tactical
    needs.  But, a large organization needs both and with good
    understanding and communication , both can work together.
    
    The problem with 'moving to a better place within' is that some
    managers perceive that as 'running from a problem' rather than 'going
    to something bigger and better'.  This is an issue of the maturity
    of individual managers.
    
    As someone once said 'Digital is the best company in the world at
    self-flagellation'.  Maybe that is how we succeed inspite of ourselves
    and the organization?
    
    The key is the people!  People who care will make it happen without
    regard to organizations, culture, etc.
    
    Still hanging in after 11 years........
    
    	-Barry-
    

    Maybe I'm being misunderstood: DEC's culture as described in various
    Business Week, Forbes, and Fortune articles, as well as in "In
    Search of Excellence" is DEAD IN THE FIELD and has been for several
    years
    
    There are no "oldtimers" in the field too introduce new hires to
    the quaint ways of the DEC recently described in FORBES.  My
    first contact with DEC's culture was in 1968 and I was hired in 1975.
    Theres a little oldtimer gap of zero employees in my district who
    were hired from 1976 through 198: no Software Specialists
    or Software Unit Managers hired during that period are stil
    around to communicate that culture to new hires.
    
    About 6 or 7 reorganizations ago, "product lines" which were really
    oriented around industry groups were dissovled and the field got what
    it always wanted: DIRECT PROFIT AND LOSS responsibility. The rest, as
    they say, is history.  A completely myopic focus on the short-term
    results and don't let anything in the way such as putting the customer
    first and showing concern for the productivity of individual
    contributors.
    
    Rather than having a common culture between people who share a close
    professional bond like software engineers and software specialists,
    most software specialists that I know of dream of the experience
    of working in an environment that espouses the DEC culture, they
    don' have it now and some in sales and software never saw it, and
    some will get it though a transfer to corporate,or in their
    next job at a competitor or a customer.
    
    Whatever once existed of the DEC culture in the field was irretrievably
    lost years ago.  It's time to stop being nostaligic and get real
    about what it means to sell for DEC in a field office.

    First of all, I agree with Pat that there's a lot wrong with the
    field.  Most of the problems stem from the inability of most of
    the management to look beyond short term results.
    
    However, I'm not as pessimistic as he.  There are an enormous number
    of very talented and dedicated people working in the field.  In
    addition, there are a lot of good managers who understand and follow
    the Digital principles.  There is great diversity out there.  There
    are most certainly a lot of places in the field which are fun just
    like the good old days and the way life is perceived in engineering.
    
    The clear problem with life in the is the fact that the buck stops
    there.  That's one of the really fun things about the field, at
    least, when dealing with customers.  The field IS Digital to our
    customers and that's a great responsibility as well as being very
    rewarding.
    
    I believe that it's vital that we ALL understand the beauty of Digital
    and live by the principles of Digital.  We can lead those who don't
    understand or believe in those who don't seem to.  I know that this
    sounds somewhat naive but I've seen it work.  It just takes time.
    
    My approach is to introduce Ken Olsen and Grace Hopper through their
    various talks and recordings.
    
    I certainly don't believe that life can be as perfect as was painted
    in the Forbes article but it can be a lot better than it appears
    to be where Pat lives.
    
    Not always so optimistic,
    
    Don

    
    Well...I've recently come from several years in the field as a
    specialist to 6 motnhs in CE as a software engineer.   Pat is
    correct in pointing up the reality of life in the field, but his
    observations clearly do not extend to every field office.  It comes
    down to the individual managment in each field office.  Are they
    totally driven by the short term numbers or do they have some concept
    of what the "real" DIGITAL culture is?  My experience was that my
    management had alot of the first and at least a little of the second.
    
    As I believe Martin pointed out earlier, there are many customers
    who are technical in nature and have much greater respect for the
    specialist who shows up in jeans and knows his/her stuff, rather
    than the the specialist in a two or three piece suit who "looks" sharp,
    but fails to have the technical expertise to back up his/her look.

    The point being that managers are not all stupid and they realize
    that some customers are more "satisfied" by the specialist who
    tries to live the unique DEC culture.  Perhaps not in the big apple,
    but hey "don't mind the maggots".
    
    I agree whole heartedly with .17, in that there are a great number
    of very talented folks in the field.  My hope is that these
    talented folks can do something to mold their management and educate
    them if necessary.  Educate management that at least a sliver of
    the true DEC culture must be maintained in the face of bottom lines,
    lest we lose the respect of a great deal of our customers.  This
    is what I tried to do while in the field and it worked to some degree
    because you can show positive results and satisfied customers, things
    which any manager can understand.  
    
    I believe it is the responsibility of everyone in the field to learn
    about the heritage of DEC's culture and strive to educate those
    around them.   This should be the case everywhere, even in New York
    city.  Don't resign yourself to the "death" of DEC culture in the
    field, "rage, rage against the dying of the light."  (loosely quoted)
    
    Enough rambling...
    
    jt

    I, of course, agree completely with .18 and the approach of educating
    EVERYONE I deal with about the TRUE meaning of Digital.
    
    Is .19 and some of the other more pessimistic view that we should
    just keep our mouths shut and let things go?
    
    Everyone of us has a fair amount of influence and each of us CAN
    make a difference.  You're not going to be very effective or happy
    by being totally apathetic.
    
    Of course, tilting at windmills is often ineffective but quite romantic,
    
    Don

    There is nothing romantic about a windmill that tilts too far and
    falls on you ....
    
    Caught in the "dead zone" between Engineering and the field ...
    the AEC!
    
    jack

    
    
    A good part of our customers respect for "DIGITAL" comes from the
    fact that decisions can be made on the spot. Be they engineering,
    sales, or service the person there can make the decision usually
    without having to shuttle back and forth between different levels
    of management. This flexibility and speed of response, coupled with
    the customers knowledge that unless a major blunder has been made
    the decision will be honored go a long way towards gaining the respect 
    and trust of the people we deal with. 
    
    It is right that managers should be concerned with the bottom line
    but most or should I say good managers do realize that the bottom
    line today is not the same next week or next month or next year.
    The only constant on that bottom line should be a satisfied customer.
    He is our best advertising and our best sales tool and he not your
    manger is where your paycheck ultimately comes from. If there is
    a problem dealing with that thought by you maybe you should change
    jobs. If your manager has a problem with it perhaps a talk will
    help him come back to the real world of CUSTOMER service.
     
    
      

    The "dress code" is and should be "When in Rome do as the Romans
    do."   While you can argue that clothes making a first impression,
    the DIGITAL culture takes pride in knowedge and customers appreciate
    that. I hope that buy decisions will be made on facts, not on appearances.
    
    Overheard at DECUS: oldtimer telling firstimer, "The people with
    the blue `DEC' ribbons are experts, unless they're wearing a three
    piece suit."   Yeah!                              
    
    The interdisciplinary helping skills that DIGITAL people develop are 
    quite unique for a large corporation.  For example, at IBM, salesmen
    are paid large commissions which they do not share with engineers
    - what kind of "helping salespeople" skills can those engineers
    develop?  Maybe we just need to realize that some time can be spent
    helping others, but most of our time is allocated elsewhere.
    
    Finally, the only thing more "fun" that designing and building and
    useing computers is to see how products help others - others who may
    be pushing the state of the art in THEIR specialties in medical
    research, publishing, etc. etc.        
    
    	Rick
    	Merrill
    

    Two more cents worth on the "dress code":
    
    A couple of months ago, I went to a sales presentation in Hawaii.
    For the first days presentation, I came into the presentation area
    dressed in "normal presentation attire"; ie, suit, tie, etc.  The
    sales rep saw me & asked if I was planning to attend a funeral,
    then told me to get into the hotel gift shop asap and get myself
    a flowered Hawaiian shirt.
    
    He wasn't kidding.  Every local Digit had on a flowered Hawaiian
    shirt in the traditional style, as well as each & every customer
    who attended the presentation.  All week!
    
    When in Rome...
    Jon

    Having read everyone's replies on the DEC culture, I'm still optimistic
    about the ability of the culture, as we know and love it, to
    survive---even in the field. By the way, I'm part of the field sales
    organization, but also, spent 5 years in Merrimack. I mentioned
    in .3 that I had spent 1 1/2 years researching the DEC culture with
    a leading authority in the field. One who has just published a bbok
    on the subject, and in which, Dec figures prominently. 
    
    I'm not trying to impress anyone with what I know about the DEC
    culture, but rather, trying to give you some confidence that the
    core values of any culture don't change easily----especially one
    as strong as ours. Dress codes and the like, are not the fundamental
    assumptions of our culture. According to the research, there are
    3.
    
    1. Digital is a family.
    2. People are creative, hard-working and capable of governing
    themselves.
    3. Truth is discovered through conflict.
    
    At this "root" level, I ask you to eveluate whether these same values
    are not present in the field organization. Certainly, they may not
    exist to the same extent that they do in Maynard, but I submit you'll
    find them there in some form of the above. 
    
    Hang in there! I maintain that DEC has been and will continue to
    be successful because of its culture. There have been threats to
    it before and there will continue to be, and it may even change
    someday. All of us need to fight to make sure we preserve those
    elements of it we hold dear.
    
    Pete

Can you give us a pointer to this book on DEC culture?
(is there a DEC employee discount :-)?

    Well, I can't resist a reply on this subject, albeit a late one.
    
    Since 1979 I've spent half my time in the field, the other half
    in engineering.  I've had a chance to watch the DEC culture for
    some time now.  I'm not sure the field ever really had the kind
    of culture that Forbes talks about.  It used to be a lot more casual,
    to be sure, but I've always had the impression it was pretty
    hierarchical.  What I HAVE noticed is the trend away from the kind
    of parochialism that fostered drastically different cultures in
    the various sub-groups around the corporation, not just 'the field'
    versus 'engineering'.
    
    Marketing, manufacturing, personnel, Corporate Telecom, SWS, F/S,
    sales, GIA, etc, have aways tended to foster different cultures.
    The nature of the company's organization and history encouraged
    it.  I think that engineering (hardware/software) vs. the field
    (sales/SWS/Field Service) represents the most dramatic difference,
    that's all.  I also think that as the corporation grows there's
    a tendency toward the middle - toward the more 'main stream' DEC
    culture.  I like to think that's what Forbes was describing.  It's
    true the field is harsh - I'm currently working there, and can see
    that clearly, but it's also changing, perhaps maturing.  So is
    Engineering, or so it was two years ago.
    
    BTW, I disagree with the comments about dress code.  Nothing impresses
    a customer more than the surprise of discovering the well-dressed
    apparent 'salesy' DEC person is in fact a very technical, competant
    professional.  Nothing makes the Big Blue three piece suit look
    worse, either.  As was said, when in Rome (Italy, or Georgia)...
    
    
    tim
    
    

    Another late entry, but give me a break, I've only been with DEC
    since 6-APR-87, after 5 years at Wang. There was nothing even close
    to this kind of forum there, and I think it's great. This conference
    especially has given me some insights about this mysterious "DEC
    way" that I had heard about. 
    
    Well, here's my 2 cents.
    
    In one week here I've met more people who LOVE their jobs than I
    did in 5 years at Wang. 
    
    OK, that's an exaggeration, but it sure seems that way. Granted,
    this is my first week at CSC/MA, but everything I see makes me feel
    better about my decision to leave what I considered to be a great
    job. If this is what DEC culture is all about, count me in!
    
    
    -Greg 

    For what it's worth,NO company with sales of $1 billion + remains
    a democracy. Since DEC passed the magic number, we have steadily
    become a beaurocracy. One has only to look at the size and shape
    of the personnel department to realize this. 

I work in the field and I don't believe the battle to preserve/restore the DEC
culture need be over. What makes us different and special is not just the
decentralization but the leadership as well.  One of the reasons I joined DEC
was because I wanted to work for a company where the founder was still driving
(not referring to his FORD or course). Being as decentralized as we are, having
strong leadership is even more important. I have worked for 6 or more companies
and since coming to DEC I have had opportunity to peer closely into even more.
In the companies I have observed, I have never seen the president have the
ability to influence *attitudes* like Olsen can. This shaping of attitudes at
the various levels and segments of the organization enables our decentralized
system to act as a unit. I don't think many corporate presidents are respected
as much by the rank-and-file as ours is.  Maybe the best salesman for the DEC
culture is still the man how helped create it in the beginning. 

Roger Robb

re Note 282.30 by MDVAX3::ROBB:

> I have never seen the president have the
> ability to influence *attitudes* like Olsen can. 

At the last company I worked for, I neither knew who the president was nor did
I care to know.  And the general attitude among the employees at my level was
that the president was irrelevant to their affairs.

Bob 

	Well, finally, a month after the last reply, I have had time to read 
this topic after working most of a Saturday in the office!

	Let me hypothesize that there are not two DECs, but 4!

	There is the "old" DEC and "new" DEC in the way our customers view us 
from the outside.

	There is also, perhaps in an embryonic stage, a division internally 
into a Management DEC and a Labor DEC.

	Discussion?

    There are indeed many Digital's.  I cannot believe that there are
    only 4 or 5.
    
    Having been in the field for over 9 years and now being in engineering
    I can see a VAST change for the better in the way people and products
    are treated.  Granted, the last couple of years were in one of the
    worst managed parts of the company so the change is made more dramatic.
    
    However, I can see differences both good and bad between my group
    and the engineering groups 'above' us.  Interestingly enough, there
    is still another level above that in terms of hierarchy of power
    and freedom.
    
    I believe that there are hundreds of Digital.  That, in fact, may
    be one of the beauties of what Ken wanted.  That's what a democracy
    is all about.
    
    The key is to ALWAYS strive to do what is RIGHT,
    
    Don

    SET NOTE/TITLE="Is Digital a conspiracy, and can it stay that way?"

    Gee, a lot of people think that Pat lacks a sense of humor and that
    he's a total cynic.
    
    Just goes to show how wrong people can be,
    
    Don