Conference 7.286::digital

    From what I have heard, there has been alot of active campaigning
    from third party maintenance contractors to try and scoff up some
    of our higher level field service engineers.  I've seen a few of
    the form letters.
    
    Bruce 
    9.3 years

	The primary group affected by this action are field people, district 
levels and below, in Sales, SWS and FS.  Field Service may be the largest
group affected, since there are Area level folks with Plan A cars in my Area. 

	With the advent of Plan B, it should have been obvious what was in the 
wind.  I don't find Plan B all that attractive, myself, and would probably opt 
for $.225/mile on an older, but classy model.

	I have a Plan A, my fourth in over 12 years, and I have no plans to 
leave DEC because of this.  If anything, this may give me new options in my 
career path because the car won't be holding me back from looking at jobs 
without a car plan, as has happened in the past.

    In my 7 years here I've been fortunate enough to have met many senior
    employees in many functions. I'm impressed with the humanness with
    which they network major decisions, and I believe that their style
    contributes to technology transfer and to 'fast on the feet'
    competitive action. I cannot believe that any of them would leave
    because of a benefit change like this one. I cannot believe that
    anyone who *would* leave for this reason would have material effect
    on the Company.
    
    It seems that success here calls for a mixture of fun & frustration;
    you take the lumps to operate in the environment. Perhaps the
    motivation for the change could have had a better PR effort.

    There has been alot written by many regarding the "best people"
    leaving Digital because there "benefits" were taken away.  I got
    news for those self-serving individuals who place themselves above
    DEC and the 130K "best" people in the industry; the BEST PEOPLE
    will stay with the BEST COMPANY IN THE INDUSTRY, and the rest will
    move on to B#$@H about how their new company is messing with them.
    If they can't see that, goodby....
    
    Jay
    

    There is a basic assumption in .0 and in other Notes that
    there is a real possibility of a lot of senior people leaving
    DEC in the near future. Frankly I don't see that happening.
    
    Most of the real senior people in the field have been tempted
    by customers and headhunters for years. I know that when I was
    in the field I averaged a job offer (at a healthy raise) every
    other month. I wasn't that senior either. This car plan may be
    the straw that makes a lot of senior field people leave the field
    but I guess that most of them would rather transfer to engineering
    or other non-field position now that the silver handcuff (not
    quite gold is it?) in the field is gone.
    
    Yes this may have some impact on the field but it should help
    other organizations and the net effect may be a wash. Over the
    years SWS management has shown a great willingness to inflict
    untrained and inexperienced people on customers. This is not new
    at all so there is no change. From where I sit, safely nestled
    in engineering, SWS has not changed all that much in the last 10
    years. Sure some roles are different but the way people are treated
    is the same. These are the good old days for SWS.
    
    I don't see all that great a change in engineering either. If anything
    I feel more a part of the 'DEC family' now then I have at any time
    in my career at DEC (8.5 years over the last 11). I left DEC once,
    from the field, found that other computer companies had a worse
    environment, and came back.
    
    In general I think that the longer one is a DEC the longer they
    are likely to stay. The best DECcies are the ones who believe in
    DEC and are willing to outlast the short timers. They are the ones
    who are most likely to put in the extra hours, answer the extra
    phone call, and read documentation on vacation because that is
    what makes them and DEC perform better. The people who are motivated
    solely or mainly by money, rather than fun and commitment to
    performance, may leave but I hardly see that as a threat to the
    future of DEC. They'll leave a leaner more efficient DEC that will
    pay the rest of us better as profitability goes up.
    
    			Alfred

    
    	RE: .0
    
    	I'm not sure if there's not a misunderstanding here... are we
    	talking about "senior" in terms of job level or in terms of
    	years of service?  I usually think in terms of the former, as
    	in "senior" management.  
    
    	I can't see why taking away a little benefit like $6000 a year
    	would make anyone leave a company.  Their children can always
    	work an extra job if they want to go to college, and that's
    	a small price to pay for one of the "Top 100 Companies in America
    	to work for."  There are a lot of worse companies to be working
    	for, and if they can't see that, then the heck with them, let
    	them go elsewhere and choke on their stupid massive salary
    	increases.
    

    As someone said earlier, the people that will leave are the ones
    that are doing the work. The No Output Division will remain intact.
    
    Maybe this is a way to get around the no layoff schtick.

    I've experienced the decline in a company's ability to produce good
    products caused by experienced, key people leaving.  While I don't
    think DEC is anywhere near that position today, it can happen here
    just like anywhere else.
    
    The situation I was involved in was caused by upper management making
    a lot of stupid little decisions trying to cut costs at the expense
    of the employees, with no employee involvement.  Any cost cutting
    should be done with the involvement of all the employees.  
    
    I don't know about anybody else, but I work for a living.  It is
    important that I feel proud of my company and the job I do, but
    it is also important that it provide me with a satisfactory standard
    of living.  While this particular change doesn't affect me personally,
    it is upsetting because it generally degrades the financial value
    of a field job -- including mine.  These changes, coming (as they
    do) out of the blue, cause uncertainty about what might happen next,
    and how it would affect my future standard of living.
    
    I vote for more open decision making!!

    contrary to 581.8, the usual case is that someone who spends alot
    of time telling everyone who will listen just how much and how hard
    they work are just the one's who don't; I doubt that the people
    who are dedicated to DEC and their jobs will be the one's who will
    leave; only those who believe they are irreplacable.  As the "right-
    on" individual said "see just how much a hole you leave when you
    take your hand out of a bucket of water".  
    

    Yep!
    
    If you died today, will the world stop tomorrow because of you?
    No!  Things will go on just as it was when you were around.
    
    As for high level F.S. people who have a lot of time with DEC, some
    will more obviously transition to other jobs within DEC; and usually
    to one located very close to home and have a comparable salary and
    where a business vehicle is not needed.   The only people that will
    stay on board with F.S. are those who don't see or have any advantage by
    changing career paths.  Yes, there is a loss when going from plan
    A to plan B, and when the present job, in conjunction with it's
    other assets, now offers less, and the alternatives (carreers) offer
    more, good by vet!  Not to DEC as a whole, but to F.S. is the loss.
    So, the answer to this riddle is that some of the best will stay and
    some of the best will not.  And the impact will vary from one group to 
    another.  
   
    

    Two kinds of people leave when the going gets tough.  People who
    can't take it and people who don't need to.
    
    12 years

    re:  < Note 581.10 by CRUISE::JWHITTAKER >

>    on" individual said "see just how much a hole you leave when you
>    take your hand out of a bucket of water".  

    You're right, there's no hole left.  But the level in the bucket
    goes down.  Archimedes figured that one out.
    
    It's easy for a person to deride other people who have hard choices
    to make when that person's not one of them.  And it's *much* easier
    to stay with the same company as long as they'll let you, especially
    if you may not be confident in your ability to succeed on your own
    merits.  By and large, the people who have really been successful
    in this industry are the ones who have been willing to try new things.
    
    If not, then Ken would still be working for IBM, and we would all
    be punching cards for a living ...
    
    re:  .12 by PH4VAX::MCBRIDE
    
>    Two kinds of people leave when the going gets tough.  People who
>    can't take it and people who don't need to.

    Truer words were never said!  I doubt that you meant this sincerely,
    but even so, this may well be the case.  Those who can't take the
    financial loss, or the feeling that DEC isn't "Doing the Right Thing"
    will probably indeed leave.  And those who don't need to rely on
    DEC for they're total career and financial development will also
    probably find something else to do as well.  But I fail to see how
    either case benefits DEC.  Are times really that tough?
    
    Geoff
    6� years

    lets face it.  DEC made a business decision.  It's not the first
    time,  and it won't be the last time.  They could have announced
    it "better" than they did, but that would have done what?  Made
    a few people less mad?
    
    My life does not revolve around DEC or my plan A car.  I will survive,
    and so will everybody else.  Why not pass on being mad and direct
    our energies towards being content.  The plan A car I have is the
    only care I have....and when it's gone, I'll get along just fine,
    thank you.
    
    Meanwhile, I still have the best job I've ever had (none of them
    are perfect), with what I think is the best company in this industry.
    
    Tony....6 1/2 yrs.
    

Maybe I have a different vision of "senior" as those employees who are
TALENTED rather than simply long-term.  But, I agree with the earlier 
replies that said that the "good" (read talented) people are the ones that
will be least likely to tolerate this kind of treatment.  

I've only been with DEC for 4 years, and I'm in the field in SWS.  My estimate
would be that at least 20% of our delivery people get calls for jobs at
least monthly.  Like it or not, the intangible compensation we receive here
was often the difference between staying and leaving.  

One of the large pieces of compensation was the plan A car that many SWS people
received when they were hired.  In fact, the car was often used as justification
for the lower salaries in the field compared to "out East".  I once had a unit
manager admit that the salaries above the 50% point in any salary range were
reserved for people that didn't get company cars. 

So, I think the loss of this benefit/tool will make it harder to buy top-flight
people off the street, and will also make it more difficult for the field people
that are in demand by other companies to resist the temptation when they are
courted. I think the cost will be a general lowering of the quality of the
talent in the field as some of the best move to other jobs inside or outside
the company. 

re .5:

>			The best DECcies are the ones who believe in
>    DEC and are willing to outlast the short timers. They are the ones
>    who are most likely to put in the extra hours, answer the extra
>    phone call, and read documentation on vacation because that is
>    what makes them and DEC perform better. 

Maybe it's different in the UK. If anyone found out you read documentation 
while on vacation they'd start giving you 'funny' looks.

Dave (obviously not the best of DECcies).

>  Will senior employees departure effect DEC? 

There are two grammatical errors in this title.

There will probably still be the same number of errors in VAX Notes conferences
after these senior employees leave.

	See also 583 for a REAL example of affecting senior employees.

	I can begin to make some hypotheses about where all this is taking us:


	1.  The corporate officers truely want to do some "weeding" before JEC 
	    is implemented, and salaries go up.

	2.  The corporate officers see what post-JEC salaries look like and 
	    feel we won't need all these "bennies" anymore. (Semi-seriously!)

	3.  Osterhoff is bucking to replace KO, figuring the Board might move 
	    him there to get him out of F. & A. and restore morale to the 
	    troops. |:>) |:>) |:>) |:>) |:>) |:>)

	Oh well, now back to normal job of assisting my manager running a 
$4.5M business with too little Sales Support and too few delivery folks!

    <afterburners on!>
    
    I take offense to those who suggest that the people who would
    consider leaving DEC are not the *talented* ones, especially those
    who feel that working "lot's of overtime" and "reading manuals on
    vacation" are measurements of a dedicated/talented employee.
    
    I consider myself a "dedicated" and hopefully "talented" Digital
    employee.  Yes, I work my share of overtime and have read manuals
    on my own time (but never on vacation!?).  However, I am married and 
    have a family, and they are #1 in my life NOT Digital or any other 
    company that I may ever work for.  I don't believe this lessens my
    value/contribution to the company.
    
    To borrow a quote from Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol:
    "The dealings of your trade are but a drop of water in the
     comprehensive ocean of "your business"!"

    <flame off>
    
    
    As to the issue of people leaving over Plan A...
   
    While I agree that leaving simply over the "principal" (vs hardships
    caused) of the changes to the car plan itself may seem like an 
    over-reaction; what I am reading into all of this is something
    slightly different.
    
    I have been with Digital for about 4 years now and I have witnessed
    a change over the last couple of years that concerns me too.
    Maybe this is what some are calling the "NEW DEC", but it concerns
    me both personally and for the future of Digital.
    
    Some of the things that attracted me to Digital were:
    	*  The quality of it's products.
    	*  The apparent genuine interest in employee satisfaction.
    	*  The    ""       " "  interest in customer satisfaction
	*  The appeal of working for a major computer vendor, and
    	   the associated benefits:  (training, car, etc.)
    
    For the first 2 years DEC held to it's principals and ideals.  The
    last few years things have been changing.
    	*  DEC's product quality is still there (although I still don't
    	   believe we will ever manufacture anything that will outlast
    	   an LA120!  ;^>
    	*  Recent events classified as "cost cutting measures" demonstrate
    	   (at least to me) a definite lack of real interest in employee
    	   satisfaction.  I have seen it locally and it appears to be
    	   that way from the feed back I hear from other areas.
    	*  Although we send out "customer satisfaction surveys" every
   	   year, they are handled in such a manor as to only be a vehicle
    	   for my district to get the highest possible customer satisfaction
	   "number".  Not in anyway a true reflection of customer satisfaction.
	*  Working for a vendor has lost it's "glamore", and we all know
    	   where training and the co. cars are going...
    
    In summary, Digital appears to be moving from being a "caring" company
    that cared for it's employees and customers to a more "bottom line"
    company that cares only about it's "numbers", to the detriment (sp?)
    of the above values.
    
    This is what will cause good people to leave.  It's not just the
    car plan, but all the little things that added up to make Digital
    one of the "top 100 companies to work for.  

    For me, I will continue to observe the trends that the "new DEC"
    is taking.  If Digital continues in the direction that it apparently
    is headed, then I too will join the ranks of the "less talented"
    (but smart!) people who find greener pastures elsewhere.
    
    			Hoping-this-is-just-a-stage-we-are-going-thru-Jack.
    

�    < Note 581.21 by CSOA1::REARICK "Jack Rearick PTO-SWS" >

    Good one Jack!
    
    After 11 years with DEC I can totally concur with everything you
    say. I could not have put it better!
    
    Jim
    (Who also considers his family #1)

    Personally part of the reason I joined DEC the first time
    almost 11 years ago was because I felt that DEC didn't care
    enough about customer satisfaction (except 'technical' customers)
    or quality and I wanted to help do something about that.
    
    Over the years interest in customer satisfaction and quality
    at DEC has grown (still not to where I'd like it but it's 
    better.)
    
    I don't feel that lots of overtime and reading manuals on ones
    own time are measurements of a dedicated/talented employee. I
    believe that it is better to work smart then hard. On the other
    hand, it is hard to believe that people dedicated to quality
    and customer satisfaction would gripe about the occasional need
    to work some extra hours for those goals.
    
    One of the things that I like about DEC is that is still lets
    the employee put their family first. This is quite unlike other
    places I've worked. This is an other area that I think DEC has
    *improved* in over the years.
    
		Alfred

    Re: .23 by CVG::THOMPSON:
    
>        One of the things that I like about DEC is that is still lets
>    the employee put their family first. This is quite unlike other
>    places I've worked. This is an other area that I think DEC has
>    *improved* in over the years.
    
    I glad to hear that the trend is in the right direction, Alfred. I
    would also add the Digital is "quite unlike other places" in allowing
    me extraordinary resource use for community service (read that Boy
    and Girl Scouts).  

	There are a lot of good thoughts here. I've always told my headhunters
	that I wanted to find a "home" as opposed to a job. That's a place
	that cares, which includes paying me what I'm worth. I'll admit it -
	I took my job partially because the $2K of Plan B was included (see
	the Plan A note - all car plans may be eliminated in the near-term).
	If, down the road, you reduce my compensation $2K, you lose my respect.
	Working for DEC is nice, but "nice" doesn't pay off my Amex. I'm not
	a technobigot - I could work elsewhere doing the same thing.

	Yes, life will go on, but people will realize that DEC has become a
	little colder, a little less sensitive to its employees' needs. What
	else can you say when there is a mass exodus in response to such
	changes?

    
    The focus (in my humble opinion) of notes .21, .22 and .25 are overdue
    and healthy.  I'm not in an area effected by these plans, but one
    of the problems that I've observed in my 4 1/2 years at DEC is that
    many people seem to forget that having a happy personal life and maintaining
    financial prosperity is key to cutting edge performance at any job,
    and in any profession.  If you cut a Perc the size of Plan A's value,
    the company in essense is giving those folks a pay cut -- and the
    company is not discriminating between those who are good and those
    who are not.  The honor of working for the best computer company
    in the world goes on the line -- well at least goes on trial say,
    when these types of thinkgs occurr.
    
    I don't doubt that the decision was a hard one to make at by the
    corporate powers-that-be.  Also, I do not have an opinion on the
    need or the merit, because I don't understand the issues involved.
    But the attitude of....if they don't like it....let em leave...
    stikes me as being rather parochial and not in the best business
    and motivational interests of those who are affected.

    NUCLEAR FUSION....also offended....want to see effects,  just guess
    what damage CDC could do to Digital contract base if a few of us
    old goats jump ship. 
    
    HALF LIFE....when you think about it we (us old goats) have fixed and
    can fix anything from 8's thru 897X's...we have knowledge of DEC
    practices, and DEC's weaknesses all of which would be of significant
    value to a 3rd party service organization's attempts at contract
    penetration. We have worked at one time or another with every operating
    system DEC offered. We have extensive personal knowledge of key contacts
    within customers organizations and in fact are close personal friends
    with many of them. There is a lot at stake when an employee leaves
    after so many years especially if you are now competing with him.
    
    FUSION OFF...don't think for one moment that the person that leaves
    will first have no effect and next was "bad" anyway. Loyality can
    cover up a lot of small mistakes but you are eventually going to
    have to shoot the dog if he bites you once too often!!!

It isn't an issue of losing a perk....it's an issue of getting a BIG and
SUDDEN pay cut.  I am going to have to scrabble around very hard to
figure out how to maintain a not-lavish lifestyle while getting together
a down payment, monthly payment, and maintenance costs for my suddenly
required new car.  I know for a fact that those who have been hired
recently, and who do not have the company car, received HIGHER
salaries.  I am a past excellence award winner, a proven project leader,
project manager, and project team member as the job requires and I
DELIVER when I make a committment....apparently, I am not only not
valued very highly, I am worth LESS now to DIGITAL?   I was not informed
I will be compensated for the loss of income that I will
experience starting the day I turn this car in...in fact, they delivered
one of the more insulting documents I've ever read in attempting to
convince me that they were making this decision for my good.

Will I leave?  I honestly hope I don't have to, but maybe one of the
job offers I get every year will be just a little more attractive
now....Would MY leaving affect DIGITAL?  No, one person or even 200
experienced software services field people leaving won't affect DIGITAL....
but, the overall depth of talent in the field will begin to get thinner
and the mentors for the new-hires will be a little less experienced
and the job may not be quite what it once was if enough of us are
forced out.  You see, I don't want to go to engineering...it's the
field for me, or I might as well be working for any one of a 100 or
more other companies.

D (13 years total at DIGITAL)

    \
    Something hit me just now [I'm slow], and I just had to ask:
    
    for those who claim plan A was worth up to $6000.00 in benifits
    or salary, DID YOU SO CLAIM THAT ON YOUR 1040 LAST YEAR?
    [not just part of it, all six thousand buckeros]
    
    Shame on you if you didn't!  I would expect the IRS would have a
    field day if they had access to this notesfile with all the self
    confessions.
    
    ;-)
    ed

    A lot (50% 0f current sales force) of Senoir Sales Reps that were 
    hired in the last 5 years contributed largly to DEC's penetration
    into the  "business" data processing environment. Lots of systms
    have been sold to banks, insurance companies, retail, etc. Taking
    business away from IBM. We've all seen it in the press. 
    
    These sales reps haven't been with DEC long enough to have any loyalty
    and will jump ship to a competitor easily. DEC wouldn't be hurt
    initially but in 5 years companies like HP and Sun who have some
    excellent new technology could be major forces especially if
    they hire a lot of DEC sales reps. 

	I am not in any car plan - I get to sit at a desk and answer the phone
	all day but -

Re .29:

	Read carefully - the car is "worth" reduced expenses to the tune of
	enough money that it would take a $6,000 increase in pay to cover it.  
	The complaint is that the expense that was bourn by the company is now
	being bourn by the employees.  Since the IRS is interested primarily
	in actual income, there is not likely to be a problem.  However, see
	a tax expert before relying on any of this.

	The statements that the car is a benefit are technically incorrect BUT
	THE PRACTICAL EFFECT IS THE SAME NO MATER HOW YOU LOOK AT IT.  The
	employees are getting an effective pay cut, in the form of increased 
	required expenses.

	An interesting question - If employee pay rates were adjusted to cover
	the additional expenses (a BIG if), wouldn't it cost DIGITAL more than
	it does to pay for the cars directly?  After all, DIGITAL was able to
	get good sized discounts on both initial purchase, service and insurance
	and, since the costs were business expenses, did not have to pay taxes 
	on the offset income.  Employees have to pay effectively retail on all 
	these plus pay taxes on the income as well.  It sounds like a net loss
	to me.

    re. .31
    
    	Another point is that Digital never took collision insurance
    on ANY of these cars.  That is, if a car became totaled, and it
    was either the driver's fault or the result of an uninsured motor
    vehicle, Digital would eat the cost of replacing it.  Digital did
    this because it was cheaper in the long run to replace it over the
    cost of collision insurance.
    	The employee, on the other hand, can't afford not to insure
    it with collision coverage; and if a loan is involved in buying it, then
    it must have that coverage too
    	It definetely was a lot cheaper for Digital than for an employee
    to provide the "tool".  Also Digital was able to write it off in
    tax deductions better than we can.  But now that these tax laws
    have changed to where there is no longer any advantage to Digital
    in terms of money, they are getting rid of the plan.  It appears
    that what it's going to cost us (the employee), is none of their
    concern.
    

Re .32:

>    to provide the "tool".  Also Digital was able to write it off in
>    tax deductions better than we can.  But now that these tax laws
>    have changed to where there is no longer any advantage to Digital
>    in terms of money, they are getting rid of the plan.  It appears
>    that what it's going to cost us (the employee), is none of their
>    concern.

	This may be only partially true.  They will have to pay better to
    get the quantity and quality of people they need now that the car plan
    is gone.  The amount will probably be equivalent to the after tax expense
    of owning and operating the car.  

	If the fleet were properly administered, there would be some net 
    savings due to quantity purchasing that should accrue to the company.
    These are now lost.  They have also lost a good deal of good will in the
    process.  As a stockholder, I am worried about the questionable economies
    being practices.  As an employee, I am more than worried about the change
    in attitude that has come with all this so called cost cutting.

I started this note just as I was leaving on vacation, so it was sort of a
hurry-up job....it was *NOT* intended to be another 'Plan A' note.

After reading all of the responses, I have formed some conclusions:

a) The 'field' is taking the brunt of the $$ cutting axe right now

b) Some 'Areas' (geographies) in the field are in better shape than others

c) If you have poor mgmt making poor decisions you are gonna get hurt

I believe I am triple-whammy victim of all three above.

.5>    In general I think that the longer one is a DEC the longer they
.5>    are likely to stay. The best DECcies are the ones who believe in
.5>    DEC and are willing to outlast the short timers. They are the ones
.5>    who are most likely to put in the extra hours, answer the extra
.5>    phone call, and read documentation on vacation because that is
.5>    what makes them and DEC perform better.

This sounds like a good description of the type of person that I am (or used
to be), but it has become a personal hardship for me to grind out the kind of
performance that can make up for a lack of staffing. The fun is gone and has
been replaced by pain.

.5>                                             The people who are motivated
.5>    solely or mainly by money, rather than fun and commitment to
.5>    performance, may leave but I hardly see that as a threat to the
.5>    future of DEC. They'll leave a leaner more efficient DEC that will
.5>    pay the rest of us better as profitability goes up.

I have been told that a Digital employee's salary is 'comparable to the rest
of the industry'.  If I may conclude from that that DEC salaries are merely
'average' then I would tend to think that the individuals that are 'motivated
solely or mainly by money' are either gone or never came to DEC to begin with.

I believe that I am at this moment living the life of the 'leaner, more
efficient DEC' employee but am not sure I can last no matter what the salary.

I have been in two positions in the last 5 years and all during that period
the staffing level for the work at hand has ranged from 'barely adequate' to
'abysmal'. This condition seems to persist despite attempts from myself and my
former manager to get improvement. I'll not touch on the myriad of reasons I
have been given why this is so. My view is that my Area's management sat idle
while the hiring light was green and now is faced with "Red Light, can't hire
now" and "No Money in the Kitty, sorry". The Area manager attempted to get
headcount from the the other areas from which our Area was formed a couple of
years ago and was told "No can do". The other Area gained by having less
geography to support with the same staff level. Sort of like forming a third
football team from two existing ones... but not being allowed to initially get
players from the two existing teams nor are you allowed to recruit. Not must
chance of a bowl bid, huh? 

Recently it's been darn hard to personally to absorb the extra load when I
look at one of those neighboring Areas and see a staff of 8 compared to the
staff of 2 or 2.5 in the Area where I work. The planning, testing, installing,
troubleshooting, analysis and support of networks (what I do and more) are all
a blurry ball that I and another 1-1.5 people have responibility for. 

"Pay for performance" has been explained to me to mean that I must outperform
the person beside me (that is going through the same grief that I am) in order
to get some of that precious raise pot that has been given to my group.
Meanwhile, the person in the other Area can get the same amount of a raise as
I do with a lot less personal sacrifice because their Area mgmt did good
planning and got the people to support the workload. "Pay for performance" is
a myth when someone elsewhere can perform less than I do and get the same
raise as I do all because they are in a different group that has a larger
staff.

.11>    If you died today, will the world stop tomorrow because of you?
.11>    No!  Things will go on just as it was when you were around.
    
The world won't stop, but DEC will have to work to find a single person with
as much experience and talent that I brought to the position in a
cost-effective manner. [No, I don't have the ego the size of the Goodyear
blimp either.] It's a real interesting to have to talk to three different
people in another Area while working a problem, each of which defers to
someone else when a different expertise is called upon (nothing wrong with
that)... but I am the person responsible for all three of those items on this
end of the phone!
   
.19>>  Will senior employees departure effect DEC? 
.19>
.19>There are two grammatical errors in this title.
.19>
.19>There will probably still be the same number of errors in VAX Notes conferences
.19>after these senior employees leave.

Okay, Okay, I flubbed up. I'll change the title slightly to somthing more
appropriate. The choice of 'senior' was poor; talented or long-term is more
what I had in mind.


I'm not trying to make a complaint soapbox out of this note; I just wanted to
discuss the possible affects upon Digital if significant numbers of talented,
long-term employees decide that Digital is no longer where they want to expend
their energy and talent.

I'll summarize my view as follows: Some of the loyal, talented, long-term
field employees are getting fed up and have lost their "I Love DEC even with
its problems" attitude. Moving to another company is now a viable alternative;
in the past it would have been unthinkable. These people should not be
characterized as 'job-hoppers' or '$ seekers', they are merely trying to
preserve themselves from destruction. If enough of these talented people leave
they will have to be replaced with a larger quantity of less talented people
to acheive the same level of customer support and satisfaction (not talking
about survey numbers here, folkes!). DEC stands to lose if it continues to
lose these type of people that were previously very loyal to DEC.

The following really said it best:


Note 581.12        Will senior employees departure effect DEC?          12 of 33
PH4VAX::MCBRIDE "do it, ship 100,000, try it, fix it" 4 lines  29-JUL-1988 17:51
                                   -< kiss >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Two kinds of people leave when the going gets tough.  People who
    can't take it and people who don't need to.
    
    12 years

    This might not be exactly the right topic, with 3 very similar ones
    in this conference alone.  I'm hearing a lot of comments about how
    "the field is taking the brunt of the cost-cutting measures within
    Digital."  Is this simply extrapolation from the demise of "Plan
    A" or is there more to it?  I honestly do not believe that this
    is the case.
    
    First, the demise of the company car has had the writing on the
    wall for at least 2 years now.  It bothers a lot of people, and
    rightly so, but isn't totally out of the blue.  Just ask the Southern
    Area folks.
    
    Second, although we aren't hit in the wallet here in
    engineering/whatever since we don't have company cars, it is very
    evident that cost cutting is going on all over the place.  In
    particular, Digital has decided to concentrate on the most profitable
    products it has, reorganize to make the most of the products currently
    in development, and slow down our incredible growth in new areas. 
    Although I might not agree with every decision made, overall we
    did need to do some sort of entrenchment.  All companies need to
    do this periodically -- otherwise you start losing money.
    
    Now, will this cause people senior people to leave?  Of course it
    will.  People who lived for a given project and can't accept its
    demise.  People who think they will make more money outside of
    Digital will leave -- blatant actions like losing the car or having
    your project cut are perfect excuses to look in the paper for the
    want ads.  Even if those very experienced people don't leave, if
    they remain and are demoralized, it can hurt Digital almost as much
    because they might leave 6 or 12 months from now and be disillusioned
    the remainder of the time they remain.  It might only take another
    straw to break the camel's back, so to speak.  This is where I see
    a real loss. 

    The people in the field with the most to say about this topic are
    software specialists.  The higher individual contributor ranks are
    software consultants, and I am one of those.
    
    The career path for a Software Specialist who advances within Digital
    over, say, three to five years tends to lead more and more out of
    the company.  If you are a Software Specialist, find a local org
    chart that's five years old and and ask "How many are still around
    now?"
    
    Software Specialists tend to bear the brunt of the rapid pace of the
    introduction of new products, and the problems associated with the
    regular turnover of sales people.  They uniquely have skill sets and an
    attitude that's close to the customer (ie both the customer and the
    specialist are attempting to solve business problems with innovative
    use of technology.)  Consequently they are the first to "push" and "be
    squashed" for customer satisfaction issues.  Add to that impossible
    dealines, inadequate equipment, after-midnight travel, angry sales
    reps, and angrier customers, the job, as we say "builds character".
    
    Lip service is paid to it being a "career position", it's actually a
    burnout position.  Software Specialists become customers, software
    engineers, sale reps, managers, or even competitor's software
    specialists.
    
    I could go on for a thousand more lines, but, in case you weren't a
    software specialist or haven't had lunch with one, I thought I try to
    explain why people might think that dropping plan A is "the last
    straw". 
                                                      

    I currently work at the Colorado Springs CSC, but prior to this past
    April I spent nearly four years in SWS. I found that working in SWS has
    its rewards, but it also often requires many personal sacrifices.  Those
    sacrifices take their toll, and they made such perks as the company car
    all the more important.
    
    Software residencies can be technically challenging.  Although some
    people get assigned to the same residency over extended periods of
    time, it is often the case that the specialist works at one customer
    site for a period of time and then moves on.  This provides the
    opportunity for working in a variety of applications and using many
    different software components.  The ability to switch gears quickly and
    to be proficient at something new--whether it be a database management
    system or an operating system--is an art, and it is not easy.
    Specialists often have extremely limited ramp-up time when faced with a
    new residency. 

    So while that provides a technical challenge, it also places a lot of
    pressure on you.  At all times, you represent Digital; the customer is
    paying a lot of money for you, and may even remind you of this fact from
    time to time.  By the same token, Digital is earning a lot of money for
    you, and you are also reminded of that fact from time to time; in
    other words, you should bill as much time as possible.

    So at the customer site you have little room for slack.  And, of course,
    you must dress well--a three piece suit does nicely.  You may spend
    enough time with the customer to get to know the people well, even as
    friends--but you are still an outsider.  Even though you work on their
    site, you are not an employee there.  You can't afford to let your guard
    down as you might with your Digital co-workers, even if you are having a
    bad day--because these people are not really your co-workers.  If you
    really do stay there long enough, those barriers do tend to drop, but
    initially they exist. 

    So you spend 40 hours a week as an outsider at the place you work--the
    customer site.  Yet you are a kind of outsider even within the Digital
    office you call "home".  Many Digital facilities do not even grant
    their SWS residents desks; instead, they have a few drawers in a
    residents lounge where they can stash their belongings. You have no
    home base, no wall on which to put up pictures of your spouse or kids
    or dog, nowhere to hang up your Digital training certificates or your
    excellence award plaques--apparently you are supposed to put up these
    things at your desk at the customer site.  But since that desk only
    lasts as long as your residency contract, it is not recommended that
    you take too many personal belongings with you; it is a pain to
    constantly move them every few months. 

    SWS offices cover a certain geographical area, and this sometimes means
    commuting a long distance on a regular basis.  You may live only five
    minutes from the Digital office, but tomorrow you may get the word that
    for the next year you will be commuting an hour each way to a customer
    site in Timbuktu.  If you don't like commuting, then you have a
    problem; you could move to Timbuktu, but then a year later, your
    residency could be a hours drive on the other side of the Digital
    office, and you'd have to move again.  So you might as well stay put in
    a semi-central location and expect to be sent all over creation.  Those
    who don't understand the commuting problems faced by SWS residents fail
    to realize that while ordinary commuters can choose where they live,
    SWS residents don't generally choose where they work.  While I can't
    speak for every district, it is clear that in many districts, travel is
    an inevitable part of the job, no matter where you might call home. 

    Furthermore, you sometimes find that if business is slow in your unit,
    you may get sent somewhere else in your District that is not even within
    commuting distance.  You may spend several weeks in a hotel, or Digital
    may even put you up in a furnished apartment for several months.  This
    does not, of course, do wonders for things like your marriage and your
    home life.  Certainly, Digital recognizes the problems that this can
    create, and you do have some leeway on these distant residencies (less
    leeway if you are single). 

    This means that making plans can be rather difficult.  Would you like to
    sign up for some classes this fall?  That might not be a good idea if
    you know there is a chance that you'll be spending time in Outer
    Mongolia in a few months.

    Life for the SWS specialist is not easy.  The technical challenges can
    be very rewarding, but the price is also high.  With the removal of the
    company car, the price has become just that much higher.

    -- Mike    

    re .37
    
    Applause, applause!  You have given an excellant portrayal of life
    in the field.  .35 take note!
    
    I have very little to add, except...
    
    Many times a residency is not for a fixed time-period.  It may go
    for three months, be renewed, you get pulled during negotioations,
    then you go back in for another two weeks, that becomes six months.
    
    Residencies are as uncertain as the whim of the customer and the 
    the current financial clime.
    
    Add to that, sometimes the customer doesn't even make facilities
    available at all.  Imagine going to a residency and for three months
    having to scramble with every employee of that company for a free
    terminal so you can start doing your job!  No desk, no phone, in
    fact, not even a coat rack.  You learn to live out of your brief-case
    (unless you are at a government affiliated site that doesn't allow
    you to carry a brief-case!).  OR the other favorite - living in
    the computer room.
    
    And if you happen to be reading this at 9600 BAUD terminal during
    working hours, remember that customers RARELY provide any sort of
    dial-out capability for residents on-site.  The time-stamp on this note
    is fairly typical - if I want to read notes, technical or otherwise, I
    do it on my own time, in my own home, on my own PC, and I pay my own
    phone-bill (and nobody calls me while I'm doing it cause I only have
    one phone). 

    And don't forget the internal squabbles.  Working for a given manager
    may be lip-service.  Chances are you'll report to another manager
    when you start doing work for his client because your manager doesn't
    have work (or because the other manager needs help so desperately).
    Suddenly, you get an org chart with your name on the wrong column,
    only to find there has been some juggling.  
    
    But they are used to this in the field and are very careful to pass
    information about you and your performance between manager's so
    that you don't get "lost" in the shuffle, right?  Wrong!  9 times
    out of 10, when you "end up" working for your seventh manager in
    five years, your promotion gets lost, your raise gets lost, your
    status reports get lost...
   
    Not to mention that your mail gets lost for two months because you
    moved your mail stop from one town to another, when your manager's
    name changed (not your desk - you never had one - just your mail
    stop).
    
    My comments are not as eloquent as .37, and are perhaps a touch
    more emotional.
    
    But considering that the field is tough, and people in touch with
    the field know how tough it is, and how few of the "DEC" advantages
    field people share with their internal counterparts, some small
    compensations are in order.
    
    An internal person once told me he was envious because I had a company
    car.  I told him I would trade him my company car for his VAXstation
    ANYDAY.  But I can't now, I don't have a company car any more -
    OR a VAXstation - or a VT100 - or a modem - or a desk - or a phone
    - or ...
    
    Jim

    Life in the field has always (well, as far back as I remember) been
    tough.  Lack of equipment, support, doc, etc. etc.  The car and
    Excellence Awards were the only "perks" that I can think of.  My
    reply simply stated that my impression of the current cost-cutting
    is that removal of the Plan A car is the only "new" hardship being
    imposed on the field organization.  And yes, I agree that this
    particular cut has the most potential to cause people to leave.
    If I were still working in the field, the demise of the car would
    have caused me to move up to engineering or leave the company. 
    But, I wouldn't consider myself to be "senior" (i.e. >7-10 years).
    
    Although many don't want to move for a variety of reasons, if you
    don't want to just leave the company and the loss of the car was the
    "last straw", then look at moving up to DEC corporate.  I think that
    .37 (from the CSC) amply described why people in the field organization
    are so valuable.  And you won't have to give up the car to do so
    anymore, either ;^).  If this happens, it won't be as bad as
    if those people left the company and there might even be some good
    that comes from it.

    re: .38
    
>    Suddenly, you get an org chart with your name on the wrong column,
>    only to find there has been some juggling.  
    
    WOW!!!  You mean they actually *GIVE* you org charts?  Our district
    has reorganized twice in two years.  Everyone now knows who they
    work for -- but some people have never been officially "told" and
    have never actually seen an org chart.  They are relying on word
    of mouth from other employees (peers).  After all, its *only* been
    a month since things changed...
    
    Well... At least I *think* everyone knows who they work for now...

    re: .39
    
    Why not relo to Corporate?
    
    Sure, I'd love to get back into a Software Engineering environment
    again (I spent a 4+ years doing R&D for an OEM's database product
    on the VAX & PDP-11).
    
    But, there are some of us who have reasons to work in parts of the
    country which are not "well-inhabited" by Corporate.  I'd *LOVE*
    to hear of a Corporate job in an area with an "alive" Mennonite
    church, but I know of none.  My family is not going (back) into
    another area where we are seen as nothing but a circus sideshow.
    
    Now if someone could find me a Corporate job in the MD/VA/DC/OH/PA
    area (or into the near-mid-west) I would be interested.
    
    But, in the mean time, it's SWS or it's nothing (DEC-wise).
    
    -- Russ Pavlicek

    Well, there's always Software Services Engineering, now located
    in New Castle, Delaware.  I saw some ads in the jobs notesfile
    last week about one position.  Moving is not an attractive option
    for lots of people, esp. to MA or Southern NH.

Re: .41

I understand that Networks and Communications Engineering are going to
set up a corporate engineering facility somewhere in Northern VA.

jb - Reading, England

    I wish everyone would stop talking about going internal.  I thought
    I had an original idea.  Now EVERYONE is gonna wanna do it!
    
    Anybody out there need a programmer?   :-|  (straight-face)
    
    Jim
    

    re:  .41,.42
    
    Yes, there are (according to the job postings) software engineering
    jobs in DWO.  That would put you well within commute range to an
    "alive menonite church".  If they are so alive I may consider a
    little walk Sunday.
    
    Bob

    When people leave the company, where do they go?  When yo remove
    your hand from the water there is no hole extant, that' true, but
    when a GOOD person leaves the company he COULD go to a competitor.
    That's the kind of stuff that worries me!  Sometimes he goes to
    a customer and takes along enough "inside information" to make life
    tough at the local office.  Sometimes it makes the customer
    relationship better.  Sometimes the people you want to get rid of
    won't go but the people you can really use leave.  If they just
    fell off the earth that would be bad enough but when you have to
    compete with them ...
    

    
    re: <descriptions of life in SWS>
    
    More applause!!!  The descriptions of life in the field are very
    accurate.  What more can I say...
    
    re: <car being the only recent change>
    
    Not so!  The elimination of Plan A may be the only recent change
    to come down from corporate, but not from local areas and districts.
    
    In our office we recently received a memo from our district manager
    that the following changes would take place to "improve our margin":
    
    	*  If more than one person from the local office has to travel
    	   to the same place overnight...they are to share a motel room
    	   (2 to a room).
    
    	*  If more than one person has to travel on company business
    	   they are to share a rental car, or use public transportation.
    
    	*  If there is a need to go outside of the area for training,
    	   then the person receiving the training will be expected to
    	   give a training session AFTER NORMAL WORKING HOURS.
    
        and the list goes on...
 
    Whenever somebody in management wants to look good by cutting expenses,
    we in the field seem to bear the brunt of it.  Our training is always
    first to go.  Our manuals, equipment, and other "tools" (what is
    left of them) are next.
    
    In summary, it isn't just the company car (although that may be
    the last straw for a lot of people), but also all the other things
    that are happening at the local level.
    
    						Jack.
    
    P.S.  Recently I find my self wandering if I am really working for
    	  a $9 billion company?  Or some little software house that
   	  is either trying to get off the ground or going bankrupt!
    	  :^}
    

    Re: .47
    
>   P.S.  Recently I find my self wandering if I am really working for
>   	  a $9 billion company?  Or some little software house that
>  	  is either trying to get off the ground or going bankrupt!
>   	  :^}

    Makes it a bit worse when you consider that we just announced that
    in FY88 we were an $11.5 billion company.
    
    Rich

    .46:
    
�                      ... Sometimes the people you want to get rid of
�    won't go but the people you can really use leave.  If they just
�    fell off the earth that would be bad enough but when you have to
�    compete with them ...
    
    During the infamous review/transfer/hire freeze of several years
    back, it appeared to me that there were 3 kinds of people who didn't
    take a powder:
    
    a. People who were too satisfied (or insufficiently upset) to leave;
    
    b. People who were too settled-in (or lazy?) to look;
    
    c. People who were afraid to find out that they couldn't get a job
       somewhere else.
    
    
    Dick (mostly type 'b')
    

    
    re .47;
    
    Something most people don't understand is that each district and area
    IS just like a small software house. Unlike 5-10 years ago the pressure
    to make a profit at that level is tremendous. If your district manager
    wants to continue in his job, much less his career, he's got to make
    those margins. He's doing things that any software house has done
    for years. 
    
    I'm not saying knowing why it's done makes it any easier but there's
    two sides to every story. The problem I have is that the reason the
    margins have to be so high is because that's the only place profit is
    made! As the money trickles up the ladder that margin drops bit-by-bit.
    Once it hits the top (somewhere in Maynard, I suppose) it's down to
    some horrible level... And the larger the overhead becomes the greater
    the margin has to be at the front-line. It's made especially worse
    because most of that overhead your district manager has NO control
    over. It's imposed on him by the corporation. In other words, those
    front-line managers (both software and field service) have to bear
    the load of everything above them (including those of us in the
    internal support orginzations, like DIS). And that load is getting
    bigger and bigger every day... 


    -Ray
    
    
    p.s.
    
    Hi Jack! Been awhile since Alcoa, hasn't it?
    

    re: a bunch
    
    Thanks for the pointers, folks!  We'll see what goes...
    
    re: .47
    
>    P.S.  Recently I find my self wandering if I am really working for
>    	  a $9 billion company?  Or some little software house that
>   	  is either trying to get off the ground or going bankrupt!
>    	  :^}
    
    As an ex-employee of a "little software house", I give this word
    of warning:
    
    	When your manager starts talking about you *bringing your lunch
    	with you* while on company travel, GET *VERY* CONCERNED!
    
    -- Russ  :^)
       (Hey, I can still smile!  Oh boy!)

    Re .43 NAC in Northern Va. Is this for real? Do you have any details?
    

They've been talking about it for two years.

Contact LKG personnel to see if there's anything more real than that.

/john

Just my opinion:

In most cases, before an employee senior enough to have a real effect by leaving
actually leaves, DEC will have already changed enough to make that employee's
contribution no longer appropriate for the company's working style.

Thirteen years ago, about the same time that I came to work here, a good
employee was one who took charge, did things on his own initiative, and
demonstrated how to do things -- often in direct opposition to what much
of management thought they wanted.

A person successful at that style of working had to have certain characteristics
--- maybe extremely smart, maybe extremely hard-working, not necessarily a
combination of both.  Our two most successful operating sytems were built by
this type person.

But today, the company seems to want a different kind of employee -- and the
environment no longer allows that kind of person to succeed.  So he leaves,
and in leaving, even though he may be one of the most senior people in the
company, he has little effect, because the company has already changed.

/john

    re: .55
    
< Thirteen years ago, about the same time that I came to work here, a good
< employee was one who took charge, did things on his own initiative, and
< demonstrated how to do things -- often in direct opposition to what much
< of management thought they wanted.

    ... and was rewarded, awarded, applauded, and promoted.

< But today, the company seems to want a different kind of employee -- and the
< environment no longer allows that kind of person to succeed. 
    
    ... and considers them to have an attitude problem, demotes them,
    shuffles them, until they leave.
  
    Well said John. Let's hope we're not cutting our own throat.

	Dave

    re: .56
    
<< But today, the company seems to want a different kind of employee -- and the
<< environment no longer allows that kind of person to succeed. 
    
<    ... and considers them to have an attitude problem, demotes them,
<    shuffles them, until they leave.

    CONTROL is the name of the game in big business.  Initiative in
    the ranks is the antithesis of CONTROL.  Decision-making in the
    ranks is heresy.  CONTROL is the religion of the MBA of today.
    
    To be fair about this, one has to realize that Digital is just
    another victim of the corporate wars.  While we have not suffered
    the devastation of a hostile takeover or a union power play, we
    have had to face up to unpleasant realities.  Corporations under
    tight CONTROL have a better chance of surviving the corporate
    wars, even if it means we make some sacrifices for that CONTROL.

    When CONTROL stifles rising expenses in a declining company, that's
    a good thing.  When CONTROL stifles innovation and productivity
    in a company where it's sorely needed to remain competitive, then
    that's a sure way of turning the company into a declining one, which
    requires even more CONTROL.
    
    It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    Geoff

    
    "Control is the religion of the MBA of today."
    
    Say what? If it were even remotely possible, what would the
    religion of engineers of today be? MBA attitudes/religions/
    opinions are as different as the people that earn the degree.
    
    I would venture to guess that Tom Peters ("In search of 
    excellence" et al.) probably has an MBA or the equivilent.
    I doubt from reading his latest that control is his
    religion... if he has one it is probably innovation,
    flexibility, and being close to the customer.
    
    
    

    re: .58

>    "Control is the religion of the MBA of today."

>    Say what? If it were even remotely possible, what would the
>    religion of engineers of today be? MBA attitudes/religions/
>    opinions are as different as the people that earn the degree.

    It was meant to be ironic, not taken literally.

    Even so, it seems to me that the focus of most MBA programs is
    very narrow.  My girlfriend just completed her MBA program at
    the University of Texas in Finance; her specialty is cash-flow
    analysis and management.  Very little of her materials, in my 
    opinion, dealt with the underlying concepts of running a business
    or a corporation.  It was mainly the "mechanics" of getting more
    mileage out of your cash-on-hand by taking advantage of obscure
    accounting practices and government loopholes.  Sure, this is
    oversimplifying, but I don't view her role in a company as being
    a "productive" one in the traditional sense.  Her value to her
    company could be almost completely negated with a few minor rule
    changes in accepted accounting practices or tax laws.
    
    I'm not the only one casting a suspicious eye on today's MBA
    programs, a fair number of articles have surfaced in the past
    couple of years about this problem.  
    
    Geoff

    The best engineers I knew of in the company when I started ten
    years ago are still with us today - their legacy and continuing
    work have helped make Digital the success it is today.  The only
    one I can think of who is, most unfortunately, not able to help
    us out today is Dick Hustvedt, whose attitude of "do the right thing"
    drove VMS to excellence.  Tragically, Dick was seriously injured
    in an auto accident several years ago, and has not recovered his
    full faculties.  But I like to think that his spirit is still
    with us today and into the future, and it was to keep this spirit
    fresh in our minds that I sought to have a conference room in ZK3
    named in his honor.
    
    From where I stand, the original Digital engineering spirit lives
    on.
    
    				Steve

    Re .59
    
    Better not let your girlfriend read that reply.
    
    By the way, be careful when you make rash generalizations.  I have
    an MBA in Finance but don't consider control to be my religion.
    Control was not the jist of my program, it boiled down to effective
    resource utilization.  Funny how that ties into my job of system
    performance optimization and capacity planning in SWS.
    
    Also, there's a place for all disciplines in almost every business.
    To even suggest that a business can get by without finance people
    is as ridiculous would be my attempt to suggest that DEC doesn't
    need engineers once all facets of the computer industry has an
    accepted standard.
    

    My apologies,
    
    The third line from the last in my previous reply should read:
    
    "is as ridiculous as would be my attempt to suggest that DEC doesn't"
    

>  < Note 581.61 by MERIDN::BIAZZO "Can tune a VAX but can't tuna fish" >
>    Control was not the jist of my program, it boiled down to EFFECTIVE
>    RESOURCE UTILIZATION.  
  (emphasis added)

Ah! But that is the crux of control!
Maximize the ROI! 
("Optimize the ROI" doesn't have a very exciting ring to it.)

The feeling many non-financial types have with current business practices
is that they focus on "optimum business CONTROL" without a knowledge of
the BUSINESS that they are controlling.  That's why a General Motors can go
into decline when it is taken over by officers with a focus on finance,
as opposed to the "old days" when the creator of the business ran it
(Henry Ford, for example, and Lee Iacocca in his footsteps (ironically)).

I believe there are three focuses that business management can take:
    1) you can know your product (traditional high-tech as an example)
    2) you can know your customers (as IBM does - a sales path leads 
        to the top jobs)
    3) you can know how to manage money (euphemistically, "resources").

The third path leads to optimal short term control, but runs the risk
of losing contact with the real business (that is, the customers and the
product).  Of course, a company must survive in the short run to survive
in the long run.
And surely, a truly optimal business must be based on all three spheres 
of knowledge to thrive.

What is optimal?  Clearly not a three-month horizon.
But is a three year plan better than a ten year plan? Or maybe vice versa?
And, of course, who says engineers, even the ones who found a company,
know the answer better than MBAs?

I don't want to categorically bash MBAs, but (to summarize) the common
observation seems to be that they don't know a lot about BUSINESS (even
their own), but they do know a lot about ADMINISTRATION.

- tom]

    re: last few
    
    Please try not to generalize MBA programs either: they can specialize
    almost as much as technical programs. 
    
    One comment on the administration, though. Different programs develop
    different results, and some of the best business schools strive
    to turn out world leaders, despite the fact that only a few individuals
    will ever take over a global business. One result: many trained
    egos without troops. Other schools strive to turn out excellent
    subordinates, at the risk of overlooking a potential world leader.
    Some of us enjoy being excellent subordinates (to the strategy,
    anyway, not to an individual boss). I think Digital currently has
    too many of the former and not enough of the latter.
    
    Finally, some programs strive to turn out excellent workhorses (such
    as in finance, taxes, etc) who are great resource administrators
    but must work overtime to deal with change.
    
    We should all strive to see where we fit.