Conference 7.286::digital

    Wouldn't this be a topic much more suited for the ASIMOV::MARKETING
    conference?
    			Steve

>At present, I find myself forced to turn to the same external sources that the
>customers use.  At the very least I can quote those sources.  Nothing from our
>internals sources can be quoted.

I hope you aren't suggesting quoting an outside unauthorized source (such as a
futures/speculation column in a trade mag) in a discussion with a customer.
Digital seldom comments on unauthorized press articles, and no employee should
(to a customer) either.

/john

    re: .1 
    
    	   No, this is not about Marketing, it's about information
    	dissemination through internal channels.  Part of my problem
    	withthe existing systems is that they ARE marketing-based
    	rather than being informative.  This is not a marketing
    	problem.  
    
    re: .2 (John)
    
    	Customer:	"I read in DR that the 6400 would run at 6.7
    			VUPS per card, and will be available late this
    			year."
    
    	Me:		"Yes, I read that too, but I'm not allowed to 
    			say so."
    
    	Customer:	"Well, I was wondering whether I should get a
    			6300 today or wait a while and get one of the new
    			boxes.  Will there be an upgrade available?"
    
    	Me:		"How should I know?  I work for Digital.  We're
    			not allowed to know about anything that we can't
    			sell today.  Of course, they usually do have
    			upgrade kits in these cases, but I can't say
    			whether we'll do it this time."
    
    	Customer:	"Well, that's awfully peculiar.  The IBM boys were
    			just here and they know what's coming for the next
    			twenty years.  Makes you look rather foolish,
    			doesn't it?"
    
    	Me:		"You bet!  And the best part is there's not a thing 
    			I can do about it."
    
    	Customer:	"Yes, I must admit, that's one thing I like about
    			working with Digital.  I always know more about
    			your products than you folks do."
    
    - Greg

    The scary part of it that the same problem holds true for *internal*
    information, not sales-related or product-related in any way.  One
    person I know of found out about the demise of Plan A by reading
    about it in Digital Review.  And I always read about people moving
    from DEC to competitors in the trade press (e.g. Cutler).
    
    Now I'll be the first person to say that Field people certainly
    don't have to be notified of all the goings on at Corporate, nor
    do we need to be privy to sensitive information.  But it's very
    hard to present yourself as a consultant that the customer should
    want to spend hundreds of dollars an hour for, when you don't seem
    to know what's going on in your own company.
    
    Geoff

    Please define what you *need* to know in order to do your job.
    
    I'm hard put to read from the notes here what you want - advance
    information on products that may not even be in field test yet...?
    
    If you can define the problem, the answer can sometimes be clearer as a
    result.
    
    Andy

    I've never functioned as a sales rep or software specialist, so I may
    be completely off-base.  Nevertheless, here is how I would have tried
    to steer the conversation in .3:
    
    Customer: "I read in (trade rag) that the (unannounced CPU) would run 
    at (lots of) VUPS per card, and that it will be available (soon)."
    
    Me: "I'm sorry, I can't talk about unannounced products."
    
    Customer: "Well I was wondering whether I should get a 6300 today, or
    wait a while and get one of the new boxes.  Will there be an upgrade
    available."
    
    Me: "If you wait until the next product is out, you'll have the same
    question about its successor.  Digital can't stand still, or our
    products will quickly become non-competitive in the marketplace.  If
    you can justify buying a 6300 now, buy it.  In the future, when you
    need more computing capacity than the 6300 can provide, even with all
    of the growth potential already built into it (add-in CPUs, clusters,
    networking) then you can look to Digital for additional solutions, that
    will protect your 6300 investment.  By that time the rumored
    (unannounced CPU) may have been superceded several times over."
    
    Customer: "When IBM was here they seemed to have a detailed vision of 
    their product strategy for the next twenty years, yet all I hear from
    you is platitudes.  Makes you look rather foolish, doesn't it?"
    
    Me: "I don't think anyone knows what the next 20 years will bring in
    the computer field.  20 years ago Digital was selling the first
    time-sharing system available from a computer vendor; 16K words of
    memory in that system required a box almost as large as the whole 6300
    system.  Multiprocessors were still exprimental; today they're
    commonplace.  20 years ago LANs were built as one-of-a-kind items by
    highly technical organizatons; today everybody is using Ethernet.
    The future will include optical computers, superconductivity and
    massively parallel computer systems.  Digital intends to provide useful
    products which take advantage of future technologies, as they become
    proven.  Buy a 6300 and you can participate with us in that future
    technology."
        John Sauter
    

Very good response, John.  One thing though -- be careful what you say:

>20 years ago ...  Multiprocessors were still exprimental;

Twenty years ago.  1969.  Our dual CPU Burroughs B5500 at Georgia Tech was
already about five years old.  It had virtual memory, too.

On the wall next to the machine was a 1968 article by an IBM research scientist
stating that multiprocessor systems would never be successful.

/john

    re: .7 (John)
    
    	   Had you used that approach you would likely have put the
    	customer off more than helped them.  While the approach I
    	used in .3 was clearly overstated to dramatize the point, 
    	it does reflect the sort of problem we in the field face.
    	Our customers know more than we do.
    
    	   Telling a customer not to worry about what's coming next
    	simply doesn't work.  Often, they are trying to make purchase
    	decisions as much as a year or two out... they are defining
    	their own computing strategy for their organization, not loading
    	up on boxes.  Very rarely does someone say, "I have a check
    	today... what can I buy with it?"  More often they say "I need
    	to budget for the next three years... what can I expect?"
    
    	   Let me give you a case in point to clear things up a bit.
    	A customer has a need for fault-tolerant computing.  They cannot
    	accept any downtime, and are looking around for an answer.  They
    	have Stratus and Tandem in their offices, then they call in DEC
    	and IBM.  Since we have a gag order, we are not allowed to 
    	mention that we have a true fault-tolerant VAX coming down the 
    	pike, so we go in there plugging the high-availability of 
    	VAXclusters, knowing full well that it is not what the customer
    	wants and needs.  They mention that they've heard rumors about
    	our fault-tolerant machine, and that's why we were brought in.
    
    	   Because there is nothing officially available concerning this
    	new and exciting offering, we cannot talk to this customer.  The
    	best we can hope to do is stall him and hope the annmouncement is
    	made early so we'll know something about the box in time.
    
    	   Again, this is NOT a marketing question.  As representatives
    	of Digital we SHOULD know what's coming up in product lines.
    
    	   Since I'm in Software, I also need to know what changes
    	are being planned for our software packages, and a rough
    	timeframe of when to expect them (say, within two quarters,
    	if possible).  Again, this is to assist the customers and
    	sales in planning for the changes they will be making, not
    	to help us sell Digital futures.
    
    	   Those who are not in Software Services seem to have a 
    	warped perception of what our function is.  Yes, we are called
    	"Sales Support", but that's only part of our function.  We're
    	Digital's front line.  We configure the solutions that are put
    	in front of customers.  We are charged with making the best 
    	decisions we can which resolve customer issues.  We can't do that
    	without information.
    
    	   The need for this information is real.  Trying to make the 
    	request seem trivial, or trying to downplay its importance to
    	our customers has cost us a lot in terms of reputation and 
    	revenues.  Stop telling us to stick our heads in the sand.
    	Start telling us where the information can be had.  Please.
    
    	- Greg

    re .0 
     I understand your frustration however there is no "all futures"
    product database existing beyond engineering that I know of. What
    I do know of is specific futures presentations in a given catagory
    that are available for your customer if they are up to a visit in
    some instances back tothe greater Maynard area. ie disk/tape futures
    are done very well by the Shrewsbury LED group and Mid-range products
    futures can be given by their marketing groups. Obviously if you
    attend with your customer then you will also have the info. Sometimes
    arrangemenets can be made to do it on-site at your customers locale.
    These all require non-disclosures but for your customers that need
    the data for their long range planning it is available (at least
    it was the last time we made use of it.)
     The reason I would imagine alot of this data is not made fully
    available on a continuing basis to the field is because of security
    problems in trying to protect patent rights etc. Another reason
    is sometimes projects are cancelled in mid-stream for reasons known
    sometimes only to sr. mgmt. and the PBU mgr. and the data updates
    would be a nightmare. Many Projects take longer to come to market
    or cost more than originally planned,sometimes this means a market
    opportunity is lost or a change in corporate strategy that mgmt
    would probably like to keep a lid on until all the story can be
    told. In any event I'm sure that if you have a specific product
    set that you are interested in knowing more about there are ways
    for you to get a glimpse into the future, sharing that information
    with all your customers is a whole other story.
    -ph

    If there is a specific need to talk about a specific future product,
    get the Product Manager involved. (S)he may have a non-disclosure
    presentation available.
    
    Andy

    Citing unauthorized press reports is sometimes very useful. I've
    kept out of more than one rathole by telling the customer, quite
    honestly, "If you read Charlie Matco last week you know everything
    I know about project oak gall."  Sometimes ignorance is the best
    defense.
    
    -dave

        You can do one of two things.
        
        You can try to change the corporate policies (which are, for the
        most part, MARKETING policies, although you think otherwise) about
        disclosure of detailed information about product directions.
        
        You can learn how to get the information you need within the
        context of the way things work at Digital. 
        
        Your chances of success in the former are, in my opinion, slim,
        but if you really want to try, I can probably find out for you the
        names of the relevant people.  I suspect that much of the present
        state of marketing policy around disclosure of marketing plans
        (and your hypothetical VAX 6400 example deals more with marketing
        plans than technical details) is determined by Corporate Product
        Operations in Stow, MA.
        
        You have a much greater chance of success in the latter.  If you
        have a real business justification for sharing detailed plans
        around future product directions with a customer, and you can
        convince your management of the merit of your reasons, then you
        can, in almost every case, get someone (usually the product
        manager) to talk to your customer.  HOWEVER, you need a really
        good business reason, and you typically need to be talking about a
        LOT of business.  
        
        Andy Leslie's advice is right to the point -- get the product
        manager involved. 
        
        Tom

    Digital does do long range PIDs. These are on the range of 5 year
    direction type presentation given by a Systems Consultant.  This PID
    gives what the current trends are in engineering and do not discuss any
    particular product.

    The next level PID is given to field test sites.  This usually happens
    about six months prior to shipment but could be longer or shorter. 
    Lots of technical detail so the Field Test Site can do a good job of
    testing the product.

    Then there is the product PID.  This can be given up to one month prior
    to announcement (used to be six months).  These tend to be fluffy
    marketing presentations to garner day-1 sales.  They also tend not to
    be given much as by the time a PID is approved, the product is
    announced.

    The final class of PID is the family PID.  These talk generalities for
    the next 6-12 months in a family of products.  They do tend to be
    rather vague as project do get canceled and redefined.

    I was an approved presentor for the last two levels of PIDs and the
    problem I had with them was the currency of the information in them.  I
    had to give a VAX family PID that was a year old, one product in it had
    already announced and one had been canceled.  Shortly after I gave it,
    a second project in it had been canceled.  The customer liked it and
    became a Digital Site and there is a Software Resident on site now. 
    The PID was also a useful tool for the Sales Rep in that the customer
    opened up to me about their future plans and needs.

    I have found one other source of information in the field.  A sales rep
    I deal with gave me a copy of the FY90 CERTS/EFFORT Budgeting Advise
    Package date 1 Mar 1989.  Some really interesting tidbits in there to
    help sales reps figure their budgets for the next year.  Descriptions
    are a bit vague (directed at Sales Reps) but with a little snooping,
    can be quite useful.

    Another source of information I have is that PID presentors have access
    to private Notes Conferences and we do discuss futures openly in there.

    Larry

    re: .8---Sorry, the B5500 had slipped my mind.  I worked on a B5000,
    which was briefly a dual-processor system, from 1963-1967.  I should
    have said "symmetric multiprocessing".
    
    re: .9--"Would....have put the customer off...."
    That's probably why I am an engineer rather than a customer contact
    person.  However, it seemed from the tone that this customer was being
    motivated by technology, rather than business needs.
    
    In the case cited in .9, where the customer has called in IBM and DEC
    to talk about futures in the face of a presentation of actuals by our
    competitors, Andy's advice is right on: get the product manager
    involved.  However, there are two problems---1) how do you find the
    product manager when you may not even be aware that the product exists.
    2) how do you "get the product manager involved" when the first time
    you hear about the customer's concerns is when you are face-to-face
    with him, and he wants to hear from you *right now*?
        John Sauter

        RE: .15 -- 
        
        We have at least as good a "futures" pitch as IBM, if not better,
        but it's not driven around "product" presentations, for the
        most part -- it's driven around services, support, and standards.
        No offense to people who build products, which are, ultimately,
        what gets bought..

>        1) how do you find the product manager when you may not even be
>        aware that the product exists. 
        
        General information about product directions is widely available,
        and there are a number of conferences, both oriented toward
        marketing and toward technical specialties, where you can describe
        a problem and ask for pointers to people who can help develop a
        solution.  You don't have to know that a product exists -- in most
        cases, the customer doesn't want a product, they want a solution
        to a problem.  They buy a product because it solves a problem.  If
        all the customer talks about is products, then the sales
        relationship is out of control, and something more than
        discussions with product management is needed to fix the sales
        problem. 
        
>        2) how do you "get the product manager involved" when the first
>        time you hear about the customer's concerns is when you are
>        face-to-face with him, and he wants to hear from you *right now*? 

        Again, this sort of situation is symptomatic of a relationship
        that is out of control.  It doesn't get fixed by bringing in a
        product manager. 
        
        These are *MARKETING* issues, and this discussion really would be
        more appropriate in ASIMOV::MARKETING (where the PID process and a
        lot of related issues have been beaten to death at least once in
        the past). 
        
        Tom

    I think .0 started as a two part problem... 
    
    1)  Getting futures information to customers (A *MARKETING* issue)
    
    2)  Getting futures information to Digital employees (A *DIGITAL*
        issue)
    
    At least that is my opinion...  While  .3 is a valid problem, with
    more *internal* futures information you would still have the same
    problem of not giving this information to customers.  (Take this
    part to MARKETING).
    
    As a Digital employee, I desire futures information for many reasons...
    
    1)  To understand the direction in which Digital is headed in
    computing...  To be able to represent Digital and best present
    *Solutions* to my customers problems.  This doesn't mean giving
    this info directly to customers.  My best example of this is in
    the area of distributed applications with PC's (DB & EM futures).
    
    2)  To help me decide what I should do to plan for my future...  Should
    I take an FMS or TDMS class, or maybe wait for FIMS?  Should I spend
    my free time learning UIS programming, or X-windows?  These two
    examples are axiomatic now, but what about six or twelve+ months
    ago?  After reading in DR about the ?upcoming? MIPS based servers,
    should I forget about VMS internals and go whole hog to Ultrix? :^{
    
    3)  Curiousity!  I don't spend my evenings sitting at this terminal
    because I hate computers!
    
    I find some futures info from Notes (A1INFO) but not much.  I have
    heard of the PID notes files, but I am not an approved PID presenter
    yet.  Are these the the correct sources for info for 1) and 2) or
    is there only Digital Review?

    Another source (supposedly) is the annual VAXcluster/TP/etc Symposium
    and Network University.  But you have to be one of the chosen few
    to attend one of these...   DECUS is another source (I might actually
    get the same info the 'good' customers get), but I will (probably)
    have to take vacation to go (even though Atlanta is only 2 hours
    north).
    
    The method of bugging the Product Manager is inefficient.  Having
    20,000 employees sending mail messages or phoning the product manager
    for PCSA won't leave him/her much time to manage.  I also don't
    have time to play phone/EM tag with them.  Plus, we are all asking
    the same questions....
    
    I spend most of my free time 'roaming' the notes files for tidbits
    of futures and other information (bugs etc).  We have FSIN for
    *Internal* problem reports and DSIN for customers.  We have  PID's
    for customers, what do we have for employees?  Can't we have a dozen
    *restricted* notesfiles (like A1INFO) for discussing futures?  Is
    this what the PID files are for?  Or is this a Marketing issue?
    
    Trying to have a ball doing the right thing,
    
    brett
                          

For those who haven't seen that note, I tried to address some of these issues
in ASIMOV::MARKETING (KP& to acquire, etc) Topic 622. That didn't get a great
deal of discussion, possibly because I phrased it in too longwinded a way, and
also because some respondents went down well-known ratholes about hardware.
(My proposal wasn't mainly aimed at hardware, anyway). If you are seriously
interested in the dissemination of information about directions, visions,
strategies, futures, plans etc., please read that note carefully and consider
replying there.

It does seem to me that the issue _is_ a marketing one, for the following
reason: our business depends on customers, and selling our products and services
to them. To do that we have to sell ourselves, and also explain what we believe
we can do to help their activities. So the reason for making information
available within Digital is to support the information we pass out of Digital
(to our customers, also to the world at large). Here too, please read carefully
what I have said and do not read anything further into it! Notice, for example,
that I have NOT said "internal information is to be passed on unchanged to
customers". Clearly, sales and support people need to have a lot more knowledge
than they present to their customers - in the initial stages, at least.

I am firmly in the camp of those who believe that information is absolutely
vital to business success; that Digital has been characterised by the free flow
of information, rather like the blood stream which bathes all parts of a living
organism in a sea of nutrients; and that it is worth seriously considering the
tradeoffs with other important considerations, such as security. If you apply
a tourniquet to stop bleeding, be sure it doesn't bring about gangrene that
kills the patient more surely...

What I'd like to see is a concentration on providing meaningful, relevant,
highly-condensed information about Digital's future directions. This would
be made public, and conveyed directly to all employees to provide them with
context about the business. This information would periodically be announced
by senior corporate managers (so it couldn't be too complicated :-)), and
also placed in newspapers, periodicals, even on TV if appropriate.

The information would NOT contain:

	- Specific product information
	- Dates, except in the vaguest terms (e.g."in the next year or two")
	- Any details of features, unless they are very radical and convey
	  striking new benefits (e.g. CDA live links)

It would emphasise:

	- Customer problems we aim to alleviate/abolish;
	- Architectures;
	- The working of open standards, wherever relevant;
	- The implications.

Examples of subjects might include:

	- DECwindows
	- Compound Document Architecture
	- IPSE (Integrated Project Support Environment) vision
	- CASE (Computer Aided Software Engineering) vision - related to IPSE
	- Office vision
	- OSF vision
	- EDI/networking/Enterprise Integration
	- QUALITY! Digital's extremely high quality processes are almost
	  universally unknown outside Digital (or even outside Engineering
	  and CSSE).
	- VAXclusters/LAVc/Distributed File/Queue/Name/Time Services (see
	  EDI/networking).
	- TP
	- Workstations, worksystems, and PCs.

The tricky bit is getting these messages right. They have to be short,
excellently written and illustrated. They must also be 100% 
(i.e. if they do give details we ought to deliver). Hardest of all,
they ought to be COMPLETE and CONSISTENT. This would mean explaining
how our Office vision fits in with Enterprise Integration (easy),
TP (less easy), and DECwindows/workstations/PCs (I wouldn't like to have
that job).

From this comes another benefit - it would FORCE us to think
in terms of complete solutions that don't have great gaps in them. In
other words, we need to think at a Marketing level, not a Product Management
level. When you have nearly 300 VMS layered software products, plus other
O/Ss, plus hardware... you can't really communicate with customers in terms
of products. That's why Oracle often are more attractive to customers than
Digital: they offer one thing, while Digital offers about a dozen (DIY).

Tom

    re: "It's a marketing problem..."
    
    Then DECUS is solely a marketing tool...
    
    Why is it that a _customer_ can find out _more_ about a product
    30-60 days _before_ release at a standard DECUS than an average SWS
    grunt can find out about the product 30 days _after_ release?
    
    I used to go to DECUS as a customer, and I _always_ walked away
    with lots of good information about new and pending releases of
    software and hardware.  I could name new features and even make
    intelligent assertions about preformance expectations.
    
    Now I work for SWS, and I don't "need to know" such things.
    
    Right...
    
    Your customer comes back from DECUS and asks if feature mumble in
    product foobar is as good as it sounds.  You try to maintain an
    intelligent look on your face as you come up with a response.  What
    you really want to do is to ask just what feature mumble is because
    you've never heard of it before.  In fact, you find yourself trying
    to invent reasons to get the customer to loan you his/her notes
    so that you can find out what the _CUSTOMER_ knows which you _AREN'T
    ALLOWED TO KNOW_!
    
    Want to keep "futures" close to those who "need to know"?
    
    THEN DON'T HAND OUT THE INFORMATION AT DECUS!!!
    
    Not a good solution?
    
    THEN LET THE FIELD KNOW WHAT EVERYONE AT DECUS KNOWS!!!
    
    -- Russ

    I'm in central engineering, actually in the IBM Interconnect
    Engineering Group and I run the SNAUG::SNAGWY notesfile that is
    the notesfile for the IBM Interconnect Products. I have a pretty
    simple philosophy that I follow:
    
    	1, I assume that the EASYNET is Internal Use Only and that if
    	   external people have access to it then that isn't my problem.
    	   There are people whose job it is to keep intruders out of
    	   EASYNET. I'll let them do my job, I'll do mine.
    
    	2, I assume that all Digital employees who read my notesfile
    	   are professional and know how to handle information.
    
    	3, I freely discuss future direction if asked about a particular
    	   area, especially if the product is currently in Field Test
    	   or close to it.
    
    	4, I make it very clear that price and availability information
    	   is not in the notesfile and that if someone has a particular
    	   need for that then I point them at the Product Manager.
    
    	5, I treat other employees in the way I'd expect them to treat
    	   me ie I start out with TRUST. If someone has come to my
           notesfile they are there for a reason so I try to provide
    	   them with the information they need to do their job.
                                        
    I have been on many customer visits at the invitation of the local
    account team. Account teams are not just flogging popcorn to a
    customer,they are selling Digital the company and a vision for
    the future. In order to do this they need first class information.
    Unfortunately far too many people in corporate work under the
    assumption that all a field person needs is the pricebook and to
    make sure that they've listened to their sanitised audio tapes and
    read their sales updates.
    
    Dave
    
    Even engineering groups don't have an easy time getting information.
    Just recently we needed information on future VAX processors and
    their packaging in order to make some decisions around packaging
    of some future DECnet/SNA Gateway Products. I understand it was
    like pulling teeth to get it.

        RE: .19 -- While I might not say this to the DECUS membership,
        DECUS is an extremely successful marketing activity for Digital.
        It always has been.  It's a place where customers go to learn
        about our present products and our future directions, and to
        discuss with one another ways they've been successful in using
        our products.  This provides a very effective form of reference
        selling.
        
        You're absolutely right, every interested Digital employee, and
        especially those in the field who have to work with customers who
        have been to DECUS, should have timely access to everything that
        will be or has been said to customers at DECUS.  I wish there were
        a good way to accomplish this.  I don't know of one. While it's
        probably possible to get copies of the overheads for the "futures"
        presentations, many of them don't have formal prepared scripts.
        Even for those sessions that are scripted, there are usually Q&A
        periods where customers ask questions and Digital folks give
        answers.  You can't predict the questions, and you often can't
        predict the answers.
        
        Short of sending every Digital employee who is interested to
        DECUS, how can we capitalize on the information disseminated there
        so it will get to Digital employees who need it? 
        
        Tom

    re: .21
    
    Well, there is another note hereabouts that talks about audio cassettes
    being sent out for other reasons.  Why not send out audio tapes
    of the DECUS sessions, or at least make them available internally
    via some electronic ordering mechanism (something hooked up to VTX,
    perhaps)?  And why not make the overheads available as well?
    
    It sure beats driving along listening to some bozo telling you that
    you should be concentrating on your driving!  8^}
    
    -- Russ

It's been awhile since I've been to DECUS, but they used to have an audio
tape service.  You pick the sessions you want tapes of and get the tapes
at the end of DECUS.  I don't know how to order them if you didn't attend.

- Jeff

    I seem to remember seeing DECUS 'Party Lines' in Sales Update years
    ago right before the DECUS meetings.
    
    For those 'inside' possibly a VTX providing that info, or VTX access
    to Sales Update.
    
    	-Barry-
    

    
    	   I seem to recall there is some restriction on the number of
    	Digital employees who can become members of any DECUS chapter.
    	Obviously, we can't allow Digital employees to turn DECUS into
    	a marketing event (as was alluded to earlier), but still, there
    	must be a way for the information disseminated there to be 
    	available to ALL Digital employees (with the possible exception
    	of upper management).
    
    	   The audio cassettes made at DECUS are of a MUCH higher
    	calibre than the ones we make internally with our own ACP
    	(Audio Cassette Program).  If we could just raise our own
    	standards internally, there'd be no need to turn to external
    	sources (such as DECUS and Digital pReview).
    
    	   As an aside, one of the reasons I came to work for Digital
    	was so that I could get inside knowledge on the products.
    	I'm what some would call a tech-weenie, and am interminably
    	curious about what we're doing and where we're going.
    	Marketing messages do not convey this information to me.
    	Technical presentations do.  We need an ACP directed at
    	techies.
    
    	- Greg

    The last ten replies or so have been of the form... "I don't go to a
    DECUS Symposium but my customers do and I suspect that they know more
    than I do."
    
    Well, I do go and I deal with customers who do go, and I communicate
    with Digital employees who do make presentations there, so at least
    you know that you'll be reading something different here.
    
    In the dark ages before the VAX Notes explosion (1984, for example) I
    complained about the internal tight lips and the external (ie DECUS/
    Digital News/Digital Review) loose lips.  Indeed in the Keystone Kops
    days of Notes Police, conversations were shut down _after_ "visions"
    were presented at DECUS, because in the 96 hours after the
    presentation, it had mutated in "futures".  And as we well know,
    "visions" are ontologically good, and "futures" absolutely evil.
    
    Today, it appears that there's plenty of internal discussion taking
    place at the product directions stage, and field test stage.  I think
    the trend is for making fewer things that are commitments or even sound
    like commitments before those quirky DECUS Symposium attendees, and
    opening up that phase review process to the field.  Perhaps there are
    some concealed programs floating about, but when I've taken the
    initiative and asked, I've been told far more than a customer would
    hear at a DECUS Symposium.
    
    A word about "DECUS" here.  Participation in DECUS LUG's and SIG's by
    Digital employees is always welcome.  Attendence at the Symposia of
    DECUS costs Digital Equipment Corporation "real" money beyond the
    travel and lodging expense.  This isn't a conspiracy but recognition of
    a potentially massive business expense.
                                           

    re: .26
    
>    Today, it appears that there's plenty of internal discussion taking
>    place at the product directions stage, and field test stage.  I think
>    the trend is for making fewer things that are commitments or even sound
>    like commitments before those quirky DECUS Symposium attendees, and
>    opening up that phase review process to the field.  Perhaps there are
>    some concealed programs floating about, but when I've taken the
>    initiative and asked, I've been told far more than a customer would
>    hear at a DECUS Symposium.
    
    Of course, this presumes a few things.
    
    	a) You know enough about something to ask about it
    	b) You have a notion of who to ask
    	c) You have the time, resources, and personal network to achieve
    	   adequate communications
    
    For residents on site, the sad fact is that they spend 40+ hours
    per week working for the customer, and are expected to take personal
    time above that to follow up on small things like unit/district/area
    business.  Much time is spent simply trying to be part of the local
    scene; there is precious little time available to search the entire
    Digital world for scraps of information regarding product directions,
    etc.  When you have to pick up your paychecks in packs of six or
    eight, you normally spend most of your "free" time trying to figure
    out what you've been missing at the office (like what policies have
    changed recently, etc.).
    
    Stating that a properly equipped individual can get information is
    just fine;  now, what can we do about the vast majority of field
    folks who have never received the opportunity to develop a network
    to gather such information?  Cassettes or similar media would help
    _greatly_ to spread information.  The DECUS info in particular could
    at least let the field know what the customer already knows.  That
    would also give a starting place for gathering more information
    if such is needed.
    
    -- Russ

    re: .27
    
    I don't put myself in the place of your manager, but establishing that
    personal network is part of your job.  You should know who your helpful
    co-workers are and helping less experienced co-workers yourself.
    
    The people in your district who present PID's and people with
    "consultant" titles are the first tier for residents to find out the
    things that they need to know or are simply curious about.

    re: .28
    
    I know who most of the consultants in my area are.  Unfortunately,
    most are woefully unavailable.  They're all out somewhere -- making
    their numbers.  It's the job they are told to do.  I can't name
    _anyone_ who delivers PIDs for our area other than consultants.
    Even if I knew their names, it wouldn't make much difference.  They
    have a job to do and so do we.  Their job has never included seeing
    individual residents on site to give them information, and our job
    has never included "wasting billable time" by gathering together
    at a common place and time to receive internal information (only
    at the mythical "unit meeting" or "district meeting", which are too
    busy with area business to be concerned with much in the technical
    realm).
    
    I have been working out of the office for a few months now, but
    I know what it is like to be out on site with _NO_ source of
    information.  I was on-site billing my second day with Digital.
    It was a year before I spent my first non-meeting workday in the
    office.
    
    When you are given:
    
    	1.  No new-hire training
    	2.  No equipment to use at home (in many cases)
    	3.  No equipment to use at the office (also, in many cases)
    	4.  No org chart
    	5.  No phone book
    	6.  No access to consultants (or even a list of names)
    	7.  No presented PIDs or equivalent (I've had _one_ in the past
	    two years)
    	8.  A mandate to "bill 'em"
    	9.  No one to explain how this company works -- or why!
    	10. Not even a freakin' mention of "it's your job to develop
    	    a personal network on your own time and with your own
    	    resources"
    	11. No mention of NOTES, VTX or other tools for gathering information
        12. No mention of the Colorado or Atlanta hotline numbers and
	    procedures
    	13. No mention of call escalation procedures
    	14. No other living Digital body within miles of your work location
    	    (in many cases)
    
    it's rather difficult to "establish your personal network" or
    do anything beyond the task in front of your nose.
    
    I work in a unit that has about 8 people in it.  It is still quite
    difficult to name who they are.  We see each other less than once
    per quarter.  We also know that reorgs have been an annual event
    around here, so by the time you learn who you work with, you don't
    work with them anymore!
    
    I cannot agree to the notion that a resident is supposed to develop
    a knowledge base totally on his or her own (will we have to pay
    for our own training next?).  You may need to develop a support
    network, but it is absurd to think that someone needs to do this
    without _any_ assistance from management or corporate programs!
    
    And now I hear people saying (essentially), "Oh, you don't know about
    this and that?  I guess you're just not doing your job then...".
    GIVE ME A BREAK!
    
    Personally, I am trying to spread information around when I can
    find it.  But this is neither efficient nor cost-effective.  What
    we need is a flow of technical information from the folk who make
    "technical reality".  I'm tired of being treated like a corporate
    spy because I need to keep a perspective on our products so I can
    make certain that my efforts (and my customers') are continuing
    in the corporate mainstream.  
    
    -- Russ (trying to do the best job I can, thank you)

    re: .29
    
    Yep.  Recently, a customer I was working at was given an opportunity
    to use one of our products, after another Digital person had suggested
    it.  I didn't even know the product existed.  The customer LOVED
    it!  One little problem.  The product is being retired.  What is
    it's replacement?  Who knows.  I have no idea what our direction
    is in most product lines.  Things like RDB vs. DBMS are pretty easy,
    but most others aren't.  How are we supposed to help direct the
    customer in the correct direction if we don't know what it is?
    As has been said before, it is the PSS resident who is in daily
    contact with the customer and has the greatest chance of keeping
    the customer on the right track.
    
    Bob

    
    	   I hear the cry of other field folk who, like me, have a 
    	serious problem with Digital's roll-your-own interpersonal
    	networking scheme of data disimmenation.  Those who do not
    	work in the field do not understand this problem.  Networks
    	that stretch this far from the hub (Maynard) have very slow
    	links, which tend to be down more often than they are up
    	(metaphorically speaking, of course).  
    
    	   For those who haven't already been made aware, the new 
    	marketing push is for CD ROM distribution media.  Better
    	get your customers on it soon, or they won't be able to get
    	the latest and greatest (doc sets, multi-kit media, etc).
    	I had to go to a symposium in California to find this little
    	tidbit out.  A week later I saw a similar statement in 
    	Digital News.
    
    	   The issue of whether to use CD ROM or Magtape is a marketing
    	issue.  The issue of whether or not certain products will only
    	be available by this media is a technical issue, not a marketing
    	issue.  How long are we expected to grope around in the dark,
    	making decisions and offering advice based on unavailable
    	information?
    
    	   Networking works just fine when you're near the hub.  The
    	farther you get from the hub, the fewer 'servers' there are
    	at your disposal, and those you can reach often come at a 
    	high 'cost' due to the number of 'hops' required to get there.
    	Often, you get little more than a 'hello message' before the
    	link to the 'server' is severed.
    
    	   It's awfully easy for those who have access to the information
    	to take it for granted that everyone has equal access.  This is
    	simply not the case.
    
    	- Greg

    re: last few....    AMEN!!!
    
    But we have all heard this b***hing from the field...  What can
    we do to fix it?
    
    How about the following RESTRICTED FUTURES notes files to shadow
    the regular support conferences....
    
    A1INFO (shouldn't that be ALL-IN-1_INFO ?)
    NAC_INFO
    DB_INFO (or TP_INFO)
    DW_INFO
    PCSA_INFO
    VMS_INFO
    VAX_INFO
    MIPS_INFO ?
    ULTRIX_INFO
    MISC_INFO
    CARPLAN_INFO or DIGITAL_INFO ;^)
        etc...
    
    Of course, there would have to be some control on the discussions in
    these conferences.  The A1INFO conference has done a good job of
    getting information to the field and getting feedback from the field
    without sacrificing security.  Can't we apply the same principle to
    other areas? 
    
    To someone in control:  How can we get something like this done?
    Cross post this discussion in MARKETING?
    
    Re: previous replies...   There are no PID presenters within a hundred
    miles of my unit...  There are a few consultants, but they are
    'industry' consultants.  They depend on me (et al) to tell THEM about
    future (and current) products (and I go to them for their expertise).
    We do have equipment at home (how else would we get to notes at 4am?),
    but none at our local office.  DECUS is probably out....  The only way
    we can go is if our CUSTOMER pays. 'nuff said,
    
    g'nite
    
    brett

    I think we need a much broader scope than single product notes files.
    
    Tell us oh VAXnotes gurus, is there a single conference out there
    that talks about the different directions that DEC is taking.
    Something that is very broad and diverse, and does not get down
    into the real technical issues.  A conference that describes new
    products, and general DEC strategy in the market.
    
    I'm looking for a conference that every DEC field specialist, be
    they in Field Service, Software, Sales, or whatever, could read
    to find generally what the company is doing.
    
    Or am I just dreaming?
    
    Ya know what else might be nice would be a monthly video tape
    distributed to each unit that talked to these issues.
    
    Doug (...another SWS field residency veteran)

    I've availed myself of tapes from our library which feature folks like
    Roger Heinen and John Shebell.  Also, the State of the Company talks
    are on tape and large sections of the talks are also in the MGT MEMO
    which comes around. 
    
     

    re: < Note 764.34 by SCARY::M_DAVIS "nested disclaimers" >
    
>                            -< your local library? >-
    
    We don't have a local library in Washington DC.  Couldn't find it
    in the local phone book or the Corporate (US) phone book.  We do
    have a local _SOFTWARE_ library which is open 12 hrs per week (or
    something preposterous like that) -- of course your lucky to actually
    find _SOFTWARE_ there, let alone business materials.

>    I've availed myself of tapes from our library which feature folks like
>    Roger Heinen and John Shebell.  
    
    I suppose that these are supposed to be recognizable names.  I couldn't
    tell you who these folks are to save my life.  I doubt anyone in
    my unit could, either.  They may be very important people.  But
    how would I know that?
    
>    				Also, the State of the Company talks
>    are on tape and large sections of the talks are also in the MGT MEMO
>    which comes around. 
    
    Comes around to you, perhaps, but not to us.  I've only seen MGT
    MEMO come into the hands of UM's or higher.  Never heard of anyone
    ever getting a Corporate Video Tape around here.  It may be available,
    but, from whom?  If anyone around here is charged with distributing
    such information, they are not making their presence known very
    well.
    
    -- Russ

    Sad, very sad... 
    
    Yes, I'm referring to our Digital library.  The folks mentioned are
    corporate consulting engineers and rate a listing in the back of the
    annual report.
    
    re: routing of the MGMT MEMO.  Bring it up at your next staff meeting? 
    (whazzat??)
    
    sad,
    Marge

    re: < Note 764.36 by SCARY::M_DAVIS "nested disclaimers" >

>    						The folks mentioned are
>    corporate consulting engineers and rate a listing in the back of the
>    annual report.
    
    Makes sense.  I've never seen an annual report around here either.
    Guess you have to be making enough spare bucks to buy stock.  8^(
    
>    re: routing of the MGMT MEMO.  Bring it up at your next staff meeting? 
>    (whazzat??)
    
    I had a manager who tried to circulate a copy of MGMT MEMO.  Once.
    Most of us were in the same (customer) facility at the time, but
    even then, it made the rounds V-E-R-Y  S-S-L-L-O-O-W-W-L-L-Y-Y...
    Imagine how difficult it would be to move a copy over a few customer
    facilities in a few different cities.   I don't expect to see another
    copy for a long time.
    
    We might have a unit meeting before July 1 (but I won't hold my
    breath).  July 1 is an important date -- the new year has brought
    on new unit reorganizations for the past two years.  I've heard
    that there's no reason to do it this year, but we'll see.  (If we
    skip this year, just imagine what _NEXT_ year will bring! 8^| )
    
    -- Russ

    re. .35 
    
    Until July the DLN (Digital Library Network) is free to cost centers.
    Manager must register cost center.  The online service available
    on VTX (keyword DLNCATALOG)provides for search and request.  
    
    timmo

re .32:

The Ada product manager maintains exactly such a restricted Notes conference,
TURRIS::ADA_MARKET, for the purposes of:

	- Discussing futures
	- Exchanging details of customer situations
	- Making product requests

and anything else that cannot comfortably be done in the full glare of an
unrestricted conference. This conference was set up by the former pm, Dave
Quigley, at the request of a number of field support people who have since used
it as a forum. Dave was a moderator of that conference, although in practice
he left most of the work to one of his senior engineers. But he DID read it
whenever he could and replied in the conference, or by mail if too sensitive.

Anyone who seriously needs to participate in ADA_MARKET should contact the
current pm, Dave TLE::Cuoco, or Sara TLE::Murphy. However, you shouldn't
clutter up the membership list and your notebook unless you are fairly serious.

The drawback to the ADA_MARKET conference is that the Ada pm, like so many
others, has a rather narrow remit: the VAX Ada, VAXELN Ada, and XD Ada compilers..

However, if you are interested in, say CASE ("computer aided software
development"), you can glean a lot of knowledge about directions from reading
the right unrestricted conferences.

If anyone needs to contact a pm, I recommend that you ask the conference
maintained by the appropriate engineering group. It's very unlikely that the
engineers who reply in that conference don't know the name of their pm.

In fact - it would be a significant step for engineering conferences to reserve
a topic for the name, node, phone number etc. of the current pm.

--Tom

    
    	   Yesterday, while scanning through the DNT notesfile, I 
    	found a pointer to a brochure detailing migration planning
    	for Phase V of DECnet.  It gives a lot of good technical
    	information about Phase V.  
    
    	   The text of the brochure was not posted in the conference,
    	just a pointer to it.
    
    	   Now, I know this isn't a terribly original idea, but it
    	occured to me that it would be handy of there was one place
    	where people could post these pointers to official documents
    	detailing technical/marketing futures (i.e. official versions
    	of what the customers already know).  I wonder how the company
    	would feel about such a conference?  
    
    	   It could be called something innocuous, like DOCUMENT_POINTERS,
    	or INFO_SEARCH, and the intent would be to have a centralized
    	place to search for pointers to official information, in 
    	whatever forms it is found.
    
    	   Any thoughts on the advantages/disadvantages of such a 
    	conference?  It would be rather like EASYNET_KITS, in function.
    	Since the information posted there would presumably have been
    	made available by management in some way (e.g. announcement
    	in product-specific notesfiles), I can't see why they'd object
    	to the information being made more readily available to the
    	noting public (i.e. Digital employees).  Can you?
    
    	- Greg
    

    One source for good pointers that already exists is
    VTX DISINFO.  Using Phase V as an example, in less than
    a minute I was provided with leads to 3 courses, 3 reports
    and 3 articles (none of which from the master index, so perhaps
    a more specific term would have yielded even more)
    _bill

    Re: .41
    
    Is "DISINFO" short for "dis-information"?

re .39:

I made a mistake in reply .39. The name of the current Ada product manager is
ED CUOCO - not Dave.

Apologies to all, especially Ed (and Dave) :-)

--Tom

>< Note 764.42 by EAGLE1::EGGERS "Soaring to new heights" >


>    Re: .41
    
>    Is "DISINFO" short for "dis-information"?


	  No, it isn't.



	  Heh,heh,heh <diabolical laughter>.

    As another example of the need for early information in the
    field:
    I am currently working on a large software project in the CIM
    domain.  We are in the early design phases.  I saw a reference
    in another topic where someone identified himself as working
    in the "Aerospace Group" of ESG.  Being that we were automating
    an airplane manufacturing plant, and I had never heard these terms,
    I sent him mail.  His response talked about several efforts underway,
    assuming that I should know all about them.  I still haven't figured 
    out what they all are, much less how to get detailed info.
    
    The bottom line is that we are configuring several third-party products
    to do the job.  If anyone had heard that there was a Digital solution
    in the works, we probably would have tried to use it.  We had no way
    of finding out.  (a method that is not publicized may as well not exist
    as it has the same effect)
    
    As to the argument that "its your responsibility to develop a personal
    network"  Well, to some extent that's true, but you need to consider
    two things:
    1)  Its easy to develop a network around a single area of expertise.
    In the field, my job is to be an _expert_ on anything the customer may
    decide to hit me with.  One week I need to be a DBMS guru, and the next
    its Ada, and the next its DOCUMENT, etc. etc.  How do you develop that
    kind of a network??
    
    2)  We've all played "telephone", right?  You know how things sound
    when they get to the other side of the room?  Consider how your
    message sounds after 3000 miles of mouth-to-mouth communication!
    Is that the way you folks in engineering _really_ want information
    that may set customer expectations for your products spread??
    
    Kevin

    
       I'm working out in the "field" right now, as part of the All Hands
    on DEC (AHOD) program.  I'm performing technical support for sales
    people.
    
       The lack of understanding of the overall direction of our products
    is scary.  While training classes and such provide "point by point"
    information, the sales force seems to lack (by no fault of their
    own!!!) an overall understanding of the directions in which Digital is
    moving.
    
       PIDs are nice, but they won't even be released until things are firm
    in terms of guaranteed deliverables, which may be quite late in the
    cycle.  I think that more should be done internally to inform the
    employees about what's happening and where we're going.  At least then
    when Charlie Matcko (whatever his name is...) prints his trash column,
    it'll be at least based on fact, rather than a large rumour mill.
    
    					-mjg
    
    p.s.
    
       I have a lot more to say, but I'm tired and it's pretty sunny
    outside, so I'll see what comes back from this first.
    
    

    You are right.  The ignorance level is pretty high...  not just in
    sales, but everywhere.  It is very difficult to know what is really
    happening when your information source is limited to sales update.
    
    BUT, while it is nice to talk about support for sales, and information
    from PIDs and such, I think the customers would be a lot happier just
    talking to some technically competent people that can talk about
    EXISTING products and show how they are really used instead of canned
    demos.  THAT SUPPORT EXISTS.  
    
    And, from what I've seen the customer will TOLERATE the coat and tie
    once he is convinced the person wearing it actually knows something. 

  >     I have a lot more to say, but I'm tired and it's pretty sunny
  >  outside, so I'll see what comes back from this first.

I almost didn't answer this.  I've only been working for Digital for just
under two years, and already I feel like Charlie Brown beating his head against
the wall.

I don't bother asking about where we are going, etc. anymore, because all I ever
hear is "I don't know", or "You don't need to know."  Being a PSS person, my
internal contacts are almost nill.  I think I have made as many useful contacts
through non-work related conferences as I have through work-related ones.

Oh well, I'll shut up now before I bore everyone to death with the obvious...

Bob

    
       Well, it was pretty sunny at some points, so I feel a lot better
    this morning, so perhaps I can continue.
    
       This is exactly the kinds of problems the field is battling for
    sales right now.  In one account, the Digital sales people "did the
    right thing" in the external PID stuff, and all that.  SUN came in with
    all their engineers, talked "engineer to engineer" about what SUN's
    doing for workstations and CASE (esp. in the Military/Gov't market) and
    made an initial penetration of a few "Seed" workstations.  While the
    customer felt that DEC had better products in general right now,
    evidently the lack of future vision sold them SUNs.  I'm working as
    hard as I can to educate myself and the sales personnel out here on
    what Digital's visions are before it's time to go back home to New
    England, but what then?
    
       I realize the need for confidentiality, but pretty soon we're going
    to be so secretive that nobody will have information on DEC's future,
    except for CHarlie Matcko.
    
       IMHO, someone should re-evaluate the need for confidentiality.  I
    don't feel that no security at all is appropriate, but we should be
    more informed internally.
    
    
    					-mjg
    

        Informing the sales force at large (on product/corporate
        futures) would take precious time from making that
        all-important, forget-everything-else goal: Numbers for
        the quarter.
        
        I doubt there will be much investment in education on
        directions as long as the short-sighted numbers race
        continues.
        
        Lee
        
        

        The other problem with many of the PID presentations, IMHO, is
        that they suffer from the common "point product" mentality that
        blinds people to the concept that we build things to work
        together.  So, for example, you might see a PID presentation on
        "X", where "X" is designed to work with "Y" and "Z", but there
        will be NO MENTION of "Y" and "Z", either because the person who
        wrote the PID really doesn't know about them, or because they
        assume that everyone knows about them, or because "Y" and "Z" are
        "outside the window" for PID presentations (they'll come out
        later, so we can't talk about them, even if they are a big part of
        the justification for "X"). 
        
        Another problem is that, in many cases, the background material
        that *explains* things (in generic terms, that shouldn't need to
        be kept secret, because it's stuff we want EVERYONE to understand
        and value and buy) is labelled with exactly the same confidential 
        by-line as the *really* secret stuff.
        
        Tom

    re .49
  < 							SUN came in with
  <  all their engineers, talked "engineer to engineer" about what SUN's
  <  doing for workstations and CASE (esp. in the Military/Gov't market) and
  <  made an initial penetration of a few "Seed" workstations.  While the
  <  customer felt that DEC had better products in general right now,
  <  evidently the lack of future vision sold them SUNs.  

    I don't know it's relevant in your particular case, but I'm sitting
    here with a � thick packet that's circulating in our group with
    the notation, "Here is the press kit that was used at the 4/24 CASE
    announcement".
    
    "Our group" in the above sentence is the CASE SIC, which operates
    out of ACI in Chicago.  I'll follow this posting with a MAIL message
    to you.
    
    	Marvin Levin

    I guess we need to strike a balance between two quite dangerous
    extremes:
    On one hand, we (Digital) have been burned in the past by letting
    out premature information on planned products.In a couple of cases,
    for technical(or other) reasons the products were cancelled at the
    last minute.  Customers had heard of the upcoming products and had
    made plans around them.  When the products fell through, customers
    lost faith in Digital's ability to deliver.
    
    So we have gone to the extreme of not letting _any_ information
    out about products that are not announced, except in certain tightly
    controlled circumstances.
    
    The other extreme which can cause problems is being discussed in
    this note:  If I as a field software specialist do not know what
    the future direction in products is (because I am obviously not
    trustworthy, being in the field and all) I am more than likely to,
    in good faith steer my customers towards a development path including
    soon-to-be obsolete products.  About the time the software arrives
    at the customer site, Digital makes the announcement that product
    X is being phased out and will no longer be enhanced.  The customer
    loses faith in Digital since we obviously don't know what we're
    doing, or else don't care that we are giving out bad advice.
    
    My assertion is that the second scenario is EVERY BIT AS DAMAGING
    to Digital's reputation as the first.  That needs to be fully
    recognized and dealt with.
    
    Kevin

	Ask the S. D. Warren (Scott Paper) team about the second senario.  
They planned, sold, and started designing a solution in a fixed price project 
around LIMS late last summer.  Not a happy bunch of campers this year.

    re: 53
    
    What you've presented as fact is incorrect and what you've expressed as
    opinion I disagree with.
    
    Customers, at least since 1975 when I became an employee, are required
    to sign a form that explicitly says "whatever we're about to tell you
    may never become a product".  If a customer was willing to suspend
    belief around that written statement and suffer some sort of financial
    loss, well, that's quite a stretch.
    
    On the other hand, embarrassment and "loss of faith" as you put it is
    price Digital was quite willing to pay in the late 70's and  early 80's
    over several products.  The new policies are a reaction to some of
    that.  Certainly Microsoft and Lotus set a pace for vaporware that's
    toughh to beat.
    
    "Certain tightly controlled circumstances" is an awfully anal-retentive
    way to put it.
    
    You can't be serious:  The field is "trustworthy".  In reply .26 I
    cataloged the means that the field has for obtaining information on
    product directions.  If you don't make the effort to find out, then
    don't offer advice to customers.
    
    Regarding "phase out" & "no longer enhanced" please understand that
    there's a difference.  There's plenty of notice provided to customers
    regarding the phase out of products, and even more available to people
    internally.  Really, now, when was the last time some one got surprised
    by the phase out of a product?
                                    

    If I have to find out that we are developing a water-cooled "very
    big VAX", that it was shelved, ... (and other rumours)... FROM MY
    CUSTOMER!!
    
    Do we work in the same company or WHAT!?
    
    Let the field KNOW what is happening and trust us to "DO THE RIGHT
    THING"! For example, if a customer should ask me about the XXX,
    I should ata least be able to tell him that I cannot comment on
    it. Rather, I now have to stare back in complete amazement, and
    ask the customer to TELL ME MORE! What impression would I give?
    What will the customer think of us as a company? That we are to
    recommend them solutions without even knowing what is to come?
    
    .53 is right. the sad thing is the customers get PID, as a field
    SWS I DON'T!
    
    ps: Sorry for the flame but if the 1st para is not appropriate PLEASE
    set this note hidden. Thanx
    

    Re: .56
    
    Your customers get their "knowledge" from the trade rags (such
    as Digital Review), and it is often wrong.  Don't be so quick to
    take what your customers tell you as gospel, as more often than
    not they have inaccurate or incomplete information.
    
    My personal view is that it is a disservice to everyone to spread
    information about products under development to anyone in the company
    who thinks they want to know.  Only confusion and ill feelings can
    come of it.
    
    				Steve

    My reply to such customer queries was "well thats a good one, I'll
    check it out - where did you hear it?".
    
    Blank amazement is your problem, not the customers. 
    
    A

    re: .56
    
    If a customer asks me about XXX, I smile sweetly and say that I cannot
    comment on unannounced products, whether or not I've ever heard of XXX
    (unless I know that it's already been announced, of course).
    
    The sweetness of my smile is a matter of opinion.
        John Sauter

    While I agree that it is possible (and even likely) that field folk
    might be better off not knowing about the little room somewhere
    holding an experimental turbo-charged super-glub (hope there's no
    project using that name 8^), there are things that field folk *SHOULD*
    know and *SHOULD* get access to *BEFORE* the customer.
    
    In particular, SWS residents seem to be far out of the loop when
    it comes to getting information.  In my experience, it is not uncommon
    that the customer will receive a PID from Sales Support (through
    Sales), while the resident will not be allowed to attend (often
    because of customer needs/demands).  The resident then tries to
    chase down the PID-deliverer (by phone or EMAIL, of course; there
    is no time available for going to the office) only to find that
    the individual is booked solid for 3 weeks and can give only a brief
    3-minute overview by phone.
    
    The resident is EXPECTED to know this information by the customer
    ("You work for the same company, right?"), but yet doesn't have
    a clean way of getting the information.
    
    I've heard the chorus of "Go to the product manager".  I've done
    this, with mixed results.  Some PM folk are good with info, others
    are not (AT ALL!).  Besides, how can a product manager be expected
    to get things done if he or she is charged with updating hundreds
    or thousands of field folk?  This is clearly insane.  The PM folk
    need to have the call as to what information goes out, but they
    shouldn't be personally responsible for handing out each and every
    bit of information in response to each and every request that comes
    along.
    
    What is needed is an effective, simple means of making "common"
    information (e.g., contents of the latest PID or DECUS) known to the
    field with a minimum of effort.  The time WASTED trying to find someone
    who is willing to part with the information is a *MAJOR* obstacle!
    There is often no time to do this during the day (the customer wants
    WORK done, not to have a resident searching for information which
    "they should know already"), and it is grossly inefficient to do
    this at off-hours (playing the NOTES-MAIL-telephone-tag routine
    at off hours -- at 1200 baud -- can take DAYS before you can get
    the information).
    
    The bottom line is this:  if we make the PID information available to
    the customer, it should be just as easily available to the resident.
    It shouldn't take multiple days and much personal time to get
    information which SHOULD be readily available to "trustworthy" field
    personnel.
    
    To claim that the current grossly inefficient methods of tracing
    information is "Digital culture" is a crock.  The information is
    prepared for delivery, but few people "in the know" seem to see
    the need to actually make it available in an efficient manner.
    
    It may be a "local" problem (which Pat doesn't seem to have -- or
    has enough clout to fix [HOORAY!!!]), but if we're serious with
    the expansion of the Services business, it should be a "corporate"
    concern.
    
    FWIW, IMHO
    
    -- Russ (who'd better get back to work...  8^)

    re: .60
    
    well said!
    
    if the customer can have a pid, why not the field folks? Customers
    must sign a pid to agree NOT to divulge corp info. we as employees
    by definition have already done that.
    
    also we are expected to come up with solutions for customers. sometimes
    the lead time is more than a year so many products wouldve been
    announced during the time. is it fair for us (SWS in my case) to
    crack our heads trying to meet the price/performance constraints
    while another machine that will be released soon that may satisfy
    the requirements? Worse, the sales managers apparently have their
    own source of information regarding unannounced products, they will
    constantly ask us to see if such "unannounced" products can fit
    the config. Now if there is no "future info" available to field
    tech folks, how do we do a long distant config? The fact that such
    products MAY become available is at least something which we can
    EXPLORE, then we may arrange for PIDs (I'm not saying that we want
    to RELY COMPLETELY on the new product).
    
    not being trusted with information is also demoralising, esp (for
    me) when the sales knows about it when I (SWS) dont.