Conference 7.286::digital

Steve,

This could turn out to be a very interesting topic.  I just hope it doesn't
deteriorate into a "That's not DEC culture", "Yes it is" series of arguments.

Bob

    I'll take a stab at one thing that I think people mean when they say
    our culture has to change.  It's being discussed in another topic, so
    let's don't get into an in-depth discussion about the pros and cons,
    but the subject is matrix management.
    
    I've been one of the strongest "clingers" to the "Digital way."  But it
    seems we've gotten so big that the matrix gets in the way of almost
    everything we try to do.  One thing that's bothered me tremendously
    over the past few years is the apparent lack of leadership I see
    literally everywhere.  I wonder if at least part of that isn't due to
    the mass confusion that seems to reign supreme.  To put it another way,
    managers must try and please a whole host of people to whom they have
    dotted line reporting relationships, and they constantly get
    conflicting messages from all those people.  So what the people under
    them see is (1) inconsistency, (2) extremely poor communication, (3) no
    apparent vision or goal, and (4) lack of leadership.
    
    I don't know what the solution is.  I believe that going to a
    completely hierarchical management structure would spell death for us,
    or at least make us very sick.  But then I never claimed to have any
    answers, just observations...
    
    							Pat

    I agree with Pat, and take .1 a step further: .0 speaks of the
    "culture" needing to change, and .1 says it's important not to be
    sidetracked in itemizing the artifacts of the "culture".
    
    "Culture" is bunk.  Discussions regarding it have moved from being the
    esoteric observations of academics to being a mainstream distraction at
    Digital.
    
    O, that anonymous boogey-man, "culture"!  Relentless and irresistable. 
    And collectively Digital is helpless to stop it! (It sounds like the
    "bad luck" that afflicts a baseball team in a 10 game losing streak)
    
    Offer a consistent vision, communicate it, let people have the tools
    they need to do the job, and hold people accountable to what they
    commit.
                                                  

    re -.1
    
    >Offer a consistent vision, communicate it, let people have the tools
    >they need to do the job, and hold people accountable to what they
    >commit.
    
    I thought that was what culture was.  I don't know about boogey-man or
    whatever, but in the 5 years I've been here the company seems to have
    changed from an attitude of "do what's right" and "growth is NOT our
    main goal" to a TOTAL emphasis on UNCONTROLLED GROWTH for growth's
    sake. 
    
    So, yes, the "culture" needs to change.  TO ONE THAT VALUES EMPLOYEES
    AS MUCH AS THE BOTTOM LINE.  One where "MANAGERS" manage paper and
    "LEAD" employees.  One where the people that actually know how and
    actually do the work are rewarded instead of the politicians,
    mushrooms, and wanna be's.

    Every organisation has a culture.  These cultures are founded on the
    value systems of the people who formed the organisation.  To suggest
    cultures can be a 'bogey' is plain ignorance.  They're a fact of life.
    
    I don't think we should consciously set out to change the DEC culture
    unless we've drifted so far off course it probably doesn't matter.  The
    culture will and does change over time, and that not only shouldn't be
    stopped, it can't be stopped.  If it has changed for the worse then its
    probably because over a number of years we've brought in a number of
    people, often into management positions, whom we shouldn't have.  If
    we're losing sight of the goals and aims KO has so consistently
    espoused then obviously we have a lot of people who were unwilling or
    unable to take them to heart.  There's not a hell of a lot we can do
    about that right now, because it will take years to overcome.
    
    The heart of our culture is the shared values we've inherited from the
    founders of this company.  I think they were and are spot on, but if a
    sizeable proportion of Digits don't then we've got massive problems.

	Well, everyone's heard me sing this song about a buhzillion
	times before, but since .4 alluded to it anyway I'll mention
	what I think needs to change in the DEC culture - 

	STOP HIRING MORE PEOPLE FROM THE OUTSIDE!

	Everywhere!

	And this goes for everybody, under all circumstances.

	   I've gotten sick and tired of the "fake" hiring freezes that
	get instituted in this company. Here we are at $12B a year with
	several thousand "extra" people on board, and people in high
	positions perhaps actually considering making exceptions to the
	no-layoff tradition, when the same people won't ENFORCE the
	hiring freezes that are rumored to be in effect. Strikes me as
	kinda dumb for a company that wants to boost productivity to meet
	the challenge of the '90s, not to mention which it detracts from
	the integrity of upper management which allows it [external hiring]
	to continue. Or the fact that the organizations which abide by the
	freeze feel like second class citizens as they watch other groups
	bring in new people.

	-Jack

RE: .6

	It's awful hard to take someone who's been soldering boards for
	8 years and make them into an Ultrix wiz and then have them work
	in NYC. Yea, that's the extreme but I don't believe that it's
	far off the mark.

	What has to be done to preserve the culture is to TEACH the culture 
	as part of a new employees intro to DEC. AND, the management of that
	group should be getting refreshers on the DEC culture.

	Here in VMS, DEC and VMS culture is VERY important and there is now
	talk of developing better ways to acclimate new hires (internal or
	otherwise) to the culture..

	It just takes someone to say it's important.. Not enough people
	think so because they've never known it to be true.

							mike

>	What has to be done to preserve the culture is to TEACH the culture 
>	as part of a new employees intro to DEC. AND, the management of that
>	group should be getting refreshers on the DEC culture.

It don't want to be to sarcastic, but there is no "DEC Culture" in DEC.
"DEC Culture" exists solely in the orientation lecture.  I've worked in
to other big companies and working at DEC is just like working at any
other company.  The similarities among big companies are more striking
than the differences. 

e.g.  Every big company has their personnel policies and procedures book
that says:

1) We pay for performance.
2) People are to be evaluated according to their work.
3) There is a set of job titles and jobs descriptions and worker should
be in the job that matches their description.
4) Every company had an ODP equivalent

and in every company there are personel people who tell the managers:

1) This is your quota for raises
2) You can only give out X 1's and Y 2's.
3) You can't give a person a two level promotion
(How many managers in DEC won't admit that JEC is just a make-work
project for personnel?)

Negative Differences:

1) DEC is the only company that I have worked for that rates people
strickly by the numbers (Metrics).  If you don't make your numbers
you're out.  

2) As a result of #1, DEC has the shortest vision of any company that I
have ever seen.  Long term thinking means the end of the fiscal year.
Normal thinking means the end of the quarter.

3) Physical working conditions are terrible.  Every other place I have
worked I have had a real office.  Except for my first office all of them
have been twice the size of a DM or VP office in DEC.  Here you have two
consultants crammed into a cube that is too small for one and the troops
have nothing more than a desk (no cube).  Software development is done
from home so that you can have a decent work place.

Last week a person in sales asked our group to trade conference rooms so
she could have the one that was closest to the entrance.  She didn't
want the customers to see the environment we work in. 

Don't read this as saying that DEC is a horrible place to work.  It's
not.  I recommend it to friends I wnat to keep.  However, this DEC
culture thing is just bunk.  Working at DEC is just like working at any
other place.  It has its '+'s and '-'s.  If you think the '+'s outweigh
the '-'s then you should stay.  If not...well this is a free country. 

John

    re:891.8 - That type of thinking should change!
    
    "CULTURE" - "A pattern of basic assumptions that a given group has
    invented, discovered, or developed in learning to cope with its
    problems of external adaptation and internal integration, that has
    worked well enough to be considered valid......"
    
                                             Edgar Schein - Sloan School
                                                    of Mgmt, MIT
    
    The DEC culture is real.  It's our values, perceptions, approaches,
    etc. regarding how we conduct our business.  It's NOT something you can
    change over night.  Our culture affects how we make decisions, remedy
    situations that are OUT OF CONTROL!  Therefore, culture will change as
    a result of how we do things.  However, add more new people and you add
    different values, approaches, etc.  to the ways we do things.
    
    To say that DEC culture doesn't exist is like saying there isn't a
    Japanese culture, or a South American culture.  And DEC is different in
    many respects and similar to other companies.  Our culture, and it's
    value system, places a tremendous emphasis on people;  otherwize alot
    of us would have been layed-off moons ago!
    
    Culture evolves.  I have seen changes in my 12 years.  But there is a
    core to the culture that I hope never changes;  an environment where
    people can utilize their creative and technological skills, and take
    risk at the same time.
    
    Yes, there are many things about the company that need changing.  Those
    changes, whatever they will be, will eventually have an affect on the
    culture.  But the culture will have an affect on the change in terms of
    the type of change that will occur.
    
    But, as Jack Smith said several months ago, "Everthing is up for
    grabs!"

    Culture exists.  Culture matters.  Culture is bunk!

    Culture is the artifact, the residual, the observable phenomenon
    after the explicit strategies and objectives, the explicit messages
    and methods are taken into account.

    Culture happens, it can't be formally directed.  The discussion that
    it can or cannot be "reinforced" is nonsense.

    People argue, for example, whether Digital has or doesn't have "an
    entrepreneurial culture".  This, too is nonsense.

    Examine this directly: Do the messages and policies of Digital
    explicitly encourage entrepreneurial behavior, here defined as a person who
    assumes the full risks and rewards of a business venture?

    Is the trend giving more discretion to cost center managers or is the
    trend to take away the discretion they once had?

    Are take obvious heroes of Digital, the most recent crop of Vice
    Presidents... are they regarded by all as entrepreneurs or as
    bureaucratic survivors and good "organization men"?

    "Culture" isn't defining the autonomy of cost centers or who becomes a
    vice president, top management does.

    It's such a joke to hear people make excuses:  "Yeah, culture, that's
    the ticket, yeah that (DEC culture/absence of DEC culture) is just
    grinding us down to be the next Wang."
                                          

    Sorry .9, but I strongly agree with .8.  I've been with DEC since
    '72, and I never have felt any sense of living in a company with
    a unique culture.  Working here is to a large extent the same as
    working at IBM, Aerojet and a College where I taught.
    
    From a negative standpoint, I think we really should do something
    about the excessive content-free meetings we all go to, the committees
    on committees, and most of all the overall lack of accountability.
    I see no more emphasis on people here than I saw anywhere else,
    and I do agree strongly that we should be ashamed of the absolutely
    deplorable working conditions that we impose on people.  I too
    hesitate to bring house guests, etc., to see where I work, because
    I'm ashamed of the shabby, trashy condition of many of the cubicles.
                                                                  
         People working in Stow or Westboro probably wouldn't understand
    my comments on office space.  They are the only place still remaining
    in Digital (to my experience), where one sees literally miles of
    manager officers, each with a secretary planted in front.  It's
    like something out of a 30's Charlie Chaplin film.  A rough guess
    on my part is that each secretary could serve 4-6 of those so-called
    managers.
    
         As Pogo said: "I have seen the enemy, and they is us....".

    Corporate culture is real; many books have been written about it.  But
    the Digital culture seems to start at the Mill, thrive at certain large
    engineering facilities such as ZKO and Hudson, and dissipate as one
    looks further away (and away from engineering groups).  This is why
    reply [.8] and [.11] can decry the office conditions, while I sit in
    the LKG facility in Littleton, MA and write that it's wonderful.
    
    I have five suggestions on adapting the Digital culture for the 90's.
    All involve change, and hopefully improvement.
    
    First, the very question of culture is used perjoratively, usually by
    the old hand, as a means of preserving the "old" way of doing things.
    Usually it's expressed by some engineer who started at the Mill,
    rhetorically shaking his head at the influx of outsiders who don't
    appreciate how things are done here.  It's similar to how old Grandpa
    might shake his head at the "newfangled ways of you youngsters" as you
    went off in the car on your first date, or how New England "townies"
    might refer to a family that's only lived in town for fifteen years as
    "the new people."  It's simple resistance to change. Well, most of the
    employees of this  company are not "old-time DECcies."  To some, they
    never will be.  But as Sussman has predicted, fully eighty-five percent
    of the Digital workforce of the year 2000 is already working for the
    company.  This is it, folks.  We are the old-time DECcies.  Things
    change, and we should embrance the changes, not fight them.  I'd like
    to see a lot less of  the "us-versus-them" mentality: "DEC has the best
    engineers in the world,  it's the
    <marketing>|<sales>|<support>|<administrative> people who are  screwing
    things up!"
    
    Second, I'd like to see more support given to new employees.  This
    "valley of the shadow of DEC" stuff is a waste of resources, and some
    people never really recover from our
    throw-em-in-the-deep-end-and-watch-em-sputter approach.  I've been to
    orientation classes where the instructors were downright smug about
    this failure to acclimatize.
    
    Third, matrix management is ineffective, confusing, frustrating, and
    slow, but it IS culturally correct.  But let's consider some
    alternatives.  Much has been written about it here; I'll leave my
    remark at that.
    
    Fourth, solving the last two problems may help with a problem I see
    that seems ingrained in the culture: slow time to market.  Time to
    market is obviously a critical problem at all companies; as Digital
    matures, we aren't always the first with a new technology, so now it's
    important for us, too.  The people here seem as rushed, harried, and
    busy as where I've worked before, yet the product cycles are two and
    three TIMES slower.  Why is this?
    
    Finally, one cultural change must, inevitably, change: the cult of
    personality around one central figure.  A startup company can be
    dominated by a founder for many years, but if the company gets large
    enough, or if it exists for long enough, changes must be made.  I spent
    a summer at Sears (a century-old company), and people there sometimes
    joked about what may have happened to Mr. Sears ("He's looking for
    Roebuck.")  I worked at Honeywell (another century-old company), where
    there was never any mention of the spirit of Mark Honeywell.  I gather
    that the name of Tom Watson (who lived in this century) is often
    mentioned at Armonk.  At Wang, along with the other evil portents of
    the last few months, there is the sad news that the Doctor (who still
    comes in to work in his 70s) is ill.  
    
    Here at Digital, one man's name is always on the minds of employees. 
    What would he think?  What would he say?  What would he do? What does
    he want?  Will he come here?  He would never stand for this.  He would
    want us to do THAT.  I will use the ODP all the way up to HIM if I have
    to.  His memos are taken as parables and interpreted.
    
    It's a great unifying image, and a source of comfort.  We're set up,
    though, for unhappiness the future.  Who else can possibly run this
    company?  I can hear it now:  "This isn't the way things USED to be..."
    (and you can add a hundred variations on that one thought).  I hope I
    don't have my account revoked for saying this, but maybe we should
    think a little less about the founder and a little more about the
    company.  Sooner or later we'll have to anyway.  THAT is the biggest
    cultural change we'll have to make, whether it be in the 90's  or after
    the turn of the century.

    Great, Steve, you've hit it right on the head!  Our product develop-
    ment cycle is a disgrace, and I would lay the fault directly in
    the lap of the committee system, which nurtures the lack of account-
    ability.  If a product manager/development manager, etc were to
    be fired just once for a slip, we might see some change.
    
    I'm also sick of the personality thing.  In the past month I have
    heard a Senior Vice President admit that the Executive Committee
    (of which Olson is a member) "hasn't made a good decision in eight
    quarters."
    
    Who could run this company??? Almost anyone with a dash of common
    sense and some business experience in the real world.  I'd go to
    the outside if I had anything to say about it.

>    Who could run this company??? Almost anyone with a dash of common
>    sense and some business experience in the real world.  
    
    You left out one key ingredient: _imagination_
    

.12>    Corporate culture is real; many books have been written about it.  But
.12>    the Digital culture seems to start at the Mill, thrive at certain large
.12>    engineering facilities such as ZKO and Hudson, and dissipate as one
.12>    looks further away (and away from engineering groups).  This is why
.12>    reply [.8] and [.11] can decry the office conditions, while I sit in
.12>    the LKG facility in Littleton, MA and write that it's wonderful.

You are describing the culture at a few engineering sites - not a
corporate culture.  Most people in DEC do not work in these large
engineering plants.  I would argue that if a corporate culture exists it
would flow from the troops in customer contact.  Just as Bell Labs is
not AT&T, ZKO and Hudson are not representative of DEC.

I think it would be interesting for some people who believe there is a
corporate culture to write a few replies describing "What is the DEC
Corporate Culture".

Would "do what brings in the the fastest buck" be on the list?
Would "make this quarter's numbers or you're out" be on your list?
I hope there would be something about politics: in DEC its not what you
know but who you can bulls*&t.
How about "abusing your employees is all right if you bring your project
in on time".

I add these negatives not to dump on DEC, but if there is a corporate
culture then the negatives would have to be part of the culture as well
as the positives.  And these are some negatives that are part of working
at DEC.  Unfortunately when I have seen lists of attributes of a DEC
culture they seem to describe working conditions at Willy Wonka's
Chocolate Factory.

John

    During an "Engineering Panel Discussion" that I moderated last week,
    several "new Digital engineers" expressed their dissatisfaction with
    the "DEC way of doing things", or culture, for those of you who believe
    there is one.  Matrix management, unproductive meetings, etc.  were
    just a few of the topics addressed by the participants
    
    An interesting response from one of the panelists (an experienced Digital
    engineering manager who was once in the Field) went something like
    this: "Our culture (or the DEC way of doing things" isn't perfect.
    Some parts of it may not ever change while others will have to.  However,
    if something isn't working, then do something about it!  If something
    needs changing, and if everyone sees value in the change, then the
    change will occur.  But it takes action".
    
    So, if you're in a field organization, or engineering, or sales and you
    see something not working then SPEAK UP!  And do something about it.
    Jack Smith's office is open, Ken's office is open.  But don't sit there
    and complain and not do anything about it.  As far as I know, the
    "culture" allows individuals to do this.
    
    Isn't this note getting interesting!  Could we be exchanging views like
    this (note 891) in another company?
    in another company?
      

    Part of the culture of Digital, is that for every discussion of "What's
    wrong with the culture" is that there is always some Pollyanna who
    comes along and points fingers and says "COMPLAINERS, YOU ARE DOING
    NOTHING WHEN YOU ARE EMPOWERED TO CHANGE THE UNIVERSE"

    The usual response, is, of course, "Easy for you to say, when did _you_
    last change Ken Olsen's mind on some important issue?"

    The problems that we discuss here, if you take the time to read them,
    involve accelerating product development schedules, flattening and
    simplifying the organization of the field, increasing accountability at
    all levels.

    No "ten minute one-on-one" in Ken Olsen's office from me or you is
    going to change anything on that scale.

    This is getting truly bizarre, as vice presidents are asking us to
    lower expectations regarding their own collective ability to "improve
    things",  while at the same time urging us on the lowest rung on to
    "improve things".

    re .16

>   So, if you're in a field organization, or engineering, or sales and you
>   see something not working then SPEAK UP!  And do something about it.
>   Jack Smith's office is open, Ken's office is open.  But don't sit there
>   and complain and not do anything about it.  As far as I know, the
>   "culture" allows individuals to do this.
    
    We've talked a bit about the "end of the quarter" being short-term
    thinking, and the "end of the fiscal year" being long-term. I spent two
    years as a PSS (software services consulting) manager. I'll repeat my
    basic premise: until metrics in this company are changed to where making
    budget by $.01 makes you golden and missing by $.01 makes you a failure
    -- reinforced by the fact that things like the number of people
    districts get to send to Excellence Awards depends on getting in that
    single penny -- _nothing_ is going to change, and you can SPEAK UP until
    you're blue in the face. The _only_ place change like that comes from is
    the TOP when the TOP decides to do it.

    The mystique of "empowerment" is a pillar of DEC culture -- but,
    remember, it is empowerment _within the realm of your natural or
    delegated influence_. I could do many things as a manager. But I
    couldn't take that last $.01 out of my own pocket if I wanted to,

    Look at the numbers: one person change a company of _127,000_ from a
    grass-roots movement majority of one? Even Digital culture can't
    overcome the beurocracy needed to keep Digital functioning. Yes, we all
    have tales of small wins that warm our hearts and perpetuate the myth.
    When's the last time you saw something BIG changed from the bottom up?

    re .17

>   This is getting truly bizarre, as vice presidents are asking us to
>   lower expectations regarding their own collective ability to "improve
>   things",  while at the same time urging us on the lowest rung on to
>   "improve things".

    When I became a UM, I got a chuckle out of the perversity of how Digital
    does business in the field (like roughly 100% profit on expenses). Now
    I'm not a manager any more (by choice), and not chuckling any more
    (_not_ by choice).

    So, if our TOP management is admitting to not making the right decisions,
    are they every going to financially make up their folly to the company's
    employees when the situation improves? No, we'll probably be tightening
    our belts even further "preparing" for the next downturn.

    <FLAME>

    We can't even manage our toner supply -- we just got mail that once the
    LPS40's on our cluster run out of toner, that's it. NO TONER CARTRIDGES
    because someone screwed up supplies up north.

    Frankly, I don't mind being held to within a penny of a budget -- but
    then apply the SAME STANDARDS to yourself, TOP management. If I screwed
    up and said, "Well, gee, I haven't really made any decent decisions in
    the LAST TWO YEARS" -- novel, how "last 8 quarters" gets used as a
    euphamism -- I'd be out the door. And imagine if I told _my_ manager
    not to worry -- since I came up short I'll make up the difference by not
    giving my unit any pay increases!!

    <ENDFLAME>

    I don't know about you, but I find nothing soothing in management self-
    flagellation -- they aren't the ones being hurt. I agree with Pat -- the
    situation is truly bizarre.



    /Peters

       
       
       	Is it totally managements fault? Nobody can predict the future
       after all. I'll agree though, that a wee bit more common sense
       could have been applied.
       
       	One of my main concerns is that when we DO get back on track and
       go back to some serious growth, that decent raises for good work
       come back to life. I'm willing to bite the bullet when the time is 
       tough but last time around I didn't get to share in the winnings
       after we returned to a healthy condition. I'm not bitter, I just
       want to see that "the right thing" is done.
       
       	Back to DEC Culture:  Ok, I'll admit it. I live in the wonderful
       world of ZK and VMS Development where DEC Culture lives. But I
       sympathize with the field folks.. I don't envy their position one
       bit. I really wish that there was something I, personally,could do.
       All I can do at this point is when the opportunities arise, I let 
       it be known that the field is hurting and needs to be fixed. Sorry, 
       but I think that's the best *I* as a DECcie can do. My only advice
       is to attempt to live by rule #1, which is "Do the right thing".
       It's awful hard to be found at fault for doing that..
       
       							mike

    Back at the beginning of this decade I was wondering to myself how DEC
    would have to change to become a "big company."  Well, the good news
    is, DEC is now a "big company."  But I have also seen how it changed in
    the process.
    
    The mythological "DEC Culture" doesn't exist except in a few places.
    What's closer to being true is that there are a number of sub-cultures
    within DEC, and the "engineering" sub-culture as typified by ZK is not
    representative of the DEC of today.  If there is a "DEC Culture" today,
    I don't think it's one I am happy to be in.
    
    I do think that DEC has changed between 1980 and 1989 to get us where
    we are.  I believe it will change some more in the 1990s.  How will it
    change?  That I don't know.
    
    --Simon
    

    Matrix management - as an excuse for confusion and lack of leadership.
    
    Individual initiative - as a panacea for a chronic lack of training and
    			    resources.
    
    ODP - I'd prefer decent managers (actually mine is pretty decent).
    
    -dave

RE:  <<< Note 891.15 by KYOA::MIANO "O.K. so who cares about the METS?" >>>
                        -< Culture is Bunk - Part IIb >-


    > You are describing the culture at a few engineering sites - not a
    > corporate culture.  

    I think many of us are guilty (I certainly am) of speaking of the
    Digital culture in terms of the way things were when we were a much
    smaller company.  I've never worked in Engineering, but I've heard
    plenty about the culture in our Engineering organization over the
    years, from people I know and also from this notes conference.  And I
    believe that the culture that Engineering enjoys today is not too
    different from the culture (read that word "corporate values and
    priorities") that existed in the field offices I worked in 10 years ago. 
    So when we talk about the Digital culture we aren't talking in current
    terms; we're talking about how it used to be when we were still small.

    > I would argue that if a corporate culture exists it would flow from the
    > troops in customer contact.

    I honestly don't believe there's much culture left in the field
    organizations that are on the front lines with our customers.  And I
    say that with a great deal of sadness.

    > I think it would be interesting for some people who believe there is a
    > corporate culture to write a few replies describing "What is the DEC
    > Corporate Culture".

    That would be fun.  Unfortunately, what I'd end up describing would be
    the small office I started to work in, where there were essentially no
    politics, where the employee was valued over all else, where the
    quality of our service meant more to management than the dollars, and
    when the pressure was great enough to make the job demanding and
    interesting, but not so much that we routinely burned out all our good
    people.  The reason I say that's unfortunate is that many people get
    sick and tired of hearing us old-timers reminisce about the way it used
    to be.  And if I were in their place I'd get tired of it too.
    
    If, on the other hand, I had to answer what the DEC culture is in the
    field *today*, I'd have a very hard time coming up with something.

    > Would "do what brings in the the fastest buck" be on the list? Would
    > "make this quarter's numbers or you're out" be on your list? I hope
    > there would be something about politics: in DEC its not what you know
    > but who you can bulls*&t. How about "abusing your employees is all
    > right if you bring your project in on time".
    
    Yup.
    
    > Unfortunately when I have seen lists of attributes of a DEC culture
    > they seem to describe working conditions at Willy Wonka's Chocolate
    > Factory.
    
    That's not a bad description of the DEC culture of 10 years ago.  (^:

    
    Re .16 - 
    
    "would you see this discussion in other companies" - paraphrased
    
    Yes. I've been a manager in several other companies & this type
    of debate was important in seeking feedback as to whether our goals
    were clear & workable. This feedback is vital, otherwise you are
    not in touch with reality.
    
    At least as important to me was that in those other companies I knew
    who was ACCOUNTABLE. I knew who to ask/lobby/counsel/promote/train/fire
    or whatever was needed.
    
    I regret that within DEC I find it difficult on many occasions to know
    who carries the can, & is therefore personally motivated to make
    things happen, rather than give reasons why they cannot happen.
    
    Too often "DEC culture" is quoted as a reason for not making decisions,
    not facing facts, & ignoring long-term realities. This behaviour
    is unhelpful to our personal & corporate well-being. I suspect it
    is a mask worn by some employees who want a convenient hiding place to
    avoid responsibility.
    
    The strange thing is that this explanation for inaction is at odds
    with the highly-structured & regimented processes used for sales
    metrics & engineering phase reviews, to name but two examples. (I
    am not holding these up us examples of good practice, just different
    approaches to planning/ work organisation.)
    
    What I see is a highly-variable set of processes used to manage
    the company, & from where I sit, I have an unclear view as to how
    they tie together to form a strategic & tactical whole. It is perfectly
    normal to have differing local practices to suit local conditions
    - what is less normal in my experience is to be a manager without
    a strong feeling of involvement in the planning/policy loop.
    
    In summary I feel we have some considerable work to do in helping
    explain to managers what we want them achieve to create a climate
    suitable for long-term survival (appropriate objectives, resources,
    training, clarity, accountability, customer orientation). 
                                       
    Please note that this list intentionally does not include anything
    to do with product. I suggest our primary keys for survival are to 
    improve our managerial processes & our focus on the customer - 
    clarity for product development will be a direct outcome.
    
    These needs are not unique to Digital - the difference for me is that
    other companies I've worked in are a long way ahead of us in making it
    happen as a conscious, & continuing, focus.
                                                             
    This is not meant as a blast against the company - just as a commentary
    of some areas where I feel we could, & must, change to protect the
    long-term future of my pay cheque.                
                
    
    Colin Osborne             
    
    (PS I value Notes as a way of gaining feedback that I need, but
        I'd still rather Digital used its management structure to pass
    	this type of info & discussion into a forum where change can be
    	created rapidly) 
    

    I find it fascinating that some earlier replies indicate that the
    authors, situated in or around the 'traditional' bastions of DEC
    culture seem to feel the field is somehow missing out.  I mention this
    because I work in a branch office of about 80 people, and we're the
    ones who decry the faults of the bureaucracy at region!  My branch is
    very oriented towards doing what has to be done, none of this 'it's not
    my job and anyway it's 5 o'clock rubbish'!  In some ways, I guess we
    see ourselves as more infused with the traditional values of the
    company _because_ we work with the customers.  We're the ones who
    complain at the apparent lack of response to our customers needs
    (particularly response from Maynard) - the people we criticise are
    quite possibly some of the authors I referred to before! :-)

    There is little irony here.  The situation described in .25 is very
    much like the one that Pat described in .23 in the 'good ole days'.
    It is a nice small office which is forced to depend upon each other in
    order to survive.  The real decisions are made inside the small team
    with little need for waiting for the overhead elsewhere to pull their
    heads out from where ever they may be.

    Back in the 'good ole days' the regional office for the geography
    consisted of 6 people.  Even if these people where a NOD (No Output
    Department) there were not enough of them to stop the good decisions
    being made by the many small teams all over the place.  Now, in the US
    field organization there is probably well over a thousand people at the
    area level replacing these 6 people.

    To make things worse, the 6 in the 'good ole days' were not a NOD at
    all.  They actually believed in the value of the people out at the end
    of the food chain.  They actually believed that customers were
    important for more than running up their numbers.  Unfortunately, the
    over thousand people replacing them are very much a NOD, generally don't
    understand or value the people in the field (they are NOT in the
    field), and see customers as these objects (in all senses) which result
    in higher numbers.

    My view is that the field and engineering both share a very similar
    culture and belief.  Each is at one end of the food chain.  Engineering
    starts the chain and the field ends it.  I realize that marketing will
    disagree on this and, more importantly, that it is a feedback cycle
    which better never end (even if the product goes to Phase 5).  Both are
    concerned with meeting the customers' needs and very much interested in
    output.  Contrast this to the NOD's which have become so widespread as
    to choke the customer out of the vast majority of the minds of most
    organizations in the company today.

    The US field has become bloated with enormous overhead (NOD's) while
    the field in Europe and GIA have not had the MBA approach to
    organizational theory applied.  They have taken a more simple approach.

    I am still optimistic that we will do well.  I believe that we will
    keep our values at both ends of the food chain.  It won't be easy but
    it will be interesting and fun.  Seeing your creations come to life
    whether they be a neat product (engineering) or a neat application of
    someone else's product (the field) is what keeps us going.

    Fighting the NOD's is a drag and tiring but I believe that it's part of
    WIRDI (Whatever Is Right, Do It).  I am happy to say that several
    people in a major NOD are currently gunning for me, in fact.  Let them
    take their best slimy shots.

    Keep the faith and your focus on the customer - the key to Digital
    culture,

    don
    
    P.S. I apologize in advance to those offended by this reply.  Clearly,
    there are many many very good groups throughout Digital who do the
    right thing very quietly and never get the credit.  It's part of WIRDI.

    I don't want to argue whether there really is such a thing as culture
    or not. But what ever it is that spurred the huge growth, is now gone.
    We should take a look at how nature operates because it's had billions
    of years of experimentation to work out optimal systems.
    
    Ameobas are single celled animals. You don't see any 150lb ameaobas
    walking around Digital. Well, my boss just walked by. (Just joking.
    He's one of the good guys.)
    
    Large organisms start from a small cell that grows very quickly and
    then DIVIDES! The cells group together and specialize (local
    optimization) that work with the other specialized groups of cells
    (organs, bones, etc.) in cooperative fashion. Each group is clearly
    defined and seperate from the others. Bones are bones and not skin,
    skin is skin and not bone, muscle is muscle and not brain, etc..
    
    Digital has become a giant ameaoba. Something that should have gone
    extinct a billion years ago. Nothing is well defined. We can only talk
    about abstract goals like "partnerships", "enterprise integration",
    etc.. Sales is sales -- except that it's also industry and area
    marketing. Marketing is marketing -- except that it's also systems
    integration engineering. Engineering is engineering -- except that it's
    also base product marketing and wanna-be marketing (product
    management), storage systems is storage systems -- except that it's
    also database management, computers are computers -- except that it's
    also terminals and networking. And it's not even a democratic vote. No,
    all the matrix people have to reach a conensus...
    
    If you want that small, fast growing, successful company culture, then
    there's only way to get that -- keep dividing into small companies that
    work together in symbiotic fashion. There's too many execs that would
    see their kingdoms decimated or entirely gone if that happened. So, it
    won't happen until there's a hostile takeover of this company. That's
    at least several years away. So, we'll have suffer the decline in
    productivity and morale (or culture or whatever you want to call it).
    
    -George

    I'll change a reply to a few notes w/o reading replies .20-.28.
    
    Re: .5,.8,.10 and .15 that there is NO culture and/or that culture
    is inherited and cannot be changed.
    
    I am saddened that I wasted 8 years of my life studying industrial
    physchology and organizational development (B.S. & M.S. thus far)
    all to find out that everything I was taught is fantasy!!!!
    
    My belief continues to be that Digital has a set of "cultural" norms
    guiding the daily activities of its employees;  That those norms
    are currently diffuse and unfocused BECAUSE we have imported a
    substantial portion of our current population through massive hiring;
    That everyone can contribute to those norms, is affected by them,
    and in turn nurtures and impacts the culture through their own efforts;
    
    and finally,
    
    that it is not IF we can impact culture, but rather weither we choose
    to manage our culture or be managed BY it.
    
    Today the vast majority of Digital does not recognize that our culture
    is just as important to our success as Policies, Processes, Programs
    and Management Directives.  By ignoring this attribute of the system
    which is Digital we fail to control a significant aspect of our
    performance.
    
    There are many examples of large corporations where the culture
    is managed for the success of the company and the fullfillment of
    its employees,  Peter Drucker named 3M, HP, and Mary Kay as examples.
    Digital USED to have a homogeneous, focused culture - Drucker included
    Digital in his list when we did.  We are no longer on Drucker's
    list of "excellent" corporations and I believe that the dissipation
    and contamination of our culture during our massive employee
    re-generation of 82-84 accounts for our current problem.  If we
    DON'T innoculate culture into new employees, THEY incorporate cultural
    remanents from previous experiences into their new jobs.
    
    Have FUN!

    re: 28 - Your response seems to sum up everything discussed so far.  
    
    I agree that the organizational behavioral characteristics we observe
    today are somewhat different than they were years ago.  I believe that
    many of the responses so far are referring to the "Digital of the
    past", the way things used to be; the old culture.  Everything stated
    so far is a reflection of TODAY'S CULTURE; many levels of culture that
    are vastly different across organizations.  The management styles,
    group structures, personalities, processes (including the product
    development process) will and do differ to suit the needs of the people
    and the environment they are working in.  Fortunately or unfortunately,
    each organization has created the culture it needs to produce whatever
    it produces.
    
    Now, I'm sure I'll be criticized again for what I'm saying, but
    understand that I'm in Digital too, whether it be in Engineering or the
    Field.  We all have our opinions and they should be respected.
    
    As stated in the previous note, Digital has hired many thousands of
    people (managers included) but has failed to make them aware of the
    basic cultural assumptions that Ken believes; honesty, trust and
    cooperation.  It doesn't suprise me in the least to hear the
    differences and the frustrations out there today.  DEC culture is what
    DEC people have created!!!! 
    
    To state that "culture is bunk" and "there is no DEC culture" is
    perhaps a reflection of the past DEC culture and comparing it to what
    happening all over the company today.  A CULTURE does exist; however,
    it's different, it comes in different sizes and shapes, it's unknown 
    to many, etc.  The culture in the field (as described in this
    conference) seems to be alot different from that of engineering.  Is
    this wrong or right?  Should it be the same?  
    
    I will defend my position and continue to say that a "culture" does
    exist.  Not the same culture of 10 years ago, but a culture that is
    evolving, a culture that is a reflection of all the values people share
    in this company, even those values from the field organizations.  
    
    We look different then we did 10 years ago, we will look different 10
    years from now!  
    
    RE: previous note:  "Do we choose to be managed by the culture?" 
          Great question for everyone to think about.
    
    Getting back to the original question on "what needs to be changed",
    here are a few:
    
                    o  Limit the scope of Matrix management
                    o  Institutionalize corporate orientation programs
                         for everyone
                    o  Job plans for everyone; a requirement not an option
                    o  Fire more people for non-performance;  the current
                         system is not working
                    o  redefine the product development process; although
                         that is being done today in LES
                    o  Let the culture evolve
    
    OK, now for the responses!!!

    As an aside, a few years ago there was an unwritten Field
    Service policy to hire managers from outside of Digital rather
    than within. I asked a long-term Field Service manager about
    this and they indicated that there was a desire to get some 'new
    blood' in the management ranks so as to bring about 'much needed
    improvements' and get some 'fresh ideas' into the company.
    
    I wonder if a similar policy was in effect in other
    organizations? It would seem that the outside hiring did not
    (for the most part) result in bringing in any leaders and new
    ideas, rather it brought in managers that helped to further
    dilute the 'Digital culture' and helped Digital become more like
    J-random 'big' company.
    
    Lee

    Re: [.29 (Briscoe)]:
    
    >> ... We are no longer on Drucker's
    >> list of "excellent" corporations and I believe that the dissipation
    >> and contamination of our culture during our massive employee
    >> re-generation of 82-84 accounts for our current problem. 
    
    While I agree with what you're saying, I object strongly to the use of
    the words "contamination" and "problem." 

Yes, there certainly is a Digital culture, exemplified by the following story:

At a stockholder's meeting, someone asked Ken Olsen, "How many Digital
employees are working today?"

"Half of them," he replied.

The story is probably apocryphal. The attitude it represents is alive and
well and sapping the company's strength.

Some people are glad that Digital is not a union company. To me it seems to
operate like a union company, in that people can continue to pick up that blue
slip of paper every week whether they've done any work or not.

I wish this company would start terminating the careers of poor performers.
Until that happens, I won't believe that Digital is serious about improving its
competitive position for the coming decade.

Vicki Meagher

    Oh, excuse me, I do into this note every 10 replies or so to reinforce
    an earlier message that culture is bunk.
    
    Look, it's a cultural thing that New Yorkers are impatient, and that
    meetings at Digital start late.  You see, one observes the culture,
    comments on it, and moves on to solve real problems.  It's the
    aggregate behavior of the 125,000 that creates the culture.  It's this
    "I can't control the culture" nonsense which so easily rolls from the
    tongue of VP's that has me incensed.
    
    A lot of the blue-sky perscriptions for "correcting the culture" 
    entered as replies to this note are really back-handed corporate
    strategies, and, as such, really are entirely in the hands of the 100
    or so employees at the top in a position to turn the company around.
    
    The next time someone suggests that something is wrong and it can't be
    fixed because "it's part of the culture", you'll know to pipe up and
    say, "No, it's not, it's a corporate strategy, that has had an
    unintended effect."
    
    As far a teaching culture, forget it.  New employees _experience_ it
    without the handbook.  Better orientation sessions are a good idea
    nevertheless.
    
    re: .29
    
    Are you sure you are not confusing Tom Peters with Peter Drucker?  Tom
    Peters has a nifty list of companies "doing the right thing" and Tom
    Peters is largely influenced by the high-profile actions with respect
    to customer service taken by the CEO's of the companies he looks at.
    
    Peter Drucker is a confused man that some people think writes books
    about business.  He writes such awesome lines in 1989 as "as knowledge
    becomes the central resource of the economy, society is bound to evolve
    into a post-business, knowledge society".
               

    
� At a stockholder's meeting, someone asked Ken Olsen, "How many Digital
� employees are working today?"
�
� "Half of them," he replied.

    I thought he meant that half of us are working while the other half is
    sleeping cos we're a global company?
    
    hw

< Note 891.29 by POBOX::BRISCOE >
    
�    There are many examples of large corporations where the culture
>    is managed for the success of the company and the fullfillment of
>    its employees,  Peter Drucker named 3M, HP, and Mary Kay as examples.
>    Digital USED to have a homogeneous, focused culture - Drucker included
>    Digital in his list when we did.  We are no longer on Drucker's
>    list of "excellent" corporations and I believe that the dissipation
>    and contamination of our culture during our massive employee
>    re-generation of 82-84 accounts for our current problem.  If we
>    DON'T innoculate culture into new employees, THEY incorporate cultural
>    remanents from previous experiences into their new jobs.

    You're confusing Peter Drucker with Tom Peters.  Peters list of
    excellent companies is discussed in "In Search of Excellence".
    
    Mark.    
    Have FUN!

    re: 891.34
    
    > "Look, it's a CULTURAL thing that New Yorkers are impatient and that
    meetings at Digital start late."<
    
    Yeah, go to Yankee Stadium and you'll see a culture alright!
    
    Your comment about trying to teach the culture vs one experiencing it
    is really true, and I'm happy to hear you say this.  I manage and
    facilitate an engineering-wide program titled "Introduction to Digital
    for Engineering"; a 2-day program for recently hired technical
    professionals in Digital.  One of the modules is called "Digital
    Culture".  
    
    In this module, I ask the participants to define "DEC CULTURE" as they
    have experienced and observed it and you would be surprised at the
    commonality of their responses.  They are both negative and positive
    but they do characterize the culture as most folks see it in
    Engineering.  
    
    An orientation program (not just benefits, insurance stuff..) designed
    to acclimate new-hires in Digital has alot of value in it. 
    Unfortunately, DEC mandates no-such program and therefore suffers from
    having so many problems related to "doing things"!!!
    
    The folks that do attend my program do benefit from the discussion;
    based on follow up evaluations conducted months after the program.
    
    It is [culture] the aggregate behavior of the 127,000+ that creates the
    culture, it's also the 127,000 that will keep it evolving for the
    better or worse.
    
    Rick

    re: .39
    
>I have a confession to make.  Last week I came to work late (8:25 
>a.m.).  I happened to come in the Thompson Street entrance.  I 
>was somewhat surprised by the number of cars in the lot--lack of, 
>that is.  I assumed it was vacation, but being the curious person 
>I am, I hung around the door for a period of time.  They came, 
>and came, and came until I had to leave at about 8:45.
>				:
>				:
>I wonder if the word is really out there.

    I might understand his concern if the observations were made at 10:25,
    or even 9:25.  But 8:25?!  I didn't think a 9:00 to 5:00 or 5:30 work
    day was all that unusual.
    

    Standard working hours are 8:15 to 5:00 with a 45-minute lunch break
    and two 15-minute "coffee" breaks.  I wonder if Jack checked out the
    lot at 5:30?  Seems to me that managers should have some flexibility in
    setting work schedules, so long as the work gets done.
    
    Marge  

    So where'd .39 go?  I can figure out that it was probably
    the "if you're not at work by 8:15 you're not a hardworking
    employee" memo, since I got a copy from my boss a week
    or so ago (no, he doesn't agree either).  I was just wondering
    why it was deleted.

    RE: .42
    
    Reply 39 was returned to the author by a co-moderator so he could get
    permission from the author to post it...

    Re: Note 891.41 by SCARY::M_DAVIS "Dictated, but not read."

    > Standard working hours are 8:15 to 5:00 with a 45-minute lunch break
    > and two 15-minute "coffee" breaks.

    Is this specific to your site, or more universal?  Can you site a
    reference, or is it simply common knowledge?  I thought standard work
    hours were site specific.
    
    Of course, since .39 is gone, I don't know what we're talking about.
    							Larry

re .44 re .41

>    > Standard working hours are 8:15 to 5:00 with a 45-minute lunch break
>    > and two 15-minute "coffee" breaks.
>
>    Is this specific to your site, or more universal?  Can you site a
>    reference, or is it simply common knowledge?  I thought standard work
>    hours were site specific.
    
I heard the story about a year or so ago that Digital was applying for a
building permit at a site where there were already some Digital buildings.
The town fathers were concerned about rush-hour traffic. Digital's response?
"Who are you kidding, we're talking about engineers -- they never work a
regular day!"

Digital got the permit.

    Some Digital sites have specific hours.  For example, most DEC
    manufacturing facilities operate on several shifts and incorporate a
    "flex-time" meaning that if your shift starts at 7am you have the
    flexibility to arrive at 6am to 8am.
    
    Manufacturing businesses, which by the way is Jack's background, start
    early by tradition - usually around 7am.  Perhaps Jack's perception 
    was linked to this.  I spent 10 years in DEC manufacturing and now work
    in an engineering education group in ZKO.  I still come in at 7am! 
    Tradition or habit, I guess!
    
    If Jack sat in the lobby of ZKO, would he be shocked!!!!
    
    In any event, his observations and "confession" were suprising to read;
    perhaps a reflection of the "old DEC culture"?
                                    

    > Reply 39 was returned to the author by a co-moderator so he could get
    > permission from the author to post it...
    
    My manager forwarded that memo to the entire group.  Should I ask my
    manager if she got the permission from the author before forwarding it?
    
    This conference has succeeded in making two classes of employees.
    Employees who love to receive interesting mail messages trickled down
    from the top, without having the proper authorization to _receive_
    them; and employees who receive the same mail messages and then spread
    the information, as they understand the origianl intention of the those
    interesting mail messages. 
    
    To all those moderators:-
    
    Have you ever asked _your_ source if _he_ got the permission from the
    original author or do you trust _his_ judgement??
    
    - Vikas

    Re: Earlier notes referring to "DEC culture = Meetings always start
    late"
    
    I've been here 8 years, and I always have (and always will) find this
    behaviour unacceptable ... culture or not. About 5-6 years ago, I was
    absolutely mortified by an ACCOUNT MANAGER's behavior. I was scheduled
    to give a presentation to a big account (like one of our biggest) at
    the VP level. The meeting was to start at 9:00 a.m.  I was in the DEC
    parking lot at 7:30. I waited, and waited, and waited for the rep to
    show up.
    
    He showed up at 8:15, and insisted on going into the building "just for
    a minute". We left the building at 8:45. It was a 20 minute commute to
    the customer site in good traffic. It was bad traffic, so the commute
    took 35 minutes. It also took us 15-20 minutes to get past security at
    the customer site and up to the meeting room. When I mentioned to the
    rep that we were probably going to be unacceptably late, he said ,
    "Hah, they don't expect us to be on time ... we're from DEC. They know
    we're always late."
    
    So we walked into the conference room 30-45 minutes late, and there was
    a VP, with his entire staff of direct reports sitting around the table
    "Waiting for DEC", as they had been since 9:00. They had the courtesy to
    not chastise us for being so late. The rep did not have the common
    courtesy to apologize. 
    
    There's no excuse for this. We shouldn't do this to ourselves, and we
    darn well shouldn't do it to customers!!!
    
    
    /se
    
    

Regarding starting meetings late, I once worked in a facility where if you were
late to a meeting you had to pay a quarter (this was in the late '70's).  The
money went to a charity.  The embarassment (and for some, the cost) made it 
unusual for anyone to be late to a meeting.

    
    	Other good trick is to pause for few seconds when someone enters
    late in the room. i.e Speaker would halt for few seconds..

    I AGREE THIS IS THE HARDEST THING TO GET USE TO AT DIGITAL IN
    MY SIX YEARS.

    DEC does things differently from most companies because, it is
    believed, that most companies do things wrong. For example the
    recent Jack Smith "time clock" chain letter message. While at
    many other companies when a plant manger stands at the door
    trying to catch people coming in late, those people might be
    fired as an example so no else in the plant will be late, but at
    DEC the belief in a better way to achieve the same thing results
    in an electronic mailing of a story. 

    DEC has too many people doing things that no longer need to
    done, while having many things that need to be done. Most
    companies would just pink slip some people and hire others. DEC
    believes that it would be better to train the current employees
    to do what needs to be done. 

    This is DEC culture. But it can only survive if it works.

    mike

    RE: .53
    
    > For example the recent Jack Smith "time clock" chain letter message.
    > ... but at DEC the belief in a better way to achieve the same thing
    > results in an electronic mailing of a story. 
    
    I would really like to know how you have reached the above conclusion.
    The moderators of this conference believe otherwise.  They do not
    believe that the memo was intended to spread.  Please help me refute
    their assumption.
    
    - Vikas

re:            <<< Note 891.54 by SERPNT::SONTAKKE "Vikas Sontakke" >>>
>             -< Are we still talking about a "non-existent" memo? >-

>						Please help me refute
>    their assumption.
    
	I have to agree with you, Vikas. Certainly Jack would have had
	no purpose in composing that message if he did _NOT_ want it
	to receive a wide distribution. The copy I got even had several
	subject lines in the forwarding chain which read "Please 
	distribute to your entire organization", although I must admit
	that that idea wasn't explicitly stated by Jack in his original
	message. Then again, it wasn't marked "DIGITAL CONFIDENTIAL",
	either! :^) My suspicion is that some moderators had some qualms
	about including messages authored by senior VP's without their
	explicit permission, period.

	-Jack

    Moderators (including me, but not for this conference) desire/ need/
    require VP/P-written memos that are intended for wide internal
    distribution to say "This memo is intended for distribution to all
    employees (or all employees in xxx organization)" by the author.

    Is that too much to ask for?

    The electronic milieu of Digital's mail systems is stymied by, on the
    one hand, an effort to limit mail forwarding because we don't want our
    internal mail in the Globe.

    On the other hand, we have a culture that has parables about Digital
    being passed down by managers to their direct reports because they
    guess that the memo _by_its_content_ it is not intended for
    one-level-deep, but n-levels-deep distribution. 

    You might say, the moderators collectively are trying to change the
    culture, or at least the aggregate behavior of Digital's parable
    writers when it comes to forwarding their electronic mail.

    I share the skepticism over possibility to "engineer a culture" or
    "fix it". Memos from our cultural engineers did amuse me in the past,
    these were either stating something obvious ( "parents of DEC employees
    die" ) or were completely impossible to prove.

    Nevertheless culture can be influenced. The corner stone of DEC culture
    for me is "honesty". 
    A memo from executive committee stating that "you no longer need to be
    honest" would certainly change something .-)

    But back to 0., do you remember exactly what was supposed to be wrong
    with "the culture"?
    Were any fixes suggested ? 

    				wlodek

    Re: .56
    
    Let me see if I got this right.....
    
    If I want to change the culture, I have to become a Moderator?
    
    Really?

 RE: .58  If I want to change the culture, I have to become a Moderator?

	What Pat was saying was that some people, who happen to be moderators,
	are trying to change something in the culture. There was nothing in
	what he said that even remotely implied, to me at least, that one
	had to be a moderator to change things.

				Alfred

I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THE FOLLOWING IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE DEC
CULTURE.  IF IT IS, I SUGGEST IT BE CHANGED.



(Yes, I am shouting.  I want to.  Now I'm quieter.  Please let me continue.)


I suggest we all get our heads together and find a way to change this behavior,
if it is part of Digital's culture.

I had once thought this behavior was an example of the "New England"
personality.

For example, I'm originally from Pittburgh, Pa. where waitresses behave
as though *you* are doing *them* a favor by allowing them to wait on you,
rather than the other way around.

For example, a year of driving around Boston convinced me that Massachusetts
*deserves* the highest auto insurance rates in the country.  Complete and
utter disregard for the other drivers on the road is almost the norm.


But then I've observed this behavior in other parts of the company, in
other parts of the country, as well.  So it's either symptomatic of:

	1.  Digital

	2.  our industry

	3.  American culture

(or, okay, has spread from New England to other parts of Digital.  I suppose
that's possible).


Regardless, I'm fed up with it.

I'm speaking of the blatant professional discourtesy shown to people being
interviewed by hiring managers, or asked to interview.

In 6 six years in Digital my experience of personal interviews has been
generally deplorable and inexcusable.

I would like to know if it is a part of Digital culture to NOT BOTHER to
return a message to someone with whom you've already had at least an
exploratory interview?  Why has it been my experience, over and over again,
of waiting by the phone for a call, and not getting it?

I can take being turned down for a job, but I will not accept this business
of not bothering to return the call/follow up the interview and tell me that.


I have been stewing about this many months, but then this same treatment
has been occurring to a genuinely nice, energetic person who is a personal
friend, who just finds this devastating:  this waiting, waiting, waiting,
then finally calling up herself and being told by some secretary, "Oh, sorry,
but...blah, blah...so we're doing no hiring now."  Many times playing telephone
tag to get this at the end of it.


So, having had months (years?) to stew about this, and recently upon returning
from vacation and hearing of the above, I decided that there is one little
thing I can and should do in this environment of "honesty" and "do the
right thing" that is Digital's "culture".  (Yes, I am being sarcastic.
Feel free to tell me my experience has been illusory!  Go ahead.)

I can publicly acknowledge a few people with whom I've had the pleasure
of interviewing who (I think, I hope) would NEVER treat a prospective employee
with such discourtesy.  Surely the moderators, the audience for this notefile,
and Digital in general, will not find me unprofessional, or out of line, in
publicly acknowledging people doing the right thing.



So....in my brief career here at Digital I've had the pleasure of interviews
with Bob Griffin, in SWSE/ACES, Vickie Farrell/Michael Booth in Database
Marketing, and Marge Davis and John Ferreira in CSSE.

I've turned down offers with some of the above, and I've been turned down by
some of the above.  This is not the point of my note.

What matters is that I wasn't treated like a beggar looking for a job:
I was treated like a potential valuable employee to the group, and thus
the hiring manager tried to sell ME on the job.  They tried to make a good
impression.  They treated me like somebody who had valuable skills, and
who might go somewhere else.  Whether that was true, or not.

That's professional courtesy.  That's what I *expect* from somebody paid to
be a manager in this company-that-seems-to-think-it-is-the-only-one-in-the-
industry- (i.e. world) that-knows-how-to-do-computers.

Phone calls/questions were promptly returned/answered.  And when turned
down by those in the above list, I wasn't called by a secretary.  Or worse
(and more common in my experience, and apparently many others I've been
talking to), no call at all.  I was told by the person with whom I interviewed,
and I was told why.  Directly.  Allowing me to keep some sense of self-respect,
"Perhaps we'll have the opportunity for a better match in the future."

I think it's a shame, actually, that I feel compelled to go out of my way to
publicly acknowledge people doing what I would have thought, 6-7 years
ago, to be the obvious thing to do.  Obviously, what I'd like to do, is
name those whose behavior is the object of this note.

But relax, weak-kneed, I won't.

Anyway, when common courtesy isn't common anymore, well, a pat on the back
for those who make the effort is called for.

(And if those in my list showed *me* this behavior, and don't do it to others,
well....shape up!)



So, tell me regular noters, is this obnoxious behavior Digital, the computer
industry, or America?

If it's Digital, I suggest one thing to fix in our "culture" is to start
treating each other with a little respect.  (See note 760 something-or-other
about treating people like "resources."  I keep building up steam on this one.
The problem is, the steamer keeps getting stoked)

Any hiring managers out there, reading this note, who exhibit the behavior
I decry:  a pox on you.  May all your good people quit on you.  You deserve
it.


	Bill Linn
	SWSE

    Bill,
    	I understand your feelings. I have had similar experiences, both
    within and outside DIGITAL over many years. SOme people are just plain
    bad at this kind of stuff.
    
    Digital culture, in my experience, encourages more considerate
    behaviour. This doesn't mean this always happens, it just means that
    "doing the right thing" *should* extend to common courtesy in
    interviews.
    
    - ���

    re .60 
    
    Yeah, its the culture - THE ONE WE HAVE NOW!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    I've been here only 5 years.  It wasn't like what you described 5 years
    ago.  Or 4 years ago...  But, its been happening for the last 2 or so. 
    And I don't think its just interviews, it affects a lot of areas. 
    
    Could there be a correlation between the short-term, dollar driven,
    mentality and the lack of respect for employees that seems to be
    becoming more pervasive?  I think so.  When you're a resource, you can
    be treated like a pawn on a chess board.  Its harder when you're a
    person.
    
    So, YEAH, its part of DEC culture.  NOW!  And, YEAH, it needs to be
    fixed.  BUT FIX THE PROBLEM, NOT THE SYMPTOM!!!!!

    I tend to think the problem is related to a basic fact of life:
    companies are made up of people.  Even Digital.  And in my recent
    experience, people in general are losing the sense of what I always
    thought were the fundamentals of civility and decency (comprising 
    common courtesy, consideration, compassion, helpfulness, etc.).  Oh, 
    I know there are a lot of exceptions.  Many, perhaps most, are very
    much like what I remember best about the people I dealt with many years 
    ago - very good about all of the above - both at Digital and elsewhere.  
    But my integrated sense of the general population is that the erosion 
    of these characteristics is occurring, and it seems to be accelerating.
    And let's not forget that like the squeaky wheel, the "bad guys" are
    the ones who tend to get the most attention.  So, while the percentage
    may be relatively small (or not), their negative effect on one's own
    attitude tends to be amplified.
    
    If I may, I would just say that the best solution is one which I heard
    from parents, teachers, friends, etc. over these many years.  Simple; to
    the point; satisfying in every case; successful in almost every case:
    
    	    Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
    
    Let me add quickly that as I get (ever) older, the ability to live up
    to that creed seems to become more difficult.  But when I slip up, I
    am instantly reminded of those "bad guys", and that is enough to bring
    me back to where I want to be.
    
    Gary

REL .60
> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THE FOLLOWING IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE DEC
> CULTURE.  IF IT IS, I SUGGEST IT BE CHANGED.
....
>I'm speaking of the blatant professional discourtesy shown to people being
interviewed by hiring managers, or asked to interview.
....
>In 6 six years in Digital my experience of personal interviews has been
>generally deplorable and inexcusable.
....
>I would like to know if it is a part of Digital culture to NOT BOTHER to
>return a message to someone with whom you've already had at least an
>exploratory interview?  Why has it been my experience, over and over again,
>of waiting by the phone for a call, and not getting it?
....
>So, tell me regular noters, is this obnoxious behavior Digital, the computer
>industry, or America?

I have had interviews with about 80 different companies over the past
five years and I can tell you this problem is almost universal. 
Recruiters are used to being in a position where that can treat people
like fecal waste matter and act like they are doing a person a great
favor by even considering them for a job. 

The difference between the computer industry and most others is that
good computer people are a rare find.  When I was looking for my first
job I had to put up with the garbage you are describing. After I got two
years of experience I no longer had to.  Since there are many companies
who are willing to hire us, we as computer professionals are in the
enviable position of being able to tell these bastards to go to Naples. 

It is unfortunate that this happens in Digital but it happens almost
everywhere.  Have you ever wondered what happens to a resume once it
arrives on a Digital (or any other company's) recruiter's desk?  I am
convinced that many companies are unable to find good people because
the resumes of the right people are sitting in someone's file cabinet.

I also cannot believe the number of companies that allow personnel to
screen out candidate through a preliminary interview.  I find it amazing
that even "top-notch" companies will make a candidate spend there first
interview exclusively with a person from personnel who knows nothing
about computers other than some industry jargon and acronyms that they
spout off to try and B.S. people with.  Since these recruiters are
incapable of judging the person's abilities for a computer position, how
many capable people get screened out because some moron does not like
their tie?  In addition, if you are only able to schedule two to four
interviews a week who wants to go and waste a half day with such a
company? 

So, in summary, this problem is NOT specific to Digital culture but is
one that occurs almost universally in American (or world wide?)
industry.

John - Who has never accepted a position with a company where he was
forced to have an interview with personnel.

    I wonder how much this problem is caused by the size of the
    bureaucracy?  I work at a branch of about eighty people, and was
    interviewed by the SWS manager.  A week later I was interviewed by the
    District manager, and shortly after started work.  Perhaps managers at
    larger facilities think that they are too busy to bother interviewing
    people who will end up working for them?

 Re: .64

 To clarify, I've never interviewed with a recruiter, myself, so my
 bad experiences were not with personnel.  I'm talking about the person
 for whom you supposedly would be working to make look good.  :^)


 Re:  .65

 Yes.  Size.  And the ability to get away with it.


 Re:  .62

 Exactly.  It's a symptom, not THE problem, and it's also my impression
 that it's getting worse.  Fast.  (Funny how you said 2 years....I would have
 said 2-3 myself....Interesting congruence.  Any astrologers out there that
 can tell us what happened 2-3 years ago?)

 A company that behaves this way will NOT serve its customers well.

 Which is why I brought it up.

	-- bL

:    (Funny how you said 2 years....I would have
: said 2-3 myself....Interesting congruence.  Any astrologers out there that
: can tell us what happened 2-3 years ago?)
:
    
    	Growth.   Lots of it.    And success.  Lots of that, too.
    
    -Don-

    
    
    
    
    re: .57: >> But back to 0., do you remember exactly what was supposed
             >> to be wrong with "the culture"?
               
    The speakers at this seminar (a LES Technical Orientation Seminar
    at MLO) were two *high* level personnel people. I have the names
    somewhere,since I was a bit upset about the content of this seminar
    and wrote a summary up for my manager and my PSA  to follow up on...
    (that was a year ago and I havent heard anything about it since)
    
    Essentially, the point they made wasnt that there was something "wrong",
    more like, "The 90s are due to be VERY competitive, and one way
    to make our workforce more competitive/cost effective is to alter
    their values and cultural expectations, thus altering their behavior
    and performance in the workplace."
                                                   
    Something about this concept troubled me deeply. (Sort of like
    subliminal advertising. Such a "backdoor" approach seems less than
    honest to me.) I dont appreciate being viewed as a resource
    that can be intentionally, subtly manipulated. Id much prefer the
    up-front approach that Ken Olsen seems to favor, frankly stating
    that we all must work smarter and harder. I wish more of the people
    between his level and mine thought like he does. I hope he became
    aware of their idea and stopped it...
                                                   
    
    re: .57 >>I share the skepticism over possibility to "engineer a culture" 
                                                         
    I agree competely, but the fact that anyone would want to TRY it
    is very disturbing. (The values they'd like to adjust wouldnt
    necessarily be locked in the guys desk at the workplace. He would
    also bring them home to his wife, kids, and community...)
    

    Re: [.69]:  Other examples have been mentioned in this topic about how
    a culture can be changed overnight by a single action.  The company
    whose founder stood up at a group meeting and announced that employees
    were like family to him and too valuable ever to be laid off (or words
    to that effect) that subsequently laid off many of those same employees
    comes to mind immediately.  Then there's the apocryphal story of the
    Wall Street firm that notified a top executive of his dismissal by
    moving his desk to the sidewalk and SETTING IT ON FIRE as he returned
    form lunch.  (A career up in flames?)
    
    I suspect it's easier to affect a culture negatively than it is to
    improve it.  Fire a vice-president for missing his numbers and you'll
    send a strong signal, but probably a negative one on the whole.
    
    But I claim changes can be made to corporate culture, even dramatic
    changes, even overnight.  I would further claim that Digital's culture
    is not perfect, and that improvements could be made.  What changes are
    improvements and how to implement them I couldn't say.

re: .70

Well, if I was to be fired, I must say that I'd rather like the
story you told.  I mean, if you're going to go, you might as well
go big.  Clearly the firm was impressed by the executive.  Just
a small matter of the arithmetic sign of the rating.

- greg

    Culture is bunk:  It is the result, it is the aggregate behavior of
    tens of thousands of employees.

    Talking about leaving policies, practices, and strategies alone, while
    trying to change culture is proof that when it comes to discussing
    culture, most people in Digital don't have a clue.

    Where are the explicit policies and programs to encourage the
    entrepreneurial or competitive employee behavior that is so longed for?

    Or is this great change something that's going to happen by a
    unconscious process?

Re:< Note 891.72 by SDSVAX::SWEENEY "Digital Competency Ctr/Finance" >

>    Where are the explicit policies and programs to encourage the
>    entrepreneurial or competitive employee behavior that is so longed for?
>
>    Or is this great change something that's going to happen by a
>    unconscious process?

"this is the stuff dreams are made of"

Considering the current flow of things I'd dare say managers won't figure out
a way to "change corporate culture" until they come up with a number to
measure it (the perceived culture). If it has a number it can be managed,
right?

    For lots of suggestions on what we could be doing better, go get
    yourself a copy of "The Macintosh Way" by Guy Kawasaki (Scott, Foresman
    and Company, ISBN 0-673-46175-0, 201pp, $19.95).
    
    This is not another Apple history, but a book about how to run a
    computer company.  There is a section on "Doing the Right Thing", but
    there is a larger section on "Doing Things Right".

  Re:  .72

  One vote, here, in total agreement with .72.

  The fact is that suggestion boxes, etc. ain't gonna do diddily.  What's
  missing are the "explicit policies and programs."


  Re:  .74

  Also "Made in America" by the MIT Commission.  It'll make you want to cry.
  (How many CEOs and MBA's and PhD's does it take to see the obvious....
  Apparently, a lot.)


  Also a comment/opinion about "middle management."

  Middle management has been getting quite a rap in this notesfile.  Maybe
  it's deserved.  (I've certainly never interviewed with a VP, so my rap
  in .60 was at middle and line managers.)

  Maybe that's not all fair.  Where did the "CERTS" mentality of note 895
  come from?  Who created the metrics that so many of us (in our humble
  wisdom) think are warping our values AND our chance of continued success?

  Middle management doesn't dream up the metrics by which it will be judged.
  Upper-level management does that.  Either by omission or commission.

  If K.O.s and the VP's vision isn't being implemented down here on the 
  ground, it's not going to be us little folks that fix it with a hue and
  a cry.  They gotta fix it.

  Otherwise, I think we must assume that "the way it is" is the way they
  want it to be.

		bL

    Culture is not bunk, but an integral part that must be understood.
    Companies, schools, large and small organizations, all have
    "cultures" that attract people to join and influence how  problems
    are solved. Policies, practices, and strategies both define the
    culture and result from culture, the same way laws reflect and
    define the culture of the country. A hot topic example is layoffs.
    Some companies are always laying-off someone, and they attract
    employees that know it is only a short time position. These
    companies (often lead by job hopping CEO short-timers) have
    cultures that cause people to react to problems differently from
    companies such as IBM, DEC, HP, TOYOTA, and SONY. 

    During the 90s the DEC culture, the USA culture, the European
    culture and the Japanese culture will all change due to 
    political, economic, and social changes. DEC is currently facing
    the economic reality of changes in manufacturing labor demand, 
    growth rate and an industry wide lowering of profit margins.

    Future culture shock will attack middle management with a vengeance
    as the management rule of 7 falls. An easy example is the way the
    US pentagon (for better or worse) gets involved in a dog-fight
    over the Mediterranean, or directs troop movement in a small beach
    landing in the Caribbean. In DEC, mail and notes indirectly
    provide more access to the executive committee than an "open door"
    policy ever did. Tom Peters is shouting about the demise of the
    middle manager.

    Technology and economics are pressing hard the "perks" of the job.
    Secretaries and travel are being replaced by electronic mail and
    teleconferencing. Anyone can produce a typeset quality report, or
    generate a 35mm slide presentations. Lotus scripts and "AI" programs
    are being sold to replace staff that did report generation and
    decision support. 

    Will the 1990s be like the 60s after the 50s or the 30s after
    the 20s?  Will DEC go the way of Ford Motor Company or American
    Motors? I don't know, but after 70 notes, it is clear is that the
    Digital Equipment Company of the future will provide lots of
    "interesting" activity to generate more notes.

    mike

    re:  .76
    
    Very well put, but my...vision?...sight...view of the lay of the
    land...says it's not enough.  (Or, maybe, it's too much.)
    
    With a lack of good communications channels down to the "troops,"
    and sheer size, and (I would suggest) the greater ability to do-what-
    you-want-and-get-away-with-it-as-long-as-you-meet-this-week's-metrics
    in a large, matrixed corporation, we don't have a "culture," we have
    local fiefdoms.
    
    Look at this notesfile.  It is amazingly interesting to try to read
    objectively, because you see such incredulousness by some at the
    experiences of others.
    
    Like performance reviews.  And "certs."  And how much the local branch
    of Personnel will get mixed up in *your* problems.  And how going to an
    outside vendor for training can be cheaper than going to an internal
    training organization.  And on, and on, and on.
    
    The "no-layoffs" in Digital -- yes, it does make us different than
    alot of those other companies of which you must be thinking.  That's
    a good example.  But what else?  "Do the right thing?"  What's that
    *mean.*  (Especially when I see hordes of people doing the right thing
    for *them,* or maybe even for their *organization,* but not for the
    company....Well, maybe not.  Hey, what do I know, right?  I just have
    my suspicions, and recognize that a person working in Digital is, after
    all a relatively ordinary human being.  Prone to the same attitudes
    as most everyone else in the American "culture.")
    
    See, I can use the term.  And I apologize to our fellow workers every
    where else in the globe, as I hardly know you.  As you see, I am a
    perfect product of the American culture:  I think you should learn
    English so I don't have to learn your language, and you should run
    your economics and society with the same principles as we do ours, etc.
    
    But, to get back to the subject, what else is there of Digital "culture"
    in the US that stands out to you?  Too many people are putting notes into 
    this file saying, "I don't see how things are so much different here than
    elsewhere," when they are in a position to make such a comparison.
    This seems especially true outside of engineering.
    
    Why are they saying that?  If it's not true?
    
    By the "culture is bunk" statement I have two objectives in mind:
    
      1.  We're not different (and thereby "better") than anybody else
          just because we're *Digital* -- beyond no-layoffs we appear
          to be responding in many of the same frenzied, shortsighted
    	  ways as the rest of American industry.  We're not magical.
    	  Our "culture" is not "better than your culture, company X!!!".
    
      2.  I'm tired of the "culture" baloney (sorry, but that's the way
    	  I feel) being used as an excuse for doing nothing to solve our
    	  problems.  Our problem is changing from a hardware vendor to a
    	  software/systems integration/solution vendor.  (Or something like
    	  that.)
    
    People who I would think should have the ability to fix some things seem
    to be wringing their hands and blaming "the culture."  If they can't,
    it's not the "culture" that's to blame:  it's whoever picked them for
    the job, and gave them one they can't do.  (Regardless of the reason.)
    If they won't, well, what's the "culture" have to do with that?
    
    Did "the culture" lead us into the mess that required a Summer School
    for sales?  Or jobs fairs for Sales Support all over the place?  No,
    these were things that resulted from, perhaps some short-sightedness,
    perhaps some honest inability to keep up with the changes in the industry.
    (I don't buy the latter, but I don't know....)
    
    When you say we have a "culture," then you put some kind of mysterious
    force at work in our (yours and mine) relationship with Digital.  You
    empower where you shouldn't, and you make powerless where you shouldn't.
    
    Let's leave the "culture" talk to the sociologists, and talk about
    HOW we're going to become a software/systems integration....whatever
    I said...vendor.  What must upper-level management do to make that
    happen?  What must middle management do to make that happen?  What
    do those on the bottom need from those folks to make that happen?
    
    Let's stick to the "policies, practices, and stategies," as you said.
    I ask you:  how many people joined Digital because of it's "culture?"
    
    Especially, these days.  The "panic" is in.  Lay-offs.  Mergers.
    Recession in the industry.  Not so much interest in getting into
    Digital these days because of it's "culture," but because of it's
    balance sheet.
    
    Just one man's (longwinded, frustrated) opinion....
    
    	bL
    
    

    
    	Culture is largely reflective of your local managers personality.
    This was true 15 years ago, it is still true today. I have worked
    in very poisoned cultures in DEC, where the prime activity is seething
    over who gets credit, who gets blame, and the work is generally
    neglected, and in cultures that are quite healthy, where folks work together
    towards the common goal of quality product.
    
    	In all cases, the personality of the management, and or key
    important people primarily drove the culture.  They tend to attract
    like minded individuals.
    
    	In the "old days", the only thing different at all was that
    lousy cultures were usually discovered quicker. We were a smaller
    company, and important failures got noticed a lot quicker, and were
    tolerated for much shorter periods of time. Today, we are much larger,
    and do not always have (or at least not always perceived) the same
    sense of urgency in deliverables. The management layers are crowded
    and they do tend to look after themselves.
    
    	The one constant between old days and new days, was for those
    poor folk stuck in lousy cultures, who really did not want to be
    there or wanted to make things right, is to invoke the good ole'
    culture (Boy, this never would of happened in the old days). Fact
    is it did and was only corrected when a clear business need made
    it necessary.  That really hasn't changed today, although it seems
    to take longer to get the point across when we're hurting due to
    some lousy management.
    
    	My current group is great. My last one was unpleasant. Not the
    first time these things have occurred, and it's wishful thinking to
    assume it's the last. I've worked on 3 complete releases of products
    while my last one is still trying to get act 1 together. I wish them
    great success because they are doing something we need very badly.
    There were changes made that have enabled the right things to start
    occuring.  It took a while, and caused a lot of pain, but one would
    have to say the corporate culture finally worked, as it ever has.
    
    	I do emphasize with all of you who wish they had the power to
    make change happen. I really wish I could encourage everyone to go
    out and "do the right thing".  Unfortunately, the "right thing" is
    what your manager currently thinks it is.  Without any mechanism
    for troops to have any power of review over their management, your
    are faced with the old career decision process or wait things out.
    
    	One of the real positives about Digitals consensus style of
    operating is that if you really are on the mark about something,
    eventually the consensus will agree.  Meglomaniac's who go off
    and totally ignore reality do eventually get what's coming. While
    it may seem too slow and messy at times, we do have an awful lot
    of very bright people working for us.  Without them, or with a much
    more totalitarian style of operation, for each success we have, we'd
    have equally fantastic failures, and we would not be where we are
    today (which if not the best of positions, is still much better than
    most anyone else). We possess the ability to change and adapt to
    an increasingly changing environment. With 125k folks, that is a
    tough act.  Yet, it works....
    
    	bs

    I wonder if it's too late to join this discussion. For most of the
    past year, I've been away from Notes and just recently rejoined
    it. 
    
    This conference has been most interesting and represents a range
    of opinions---all the way from, "Culture is bunk," to the belief
    that culture underscores everything that we do. A number of individuals
    commented that DEC's culture is no different than any other company
    they have worked for. From this statement, I would have to guess
    that they perceive that all personalities are essentially similar,
    since culture is essentially the organizational personality. 
    
    Culture exists and is extremely important to the success of an
    organization. For the past 3 years, I have been doing strategic
    consulting with some of Digital's largest customers and have found
    organizational culture to be the single-most important predictor
    of corporate success. Far more important than strategies, goals,
    critical success factors, etc. 
    
    The Digital culture is alive. How well is it, could be debated.
    The core values which Ken Olsen embedded into the organization 32
    years ago, are still very much present. What we see change, are
    the visible manifestations of these values. (Notes 282.3 and 282.25
    discuss these core values, for those of you who asked for a definition
    of the DEC culture.)
    
    I hope some of you will continue this discussion. As someone mentioned,
    how many companies would have this kind of a dialogue? IBM tried
    it(the now classic VNET story), and had senior management shut it
    down. What we are doing here, is very much an expression of our
    culture and a visible symbol of its continuing strength. 
    
    Pete

    At staff yesterday we reviewed the State of the Company tapes from May
    4th...they're available from your library... I'd recommend them to
    folks who are concerned about the erosion of the DEC culture.  Listen
    to Ken Olsen; listen to John Sims.  *Try* to ignore Kens' sexist
    attitudes :^)
    
    grins,
    Marge

    Re:  .79
    
<<  The Digital culture is alive. How well is it, could be debated.
<<  The core values which Ken Olsen embedded into the organization 32
<<  years ago, are still very much present. What we see change, are
<<  the visible manifestations of these values.
    
    
    I'm sorry, but this seems to be a contradiction to me.  If the
    "culture" is not well, then how can these "core values" be still
    very much alive?  (Unless the core values allowed for "illness.")
    
    What is all this talk of "culture" doing for us?  Is it fixing any
    problems?  Why are we wasting time talking about "our culture," as
    if we were better than anybody else?
    
    When the organisms IN the culture start talking/arguing culture,
    it's a dodge to avoid talking about details.  You don't "change"
    a culture.  You fix something, and the culture "changes."

    Let me pose a question-  which is causing the change in 'culture';
    people (in general) or Digital?  And- is the debate being caused
    by the conflicts of change?
        
    <olde days alert>
        
    In younger (single days) work was everything.  In the small (then)
    field office I was in, at around 8:00pm there was always a group of 5 -
    10 (25% of the ENTIRE office population) to go to dinner with and then
    maybe back to the office or home. On Saturday there was usually at
    least 5-10 of us in the office doing what was needed to keep up.  There
    was never any 'not my job', all pitched in - SWS people fixed hardware,
    FS helped on software problems, Sales helped everyone and was
    appreciative of all.  Managers supported contributors by doing what the
    people working for them asked.  Trips to Mass. were like pilgrimages.
    Gazing at the clock tower brought tears to the eyes.  You felt a sense
    of pride working for DEC. 
    
    Over the years, as we grew (both company and individually) there was a
    gradual change.  Lots and lots of people were hired from other
    companies, many a lot larger, who came in with a 'this is just another
    job' mentality and were not transformed into 'believers'.  Managers
    were hired from the outside and were used to the differentiation of the
    'position' rather than the responsibility that goes with it.
    Organizations (and individuals) were put under tremendous pressures to
    do what was important to them and did not have time to do whatever was
    needed so the 'not my job' attitude and stovepipes emerged. 
    
    People became more involved with family, outside activity and the
    'me' lifestyle then the paternalistic 'family of DEC'.  Fast-tracking
    and emphasis on personal achievement overtook team goals.
    
    Look at the offices of today- how many people are there after 5 or on
    weekends?  How many of the people in your facility do you know?  How
    many do you socialize with?  My observations are based on some time in
    the Mill (1975-76) and the field (Atlanta 1976-1987 and NJ 1987-today)
    along with being a DEC OEM from 1972-75.
    
    I know that the Digital of today does not, and can not hold the same
    position and priority in my life as DEC did way back then, and it is a
    almost a tug of loyalties along with a feeling of loss.
    
    It bothers me to see the amount of discussion and range of 'this is
    what I expect the company to do for me (more than most companies do)'
    without the corresponding level of 're-payment'.
    
    Sorry for the rambling, semi-personal nature.
    
    	-Barry_who_still_cares,_sometimes_too_much-
    
   

	Ditto on all you said, and I remember a few of those "extra-mile" days
and nights we put in in the late '70's!

	As a footnote, Barry knows whereof he speaks about "outside" managers
being brought in, and the ensuing turmoil!  He lived through it, somehow!

    < How well it(the DEC culture) is could be debated. 
    
    In resonse to .81, the above statement wasn't meant by ne to imply
    that the culture was "ill," only that not everyone would agree with
    me that it was well. 
    
    If .81 would make an analogous reference to the human person and
    substitute "personality" wherever he has used the word "culture,"
    he would see how ridiculous his argument is. You can't divorce the
    actions of the human person from his personality and also his core
    values. We behave according to our personality and values, much
    as we'd like to deny at times that that is true. 

    Why is it so hard to believe that orhganizational personality and
    values play an equally important role in corproate life? This is
    not to deny .81's emphasis on action. And it's not a cop-out to
    avoid necessary action. Rather, it's an assertion that there are
    superordinate things we must consider, whether in our personal lives
    or in our corporate lives, that are fundamentally critical to our
    success. 

    "O! How will earnings before interest and taxes ever rise to meet the
    expectations of Wall Street analysts unless we fix the culture?"

    Culture is still bunk.  Stop whining about it.

    Sit down and write a new vision statement for the corporation, clear up
    all the ambiguities regarding the corporate goals.

    Create policies, practices, procedures, incentives that reward the good
    long-term productive, profitable behavior that you want.  If adequacy
    is rewarded the same as excellence, expect only adequacy.

    Respect individuals and that starts with telling them what's going on
    without reading about it in the newspaper.

    In other words, get top management working on the critical success
    factors that top management ACTUALLY CONTROLS and the so-called
    culture, that aggregate attitude and behavior of all employees, will
    change.
    
    "We gotta change the culture around here" is an epitaph.  It is the
    ultimate cop-out.

    "Culture" is the sum of an organization's goals, policies, procedures,
    etc., plus the behavior of it management and workers, plus the behavior
    that is tolerated there.  I've interviewed at a few companies, all of
    whom said they were "people oriented."  The one that had just had a
    layoff was "people oriented;" the one that (at one time in its past)
    removed the doors from the toilet stalls, so no one could pass -- er,
    the time -- reading was "people oriented;" Digital was "people
    oriented."  Same goals, different cultures.
    
    This company frowns on alcohol consumption.  Aside from drinking on the
    job, the policy isn't different from many other companies' policies. 
    But the actual root of the aversion, it is said, comes from the
    founder's personal beliefs.  I don't choose to buck the tide.  There
    are other companies where my Japanese car wouldn't be allowed in the
    parking lot, or where, if I posted a notice inviting my coworkers to a
    union organizing meeting I'd be beaten up.  None of this is written
    policy, but it is very real and quite powerful culture.
    
    But I digress.  Why do you insist there is no such thing as culture? 
    In your view, is there culture on a larger scale?  Is there a French
    culture or a Chinese culture, say?

RE: .-2,.-1

>    "Culture" is the sum of an organization's goals, policies, procedures,
>    etc., plus the behavior of it management and workers, plus the behavior
>    that is tolerated there.  

I agree that with this statement but this implies that culture is a unifying
force.  This is clearly not the case with "DEC culture".  At the new hire
orientation everyone gets a lecture on "DEC culture".  Unfortunately, what is
described as "DEC Culture" is really the "Local Culture" at some sites in MA
and NH.  In reality, things are much different once you get more than an hour's
drive away from Maynard. 

During Victoria's reign there was British Culture and there was Indian
Culture but that did not mean there was an Empire Culture composed of a
mixture of the two.  DEC has become either become too big to have a
corporate wide culture or there is not enough leadership to unify the
corporation into having one. 

.-1 had a list of cultural things that other companies claim to do but
in reality they do otherwise.  DEC does a lot of similar things.  If I
were feeling really brave I might list a few that I have run into
locally.  As an example of one that seems to occur universally how about
"We're people oriented.  We pay our employees for their performance".
I also think that posting a notice inviting one's co-workers to a union
organizing meeting would not be looked upon kindly by the DEC
management either.

John

    re: how many people are there after 5 or on weekends?

    At ZK there are over 3000 people. Early in the summer, a
    thunderstorm caused multiple power spikes shutting down every
    system in all three buildings at 5:20pm on a Friday. (I forget
    if this was the Friday before or after the long weekend.) Since
    the power was gone, and when power was restored, it would take a
    VMS reboot before I could anything I decided to leave. And so
    did several *hundred *other people.

    mike

    re .-1
    Here, too (HLO); I seldom leave this building before 6:30, and I
    usually arrive around 8:30.  I will probably leave earlier than that
    today, though - not feeling quite up to par on the day after Yom
    Kippur!  (Might feel better about it if it didn't cost me a vacation
    day as well as a couple of days of recovering from dehydration - I am
    on the chair setup and takedown committee, so I was the last person out
    of the synagogue last night, a couple of hours after sunset, after
    knocking down all the rental folding chairs, etc., with another half
    hour to get home before I could drink or eat....remind me not to
    volunteer for stuff!).
    
    /Charlotte
    
    PS - the only REAL 9-to-5 folks here are the people in vanpools!

    Re: [.88 (Mike Taylor)]:
    
    Let me see if I understand what you're saying.  Out of a population of
    over 3,000 people, one day during the summer only several hundred
    people had left as of 5:20 PM on Friday afternoon?
    
    Are you saying that at 5:20 PM on a Friday afternoon during the summer, 
    the parking lots were generally still full on this particular day?
    
    Are you saying this is typical of the ZKO work force?

    Certainly reflects my experience.
    
    - ���

    Out of a couple thousand people at work on a summer friday, 
    at 5:20 several hundred were still there working. (I assume they
    were working, since if they were just drinking coffee shutting 
    down the machine would not get to leave.)
    
    mike

    Culture raises it head again. This time at a research lab
    presentation where the discussion all too often had the phase,
    "that is <your OS> culture, in <my OS> culture we do it differently". 

    I don't know if the tools make the culture, of the culture uses
    the tools, but I have seen that there exists within DEC a
    predisposion for or against organizations depending on media used
    to present their work., e.g. my_os/your_os, VTX/Notes,
    paper/electronic, vmsmail,mts. 

    As DEC heads into the heterogeneous computer marketplace of the
    90s, maybe it should learn to "value differences" in the way
    people work and the tools they use to accomplish that work.
    
    mike

    Folks, I'd like to comment this "working after 5:00" business sounds
    really childish.  I hear you, and I understand, but listen to
    yourselves.
    
    It sounds like "my mommy is prettier than your mommy."
    
    
    I don't buy the simplistic argument that "if I finish my work by 5:00
    every day, and you don't, it's because I'm more efficient."
    
    But neither do I buy the one of the person who's in the office after 5:00
    all the time claiming to be a "better" employee.
    
    Come on -- we're all adults here!
    
    We all know...the question is...are you doing *useful* work, meaning:
    
    	1.  work that's not redundant (i.e. being done by somebody else
    	    whom you may or may not know about, and whom may or may not
    	    know about you)
    
    	2.  work that's not "busy" work, done solely to make you or
    	    whomever-stuck-it-on-you look good.
    
    These are, of course, both personal questions as well as questions we
    should be directing toward management, since both sides may be quilty.
    
    
    
    Since I'm not shy about taking a stand, I would argue that there's a
    BIG problem with doing "useful" work in Digital, and it is a result of
    decisions which some, I think, would claim are part of our "culture."
    
    I've certainly had that claim made to me.
    
    The problem is then dismissed as being insoluable.  I say bunk.  Make
    that clear vision known, and policies known, as was so well described
    a few notes back AND STOP ALL THIS AMBIGUITY AND TURF WARS OVER OLTP
    AND INTEGRATION AND ENTERPRISE "SERVICES," etc. etc.
    
    And if it means violating this sacred cow of matrix management, well
    do it.  Look at the numbers.  Look at how the business world is changing.
    You adapt, or die.  (We're in trouble folks.  Do you see this?  It can
    be solved, it can be made to work.  But it's gonna take some clear heads
    and firm resolve, and some good, tough managers to do so.)
    
    
    And as a parting shot:  Maybe if I (Digital employee) leave at 5:00, it's
    to make sure I have a marriage left when I get home.  Or a child who still
    remembers me.  Unless Digital is looking for all...ambitious computer
    addicts who have no home life, and has no room for ordinary people. 
    
    You wanna understand the problems of the "customer" out there?  You
    better remember that he/she is very often a very "ordinary" person, a
    fact that's been manipulated by IBM for *decades.*
    
    Stop pointing fingers at people based on their hours.  The point is,
    are they good employees, trying to do the best they can with whatever
    situation they find themselves in, and whatever talents they have.

re: -1

  HEAR! HEAR!.   Any proposed changes to the Digital "culture" will have 
  to go beyond measuring number of hour beans worked to make it more productive.

				Bob 

    
    With the exception of notes files that relate to my job, I tend
    to read and write in notes files only when I'm depressed or angry
    or frustrated about something.    
    
    I have only worked for DEC since 1981, and I think I have done better
    than I could have had I stayed in any of the other places I have
    worked. I also think I could have done, and still could do, better
    here.  
    
    Maybe it's myth or culture.  I have never met KO and even if I had,
    I am sure I wouldn't get to know what he values.  I do think that he
    represents a 'goodness' toward people as opposed to impersonal
    corporate type goals.  At least it helps to carry that image.
    
    I think that management would be more ruthless and we would have
    less "dead-wood" if it were easy to be impersonal and simply judge
    based upon results.   How many long time employees haven't faltered
    and regained their pace at least once?  How many would have had
    the chance in a bottom line company?  
    
    I don't know what 'certs' means exactly, but it sounds to me like
    some are objecting to being measured and others are objecting to
    the lack of measurement which weeds out the poor performers.
    
    This leads me back to the original question posed.  Does the culture
    need to change?  At least I think that was the question.   I just
    read the preceding notes and don't remeber who said what.  I agree
    with Linn(?). Why concentrate on culture.  Most of the notes I read
    indicated that there was some problem.  Culture is culture, why
    tie it to good or bad times?  The culture stands on its own.  
    
    The problem I see is that the world is changing.  Engineering has
    surpassed the ability of the business world to apply the technology.
    The demand is for expertise in applying technology and not for the
    technology itself.  Field operations which clearly evaluate customer
    needs and feed them back are more important now.    Technical inovation
    doesn't sell itself anymore.  We have a great network. Do we use
    it well?
    
    I thik the culture is fine. Set the right direction and the people
    who care will work overtime to achieve.  Set the wrong direction,
    and the people will spend too much time soul seaching.
    
    
 

    

    It appears to me that recently then tone in this conference is more 
    frequently aggressive (masculine) than nuturing (feminine) compared to
    the tone of several years ago when nurturing was more prevalent.
    
    At the risk of oversimplification, do other people sense a similar
    hardening of attitudes expressed here?  Does speculation that this
    change is a reaction to a loss of trust ring true?
    
    Wondering,
    
    Dick

    Since when is aggressive a synonym for masculine and nurturing a
    synonym for feminine? (I'd like your answer in black and white.
    :-) )

    	I'm going to bite my tongue and not comment on masculine vs.
    nurturing. However, I will say that I don't think this is a DEC
    phenomenon you are seeing but a country-wide (U.S.) shift towards
    conservatism, less tolerence, and more reactionary, violent behavior.
    And I think a lot of it stems from the economic difficulties and
    growing pains the country is experiencing. When things are going great,
    it's just one big "love in" around here. It's when things are bad that
    you see the REAL character of people. A true test of character for me
    is to see people behave as polite, civilized, rational adults in the
    face of adversity.
    	I was lucky enough to be on Cape Cod (near Falmouth) when Hurricane
    Bob hit. I went out looking for supplies (with the rest of Cape Cod)
    the morning of the storm...when the winds were just starting to pick
    up. I felt lucky to survive THE PEOPLE and was less worried about the
    storm. It was a while free-for-all, people practically willing to step
    on you for a D-cell battery or run you over to get to the hardware
    store. It was disgusting. Once the worst of the storm was over,
    everyone was as cheerful and helpful as could be...but that means
    little in my eyes.

re: .99,

>    However, I will say that I don't think this is a DEC
>    phenomenon you are seeing but a country-wide (U.S.) shift towards
>    conservatism, less tolerence, and more reactionary, violent behavior.

    	I agree here...

>    And I think a lot of it stems from the economic difficulties and
>    growing pains the country is experiencing.

    	...and certainly, difficulties only exacerbate the problem...

>    When things are going great,
>    it's just one big "love in" around here. It's when things are bad that
>    you see the REAL character of people. A true test of character for me
>    is to see people behave as polite, civilized, rational adults in the
>    face of adversity.

    	...and this is true too, but I have to wonder at exactly when
    the test of character was conducted: now that society is going to
    hell, or before, when we elected to let it go to hell.  Also, one
    has to wonder whether it is the bad economic times which are causing
    the conservatism, less tolerance, and more reactionary, violent behavior,
    or whether it isn't actually the conservatism, less tolerance, and more
    reactionary, violent behavior which are causing the bad economic times.
    IMHO, it is the latter of the two causal relationships which is more
    plausible.

    	Unfortunately, I feel that we have, in many ways, made our
    conservative, less tolerant, more reactionary, and violent bed over
    the past decade, and now we wonder why we cannot sleep in it.  In
    this sense, we have already failed one test of character: the test
    of humanity towards fellow man.  I just hope it isn't too late to
    retake the exam.

    				    -davo