Conference 7.286::digital

    
    To overcome bureaucracy and inertia to change, one suggestion would
    be to make the #1 metric of all managers the following:
    
    1.  How many ideas and suggestions have your direct employees created
    this month?
    
    2.  How many of those ideas and suggestions have been implemented
    and/or have been championed by you?
    
    3.  For those ideas and suggestions that were not implemented and/or
    championed, justify why not.
    

    
    o Allow suggestions to be made independent of organizational hierarchy
      (direct to a corporate suggestion area) to enable employees to
      suggest changes in their work area that may have been rejected
      by their own organization.
    
    o Give employees a percentage of the benefit of the suggestion:
      a suggestion that directly saves Digital considerable expense 
      should be worth some percentage of the savings as a cash reward
      to the employee.  The higher the percentage, the greater the
      incentive to participate.
    
                                
    

    
    We trained hard  -  but it seemed that every
    time we were beginning to form up into teams,
    We would be reorganized. I was to learn later
    in life we tend to meet any new situation by
    reorganizing, and a wonderful method it can
    be for creating the  *ILLUSION*  of progress
    while producing confusion, inefficiency, and
    demoralization.
    
          PETRONIUSARBITER,  66 A.D.
    
    P.S.  Constant reorganization also protects management (inept or not),
          from any and all accountability. It breeds political handholding
          which will stagnate a company/nation faster than any other
          method.
    
    steps to take:
    
    1. Stop constant reorganizing! If a new product or a new management
       directive comes down the line, don't reorganize a whole plant as
       has been done in Phoenix. Move key players around to DEC's 
       advantage remembering that groups as an entity are reluctant to
       change.
    
    2. Eliminate dotted line responsibilites. This can and should be done.
       Management reporting to two or more upline managers aggravates the
       political handholding, the "good ole boy" network that no-one
       cares to discuss except under their breath at the "waterfountain".
    
    3. Give management unilateral decision-making responsibilites.
       Give them the power to sink or swim not just the illusion.
    
    4. Hold management accountable for their actions. If they produce
       then promote on that basis ONLY.
    
       Ken Olson stated in Tuscon that he was unhappy with how slowly
       Digital was turning itself around this year. The push to change 
       started off with a bang ( a directive from Executive management),
       and then was ground to a beaurocratic halt by middle management 
       who couldn't hold all there handholding meetings and get all
       their proper BUY-IN'S and at the same time keep up with Ken's
       expected pace!
    
    I think Ken Olson's visit to the Tuscon Sales office produced some 
    insight into the real DEC that may or may not be hidden from the
    executives in the company. Visits to other sales offices as well as
    manufacturing plants will ensure to executive level management that
    their directives are reaching implementation level at full strength.
    A sanity check if you will. 
    
    Obviously I believe DEC needs to start working on our biggest
    bottleneck, middle management. Let them go to work and prove
    themselves.
    
    Ray Kellogg
    
    
    

re: .0

I've a fair amount of respect for our management, so these comments
should be taken in that context:
    
>    It is my understanding that the Executive Committee has chartered
>    a program to be developed that will increase employee involvement,
>    presumably in growing, developing, building and directing our company
>    and the changes needed to take us into the future.

The problem starts here.  What do you mean by "my understanding" ...
wasn't it clear?  Does "presumably" mean that we have nothing to
go on but the vague phrase "increase employee involvement"?.

Let's see the memo or minutes that are behind this.  That's the
first place to start in increasing involvement; better communications.

I hope that we're not going to hear about metrics, suggestion boxes,
and rewards;  the creation of those are usually symptoms of an inability
to address the problem in a straightforward manner.

Rule one:

	Manage by walking about

Rule two:

	Talk to the workers

Rule three:

	Share the context (tell us what the heck is going on, in
	plain talk)

Rule four:

	Educate employees by exposing them to raw information and
	real customers, and frontline sales, and especially to
	NON-customers --- get rid of the filters and summaries and
	directed conclusions

Rule five:

	Eschew "reports", white papers, committees, etc.
	Build real teams and empower them to act with a
	minimum of interference and overhead.

	Include the young and the old; the wise and the
	determined, the risk-see'ers and the risk-seekers

Rule six:

	There is a line that flows from innovator-builder-
	manufacturer-sales-admin-services to customers.

	Make sure everyone in that line really understands
	customers and products.  Make sure that understanding
	is fresh (in our industry, freshness lasts about 36
	months).  Put the folks who aren't into different,
	less critical capacities and measure them by the
	extent to which they facilitate and serve, not by
	their contribution to vision/direction/decision/or
	direct profits.  These people are the bane of those
	who woul improve our fortunes.

We have many decision makers who do not understand what an HSC
or a VAXcluster is.  Who think that Unix/Risc decisions are based
on what they read in Digital News, Digital Review, and ComputerWorld.
Who have only a faint understanding of customers, never having
been one.  Who think that Harvard/Wharton MBAs understand our
business (Computer Science itself is only a decade old in University
curriculae; the business of intellectual property is only just
beginning to catch-up).


A "program to increase involvement"???   All those who can see
the problem please raise their hands.

The involvement is there for the asking, if managers would just
see to it that the opportunities for involvement are returned to
individual contribiutors.

- greg

    
    Ref: .4
    
    Since the person putting together this program has not elected to start
    a topic for feedback, I empowered myself to do so, extending my
    invitation to everyone in this conference who might like to list their
    ideas in this topic accordingly. 
    
    This being the case, it would not seem appropriate for me to show the
    entire memo sent to me (and writer), but just the pertinent part.  I
    quote: 
    
    "I have been asked by the Executive Committee to put together an
    employee involvement program, the spirit of which is captured nicely
    in your memo." (an encapsulated summary per my base note from my memo).
    
    "I...would like to contact you as the program design takes shape
    for some discussion."
    
    Where this program goes and what changes really happen remains to be
    seen. Suffice it to say that I see this as a real situation to input,
    and I extend that to anyone reading this topic.  I certainly am going
    to input my 2 cents. 
    
    More suggestions:
    
    Institute monetary awards for employee ideas and suggestions that
    increase productivity, cut costs, or increase customers, margin
    and/or revenue.
    
    Institute the dynamics of what makes a husband and wife partnership
    work into Digital where there is true partnership between managers and
    employees.  Some things might be: one spouse doesn't give unilateral
    performance appraisals to the other, reminiscent of grade school report
    cards.  Either make the vehicle two way (employees appraising
    leadership and management qualities that go into the manager's
    personnel file), or better, eliminate written performance appraisals
    altogether in favor of a real ongoing "we're in this together"
    partnership relationship.  Further dynamics of successful marriages
    between spouses are in shared values and standards.  Do Digital's
    127,000 employees truly know, understand and practice our written
    philosophies and values and standards, with no double standard for
    managers versus employees, or are we like 127,000 personal computers
    with different operating systems, values, standards and protocols.
    Institute an employee relations group, separate from personnel, whose
    job it is to constantly present and reinforc to all employees and
    managers, in-person, regularly, the values, vision and standards by
    which Digital follows as a philosophy, different from other businesses,
    unique in how we treat employees and customers.  How many employees can
    name just three of our stated, written philosophy values?  Who is
    speaking regularly, in-person to all employees, firing the soul,
    inspiring and leading to unquestioned loyalty in participitaing in
    building an even greater Digital of the future? 
    
    Another suggestion might be to fix all salaries at fixed points,
    dependent on job, for all managers and employees, and award all
    additional income as bonuses based on the accomplishment of goals and
    leadership metrics.  Let the group decide who gets what from the
    monies awarded for bonus monies for their group, further promoting
    the espirit de corps.
    
    How about making every employee an empowered employee and an empowered
    owner?  Arrange to sell Digital to the employees via an ESOP program.
    

    Appoint qualified women and minorities into top management in the
    corporation.  Get rid of the requisite "old boy" connection and
    recognize talent.
    
    thanks for asking,
    Marge

    Re: .5
    
    I couldn't figure out whether the last 3 or 4 paragraphs were your own,
    or belonged to the person who contacted you.  But I like the ideas on :
    
    -> 2 way Performance Appraisals.  I was myself discussing this with a
       colleague some weeks back.  This would be a real help in getting this
       company back to shape.  I wouldn't eliminate the PA though.
    -> separate Empl Relations group that regularly holds info sessions on
       Digital's values, philosophy, principles and Goals.
    -> On the idea of employee ownership, I would settle for simple
       "profit-sharing".
    
    - mayank

    The way I see it is this:  If a company really wants its employees
    to "get involved", then give each and every employee the incentive
    to do so.  In Field Service, Sales and Software make EVERYONE eligable
    for the major excellence awards (i.e.: Challenge of Excellence,
    DECathlon).  When many workers within a department are ineligable
    for whatever reason and they see others they work with on a daily
    basis going on awards trips, it breeds resentment.  Workers who
    reap the benefits are going to be more apt to get involved and present
    ideas for the company's benefit.  
    
    I liked the idea mentioned in a previous reply.  Measure the value
    of the suggested idea, if it saves the company X dollars, pay the
    employee who suggested it a percentage of that savings.  The telephone
    company does this already - actually pays employees for their money
    saving ideas based upon the dollar amount saved yearly by the company.
    

       
       
       RE: .4
       
       	I have to agree with Greg.. Giving out cash and trips is nice,
       but lets get serious about our future. Giving people cash isn't
       going to sell alot more products, getting them involved in helping
       our customers will.
       
       						mike

    I don't think profit sharing or rewards for good suggestions work for
    a large company. Even an employee involvement program is an admission
    that Digital's employees have lost their involvement and are searching
    for solutions. Suggestion boxs are of minimal impact to fixing large
    corporate problems. What's really needed is to down size Digital into
    several small companies where everyone in each company can clearly
    see their business goals and feel that they're contributing toward
    reaching those goals.
    
    -George

>    		      What's really needed is to down size Digital into
>    several small companies where everyone in each company can clearly
>    see their business goals and feel that they're contributing toward
>    reaching those goals.
    
    Isn't that what we've done with Product Business Units (PBUs)?

    Re .6, and others.  Come on Marge, Give me a break on the "qualified
    women and minorities" thing.  This is not the 60's or 70's.  If
    anything they are getting extra breaks.  If you want to hear about
    real lack of opportunity and wasted skills, talk to some over-55
    males.
    
    Meanwhile, I strongly favor profit sharing and a SUggestion Awards
    program that pays real money.  I can remember one reward in IBM
    in the 60's that paid $118K.  There were many others in the >$10K
    range then.  Imagine what they are doing now.

    What I want isnt stock options (altho that would be nice too).
    
    What I want, simply, is for Digital to sell more and more sw/hw
    every year, so that we can all get huge raises. I think we have
    the right products, but we have difficulty selling them.....
    
    DIGITAL SHOULD *ADVERTISE*. More often, and more aggressively.
    I read a lot of technical journals. Our ads, the few Ive seen,
    are very vague. 
    
    IMO, it seems a great deal of our strategy depends on the customer
    coming to US on his own initiative. We need to expand the awareness
    of the general public. Pitch the virtues of our clustering, networking
    and desktop technologies. Issue bold statements about the horsepower
    in a MIPS based DECstation "blowing the doors" off the competition...
    
    In other words...make our enthusiasm contagious. 

We've seen some fairly general suggestions so far. Here's a very
specific one that's close to my heart:

	Break SQM's stranglehold on the design of software
	installation manuals.


Here's a summary of the benefits and what I believe should happen:

We improve our service and image to the customer for no extra cost and
for many savings both in calls to the CSCs, in writing time and
effort, and in sheer weight of paper. How? By making SQM accountable
to their clients (us), make their rules flexible enough to accomodate
improved methods of documentation, and make their rules open to
discussion and change as would be a DEC standard.


Here's more detail:

SQM's charter is one we need: maintain systems quality and consistency
across our product line. SQM's method is totally wrong: apply a
bureaucratic list of rules and regulations without exception or
modification. 

SQM's rules and checklists for Installation Manuals are readily
publicised, but they have no signatories, their updates are not opened
for review and comment by the community to which they apply, and the
approved route for communications to SQM is not through individuals
but through an anonymous mailstop. They are not DEC standards, but are
applied as law. SQM are not accountable, not open to pursuasion, and
not able to be flexible (the individuals concerned are okay: it's the
rules they HAVE to apply that are the problem).

This may appear a trivial point. 

Yet, 60% of calls to CSCs are on installation problems and each call
costs $100. Many comms software products are rated at 1-2 DAYS for
installation even by Field Service, with all of the attendant cost in
dollars and in the image of our products to the customers. All this
because SQM rules force docs to be too long, too complex, and 
inappropriate to the customer's needs. 

Writers know how to solve this, have pushed solutions for specific
products for years, but the rigidity of SQM rules don't allow for
change: writers have pushed-back, but to no avail - I don't see any
alternative but for the push to come from above.

I speak from experience in this area and would be happy (if that's
the word!) to expand on the points I've simply touched on here.

Regards,

Mick

	If you want to increase involvement you have to do more than
	say you want it. You have to show that you appreciate the
	contributions that that involvement makes.

	I once had a boss, not at DEC, who said that any thanks that
	doesn't show up in your paycheck is meaningless. While I don't
	agree with that 100% there is some truth there. I think that
	people have to be shown in concrete ways that their efforts
	are appreciated. Some of this is easy, though costly, to do.

	For example, right now things are tough for DEC but there will
	be some good times too. When they come, if management would
	try above average (in industry terms) raises so that employees
	could feel that they too are sharing in the work they've done
	in the hard times you'd see a lot less squawking at freezes in
	bad times. We've been doing above average work generating above
	average products and selling better than the average company
	for years. Perhaps it's time to think about above average pay
	during the good times. We're sharing the cost of the bad now.
	Why not let us share in the benefits of the good times?

	That's for the future though I guess.

	For the present there is still much that could be done. Profit
	sharing is a good way to do what I suggested above and doesn't
	cost much if it doesn't work. I know people who work at places
	where there is profit sharing and many of them really do try
	their hardest to make it work because they see in real terms
	what it means to them.

	A more wide spread RSOP would also be a help. I imagine that
	groups that get awards with a lunch or dinner would be as
	happy with a share or two or three in options as they would
	with a rubber chicken lunch. (I know I would.) The costs may
	be in line with that too. And it gives a feeling of ownership.
	"Here is a piece of the company whose value YOU raised."

	Real suggestion plans *do* work. They don't don't work everywhere
	but there is no reason that someone can't do a study and find
	out which ones work and which ones don't. I suspect though that
	the ones that work by-pass the management chain (so ideas don't
	get stolen) and give more than just a pat on the back for accepted
	suggestions.

			Alfred

    RE: .14

    Mick,

    In the future, I encourage sounding us out on ideas/recommendations rather 
    than making public attacks; you will find SQM more than willing to 
    listen to layered product feedback in areas such as installation guide 
    templates, etc.

    As an aside, these templates were developed in conjunction with
    documentation groups and were designed to serve as a uniform guide
    only; if there is specific areas that must be covered on a product
    specific basis, that's encouraged, however, anarchy and a "roll your
    own" approach is discouraged.

    Someone from SQM will be in touch with you shortly.  I expect that
    you'll be able to back up your statements with specific examples
    of problems and recommendations for areas of improvement.  I'm sure
    that you'll be glad to accept responsibility of working with us to help
    eliminate "60% of calls to the CSCs".

    -John

re: .6:
    
:        Appoint qualified women and minorities into top management in the
:    corporation.  
    
 		Oh well.  So much for Equal Employment Opportunity.
    		The above statement is sexist and racist.   It
	    	discriminates on the basis of sex and on the basis of
    		race.   Highly illegal.
    
    		Try this one on for size.  I think we'll all find it
    		a bit more palatable:
    
    		"Hire qualified _people_ into top management in the
    		corporation."
    
:    Get rid of the requisite "old boy" connection and
:    recognize talent.
    
    		Yes.   Absolutely.   
    
    -Don-

    Right on .17 -- it's the truth.  I will support Marge though on
    her comments about the "Old Boy" network.  I don't think there's
    been a new face in the Customer Services Hierarchy in the past 20
    years.  Is the annual Allegash Canoe Trip and running around the
    camp in your underwear still obligatory?  (I'm in trouble now...)L

    
    The following applies to software development only...
    
    	One of the thing that Digital can do to improve the employee
    involvement is to encourage employee to develop software for DEC
    systems (Unix,VMS). With the popularity of user interface designs and
    need for DECwindows based interface it will be benificial to Digital
    and the employee to bring new and innovative ways to design software
    interface.
    	One of the option would be to make EPP (Employee Purchase Program)
    VERY attractive for employees. I have heard that Apple gives their
    employee Mac's on loan. Once someone develops the software which is useful
    for Digital and passes it's acceptance test, Digital can buy or pay some 
    royalties. All this will have to be on employees time. I can understand 
    the complication of enforcing the policy on restricting no private 
    development at work time. However there are many benifits to Digital
    and to the employee.
    
    1. Increased awareness of Industry needs in employee.
    2. Financial benifit/Incentive to the employee.
    3. Digital increases it's available software base/applications.
    	(Won't it be nice to have good applications for DS3100 ??)
    
    Robert

    re .19

    What you do, Digital owns -- even, I believe, a patentable invention
    you conceived of on your own time. The concern has always been: employees
    must not be allowed to do something that competes with Digital.

    Unfortunately, when you work for a "full-service" vendor, that doesn't
    leave much, if anything.

    Let's say I wrote a programming book on my own time and with my own
    resources (like my laptop that I'm using right now). I think even then
    I need a corporate O.K., since no Digital employee can "publish"
    without prior approval.

    Correct me if I'm overstating the restrictions.


/Peters

    .20
    	Yes I know about DEC policies. However if top management really
    want to involve employees than policies like that can be changed.
    Also I do not mean to say that employees work for competition, rather
    develop software that helps DEC selling solutions to customers (may be
    that could be the condition SOFTWARE FOR DEC only)
    	It does not have to compete with DEC. Look at shareware for PC,Macs etc.
    Having more choices does attrac customers. What if someone creates an 
    application that DEC already has ?? that should be OK because then 
    customers will have 2 choices!! Also DEC still can maintain the software 
    ownership, give some reward to the employee who develops the software and 
    make the process more appealing to the employee(loan of equipment etc.)
    
    Robert
    
    Robert

RE: .16

John,

Thanks for your reply. I've reread my original note (.14) and would
like to apologize for the parts that do come across as aggressive. I
appreciate your offer of contacts with someone from SQM. 

The one point I would like to make is about consultation with
Documentation groups when formulating SQM guidelines. I'm sorry, but
that consultation didn't, so far as I'm aware, reach us here in WACE.

If you're interested, I'll document for you the progress of events
when I tried to put forward an alternative approach to that embodied
in the SQM guidelines. 

I'll look forward to putting through suggestions to you in the future.

Mick

    An irony that has always bothered me is that when we buy capital
    equipment it is not uncommon to also buy a service contract with
    it that might run to 10% of the purchase price every year for as
    long as we own the machine yet when we 'buy' an employee we don't
    plan for 'the service contract'.   Now, we buy these service contracts
    with nary a blink so why not do the same for our human resource
    investments.
    
    One reason for this irony is that small incremental investments
    go through the same red tape as big ones.  So if I want a piece
    of equipment or training (a human resource investment) there is
    an institutionalized block in my path.   This discourages involvement
    at the level of an individual contribution.    What I propose is
    a method for removing this block.
    
    Let's suppose that coming out of this wage freeze we distribute
    the raises (or some portion of them)  as lump sums to individuals.
    They can spend this money (internally?) any way they see fit on any 
    activity they wish.   They could pool their lump with other lumps
    to accomplish team related activities.   The company could mandate
    that 10% of every employees time be spent nurturing their lump.
    
    Most importantly, absolutely no management approval or financial
    justification need be part of the process.  After all, as a
    'human' investment I am going to cause this company to spend maybe
    a million dollars on me during my career and it seems I should be
    trusted to do the right thing with a small percentage of that
    investment.
    
    Each and every year, all employees could be 'trusted' with a sum
    based on their salary.   This might encourage employee involvement
    and inovation at the level where it needs to be, next to the work!
    

   > < Note 892.23 by ISLNDS::BAHLIN >
   >                         -< "Trust Me" dollars >-
                                         
   >   The company could mandate         
   > that 10% of every employees time be spent nurturing their lump.
                                         
                                         
    "Whaddya mean, what am I doin'.  I'm nurturing me lump!"
                                    
    Mike ~/~

    
    1. Profit sharing. [Let's face it: stock options never filter down
       to the grunts in the trenches]. 
    2. Concise, annual evaluations of managers by employees that will
       be actually read by Personnel and taken into account. Employees
       would be required to back up any claims with documentation.
    3. Less hysteria about "value added." Often, "value added" means
       so many people being involved in a project that the project winds
       up being delayed, crippled, or even destroyed.
    4. *Never* assigning responsibility without the authority to make
        something happen. Nothing is worse for morale.
    
    
    KBS
                                                      

    Re: .26
    
    Three?  I can't even name one!  (And I do know about Roseanne
    Giordano.)
    
    I'm with Marge on this, though the benefits of such a move aren't
    something that bean counters would understand.
    
    				Steve

    But back to Employee Involvement.  Employee purchase program is a 
    quiet joke.  I have customers that have better discount rates.
    
    The last mailer from Employee purchase looks as if we are a PC company.
    (I sell/support solutions based upon our core systems, not PCs, I
     integrate PCs into our solutions... There is a difference.)
    
    Every Employee of Digital who has a DESK should have a
    VAXstation/DECstation and know how to use it for their job. 
    (We're in the office automation business!) 
    
    All Service people should have a VAXstation at home to experiment
    and learn with.
    
    We sell computer solutions, integrated offices, workstations,
    transaction processing systems, and state of the art networks.
    
    I think it's a crime that the only computer I have access to
    to with privileges is shared with 180 other software specialists.
    (I'm in a Field office not engineering)
    
    You want us involved?  Get us some equipment to learn on, automate our
    jobs on, grow our expertise on.  This helps the Customers, Employees,
    and Sales.  Our best salesman is someone who's using the product(s)
    the customer wants.
    
    
    On another note:
    
    Make the statement "That's not my job." grounds for an instant
    dismissal.
    
    It should be in everyone's job description do whatever is needed
    at the time!
    
    Customers are why we're here.  All channels should be focused twords
    dropping everything and making them satisfied if there is ever a 
    problem.  This should be part of every employee's goalsheet; How
    many times this year have you solved a customer's problem?  If you
    haven't solved any customer's problems, just what are you doing?
    

    Re: .26
    
    Quick!  Name three of the top managers in Digital who are:
    
    1.  French
    2.  Scots 
    3.  South American
    4.  Irish         
    5.  etc           
    6.  Of Middle Eastern extraction
    7.  Have greeny/brown eyes
    8.  Are bald      
    9.  Are Muslim/Hindu/Catholic/Protestant/Mormon etc etc
    10. Are over 55   
    11. Are under 55  
    12. Are over 5ft 10ins tall  (<- new term here - APART-HEIGHT)
                      
    etc etc etc ad nauseam
                      
    When is a minority not a minority?
    
    Why not just promote on merit?  Where's the evidence that Digital
    doesn't (well, apart from my own case, that is!!!!!)?
                        
    Mike              
                      
    

    re: .29
    
    Although I don't believe that statistics make a prima facie case
    of discrimination, I also don't believe that Rose Ann is the only
    qualified woman in the corporation to be a vice president.  Digital
    is making progress in the middle management ranks, but I certainly
    don't think it's unfair to point out that more progress can and
    should be made.  It would be beneficial for you to read our
    Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity policies and understand
    how management is expected to implement them.
    
    re: .26
    
    Rose Ann Giordano, Ilene Jacobs,  Carol Burke and Roberta Bernstein,
    although the last three aren't line positions and I have doubts
    about whether the jobs of the latter two qualify as "senior
    management".
    
    There is no doubt that we have room to improve.
    
    Al
    

    
    Long ago, families decided who a child's spouse was going to be; these
    partnerships between man and wife tended not to work very well since
    people want a "say" in who they marry.  In totalitarian governments, an
    elite few decided who would fill all the policital leadership
    management jobs; as we all can read, such countries have stagnated and
    the partnership between the citizens of such a country and their
    government tended not to work very well since people want a "say" in
    who will lead them -- look at how the current communistic countries
    are now moving toward democracy.
    
    When looking at any organization, in fact, one might deduce that
    if people get an equal say in picking the leader they are to follow,
    they will tend to provide optimum employee involvement, commitment
    and loyalty, following the leadership of their chosen leader.
    
    How about this for trying "something new" --
    
    Change the hiring policies.  When a manager position becomes available
    for a new leader, have all the direct report employees plus the
    "hiring manager" all jointly and equally, determine the desired
    qualities and job metrics (which would be listed in the posted job
    req), all equally determine who will be interviewed, all equally
    interview each of the selected candidates chosen for interviews,
    and all equally decide (on a consensus or majority) who will get
    the job of being the new manager for that given group, with one
    equal vote for every direct report with the hiring manager having
    no more power than his or her one equal vote.
    
    If you had a "say" in chosing your leader, wouldn't you be more
    inclined to follow his or her direction and leadership, providing
    optimum employee involvement, commitment and loyalty?
    
    And --
    
    If you had an equal "say" in deciding whether you would either continue
    to follow your leader or replace the current one with a new one, wouldn't
    you continue to provide optimum involvement, commitment and loyalty
    toward building a more successful Digital into the future?
    
    How about once a year, both the manager's manager, and all the direct
    reports of a manager, write a performance review on the manager,
    measuring leadership, support and development factors along with
    business metrics, all of which would go in the manager's personnel
    folder.  And after they were done, have the manager's manager and
    all direct reports have an annual closed door meeting to jointly
    discuss all those metrics, and then take a "vote of confidence"
    with one equal vote for everyone, arriving at a decision to either
    retain and follow their chosen leader/manager for another year,
    or to replace him or her with a new leader.  If the decision was
    to replace, policy would require the current manager to seek either
    a individual contributor position or a leadership position with
    another Digital group seeking a manager leader.  Wouldn't this keep
    out professional bureaucrats who put self-aggrandizement, personal
    agenda, greed and ambitions over the interests of Digital overall
    and the people Digital pays him to lead and develop to the attainment
    of goals AND DEVELOPMENT TOWARD ENSURING THE FUTURE SUCCESS OF DIGITAL?
    
    As we enter the next decade and century, into a rapidly shrinking,
    increasingly competitive world, with technology changing at an
    accelerating rate, does it not intuitively make sense that for the
    future, people who want to become managers do so more as a "calling"
    where they want to "make their people" successful, and as a result, in
    turn, achieve higher levels of overall success for our corporation, and
    where the manager's success is a result and reflection of his or her
    leadership -- this as opposed to managers who look only for "their
    employees" to "make me, your manager" successful, first and foremost,
    with employee involvement in building, growing and developing a more
    successful Digital into the future taking secondary interest to
    personal ambition?
    
    Just another thought and idea for increasing employee involvement.
    

    
    	     Re: .-1 and performance reviews on managers
    
         I've been going over and over in my mind for six weeks on
    how to enter a note in this conference about the subject of
    bad managers. Here goes....
    
    Many entries in this conference talk about "downsizing", "deadwood",
    "no output division", "they *are* out to get you", etc. The majority
    of these topics talk about problems with management overall and
    many times managers in particular. 
    
    Almost ALL of the responses to "bad managers" is "cut and run"
    or "find another job (within DIGITAL or without)", "get out from
    under them", etc.
    
    I don't see much about CORRECT THE PROBLEM AT THE SOURCE. It seems
    to me that 1 bad manager has more negative effects on the company
    than almost any other single employee. I for one think it's time
    this company works the issue of these problem managers. Stop having 
    to go elsewhere because you're under incompetent or shoddy management.
    
    This goes for the "old boy network" and "empire builders" etc. All
    those people who obviously care for their own hide more than
    this company's.
    
    It's time this company grew up and really moved into the '90s. The
    world has enough examples of incompetency and mismanagement (look
    at HUD, S&Ls, etc.) The keyword here is MANAGEMENT. Fix it.
    
    There. Now it's in the fire for sure. Nothing worse than turning
    "management" against you.
    							Warren
    
    
    

       
       
       	RE: .32
       
       	As much as I agree, it's not gonna happen without alot of people
       in the ranks taking a beating and I don't see anyone jumping up to
       take them on. Personnel won't help them. (at least not
       enthusiastically)
       
       	The reality is that it's easier on your stress level and
       definately on your career to just blow doors and find a better
       place.
       
       						mike

I heartily agree that performance appraisals for managers would go a LONG way
toward making employees exceptionally dedicated to the company's success. 
However, I also agree with Mike Foley et. al.   Whoever steps out and tries to
change the system in this way is gonna take the beating of their life.  Anybody
wanna be a martyr for a cause?  More than likely, it'd be the end of your
career at Digital.

I moved from Software Engineering out into the field about 1 year, 6 months, 7
days, 6 hours, 8 minutes, and 33 seconds ago... give or take a few minutes. ;-)
I haven't been out here that long, and already I've seen enough cases of power
abuse, disregard for employees, and petty retaliation to make everyone who
believes in 'corporate culture' ill for a week.  Guys who went to personnel
with a problem and found their future performance reviews went downhill fast. 
A guy who's been stuck out at a remote customer site since he started with DEC,
who sees his manager once a year, and has had two weeks training since he
started with the company three years ago.  Field Service guys who were told
that FS was being phased out and that they should look for jobs with the CSC in
Colorado... who receive an offer and are told by their DM that they WON'T be
allowed to leave.  The list goes on and on, and I'm SURE that I haven't even
seen the tip of the iceburg.

I think I lucked up on managers, or I wouldn't be entering this note.  My
manager does TRY to do what's right.  But some others that I've met would NEVER
DARE to enter a note like this.  It'd be career suicide.  (Come to think of it,
it's probably pretty stupid of ME to enter this.  I'm STILL in the field...)

Just about anybody who works in the field will agree that the worker bees need
some way to provide feedback on how their manager is doing, but how's it ever
going to come about?  Martyrs don't feed their families, you know.  

John

Re: .32

How do you 'measure' a bad manager? It seems anymore that everything is numbers
driven... you could have the *WORST* manager in the world but if that manager
is 'making his numbers' then those up above will praise, reward and promote
that manager for doing so well. On the other side of the same coin you could
have a *GREAT* manager, a person with true leadership capability and for some
reason they miss the mark by 1% or 2% and they are deemed ordinary or even
inadequate.

I've known a few *GREAT* leaders (with a job title of manager) that threw in
the towel and left their spots for the number jockeys to fill.

Pity isn't it?

Lee

    Want to get employees involved? Make it worth their while! Give
    management a free hand to bestow zero raises on the deadwood, and as much
    as can be afforded to the superstars, with an infinite range in
    between. This has the added benefit of encouraging the deadwood to
    seek employment elsewhere.
    
    Want another idea? Matrix management! For all its confusion and
    inefficiency, matrix management has one gigantic plus; it lets good
    ideas rise out of the confusion and rally support. The people who
    generate these ideas and tend them diligently can see them take hold
    and change the way things are done. Matrix management is alive and well
    in the core engineering groups, and it seems that people in these
    groups are generally happy. The smaller and more remote field sites
    tend to fall into hierarchic management, and people in these groups are
    generally grumpy. I know this is a gross generalization, but think
    about the inputs to this conference and see if it doesn't seem to be
    so.
    
    Pay that is truly commensurate with performance, and the chance to
    make the right things happen - those are the things that will attract
    and motivate the kind of people that I want to work in _my_ company.

re .35

>How do you 'measure' a bad manager? It seems anymore that everything is numbers
>driven... you could have the *WORST* manager in the world but if that manager
>is 'making his numbers' then those up above will praise, reward and promote
>that manager for doing so well. On the other side of the same coin you could
>have a *GREAT* manager, a person with true leadership capability and for some
>reason they miss the mark by 1% or 2% and they are deemed ordinary or even
>inadequate.
>
>I've known a few *GREAT* leaders (with a job title of manager) that threw in
>the towel and left their spots for the number jockeys to fill.
>
>Pity isn't it?

When the only thing that the head wants fed from the body are metrics, you get
this pitiful state. When the head demonstrates that it values "people skills"
at least as much as financial metrics, then things will start to change.

As far as the "two weeks of training in 3 years" mentioned elsewhere, as a UM
I got to the point where I just sent people to training and dealt with the
ensuing financial problem as a separate issue. ("You can go on vacation OR
you can go to training" is another famous line.)

/petes

    Money from employee training should be taken out of a corporate
    CC, not the employee's cost center. Whenever there is cutback in
    the budget or an overrun, training money is always one the first
    line items axed. 

    Using a VP's number, not mine, require 80 hours of training a
    year and put the number available and used on the paycheck.
    Track the numbers, and when people don't use the time, follow up
    with the CC manager. 

    mike

Re: My note on SQM and Installation Documentation (892.14)

In addition to my apology of 892.22, I would like to pass on some
points of record to make it clear that I have no argument with
individuals in SQM nor with their goal: product quality, product
consistency.

To be specific, SQM allowed me to go forward with an Installation
Documentation design that contravened their Guidelines in 1987.
European SQM in Reading was highly sympathetic to the argument I made
about the benefits of my design and raised a form that allowed this
to happen, as US SQM had indicated was required.

I have nothing but praise for the flexibility and open-mindedness
of the SQM people on that project.

My issue is specifically with the appropriateness of the basic SQM
Guidelines and template for Installation documentation. I believe
these Guidelines to be an impediment to, rather than a help in,
producing customer oriented and elegantly designed solutions in
documentation. What I would like to see begin is a debate around this
issue. 

My original note failed in focussing on this and gave an incorrect
impression of my experience with individuals in SQM in the past -
hence this note in correction.

Mick 

RE: .39

    Mick, 

    Thanks for the note of clarification. 

    We welcome your input, and will set up a meeting where we can collect
    your recommendations, and ensure they are fed into the IG Template
    review process. 

    For clarification, the SQM IG Template is really the CUP template. SQM
    are represented on the CUP review board that owns the template but are
    not the sole arbiter of the template. 


    Regards 

    Mike N 

    Having been with Digital for the last 12 years, I see problems that
    many large companies face. The one thing that is real strong, is
    the Good 'Ol boy network of management. I have never seen so many
    inept middle line managers in my life!! Not only CAN'T they manage
    PEOPLE, but they can't really do much else right either. Now I'm
    not for firing all of them, but I would do something with them to
    to bring in more $$$ for the company, instead of working on this
    Great Special Project in the Sky... Every time we  (Digital) have
    a money crisis, it comes from Field Service! Software and Sales
    still get to do what they've always been doing. Having great party's
    and such. Now I have no problem buckleing down to help the corporation,
    but when I have to take low/no raises (even though I've passed my
    T7) and was promoted, that I get 1%, that's a problem! 
    
    	I have also seen some excellent managers in Digital and have
    had the Privilige to work for them. I've seen,heard about and worked
    with some Excellent tech's/Support people. All I can say is let's
    try and keep these people instead of saying "Well We won't need
    your expertise any more" and let them leave DEC or make them xfer
    to a job that DOESN'T help Digital. Just because the "Light is ON"
    doesn't mean the system isn't broke!! I love working for DEC, I
    just wish they'd see that they Light is strting to DIM....
    	
    Joe

    How many offices in Digital have the following wasteful situation?
    
    Several Software units and Sales units in one office managed at the 
    district level by out of town and even out of state district managers?
    
    We have had this situation for a number of years now, and the
    incredible duplication of people, equipment, supplies, etc is very
    wasteful.
    
    For example, each secretary (6 or 7) has a laser printer on their desk. 
    None of them are connected via terminal servers, they are all stand
    alone printers.  Everyone else in the office (30 - 40) must use *one*
    printer!  Each secretary reports upward to different districts,
    so no one person can make a decision on how to consolidate these
    resources.
    
    The process to get anything approved for the local
    office faces such a cross-functional, cross-geographical hurdle
    as to make the process not worth using, and a lot of things happen
    informally and "under the table", or not at all as in the previous
    example.  
    
    The visibility we have to these district managers is when there
    are problems.  We don't have the day-to-day visibility we need for
    any sort of recognition of our hard work.  This could probably be
    illustrated by the software excellence awards: 12 people from the
    other two offices and 1 from ours.  The decision for those awards
    (so rumor has it) was entirely made by the DM, who has been to this
    office - I could count them on one hand - times over the past year.
    
    There needs to be an assessment of this type of operation versus
    a "branch manager" type of approach where one person is in charge
    of and makes decisions for the local office - which includes *all*
    of the functions.  Each DM with people in that office should contribute
    some amount of money (and time) to empower local decision making
    regarding facility equipment, disposition of facility problems,
    and cross-functional conflicts. 
    
    This issue was raised to our area site team on their annual visit
    and is "being looked into".  Maybe things will change in another
    decade or so...  Meanwhile I hope this note will reach someone who
    can look at the situation from outside and also see if it is occuring
    in other offices.  It just seems like an incredible waste.
    
    Larry  

    1) Eliminate the short-sighted "cost center mentality". This myopia
    could mean disaster.
    
    2) While developing inter-departmental task forces to accomplish
    a project, draw a distinct and positive correlation between the
    outcome of the project and the amount of the raise. This would 
    develop teamwork rather than power struggles.
                                                
    3) Profit sharing is always nice!
    
    Kate
     

    Re: .32
>    Almost ALL of the responses to "bad managers" is "cut and run"
>    or "find another job (within DIGITAL or without)", "get out from
>    under them", etc.
>    I don't see much about CORRECT THE PROBLEM AT THE SOURCE.
    
    AMEN.  That is exactly the defeatist response that one finds over and
    over again... May be it is understandable because of the hectic nature
    of today's life - its possible that people do not have the time to sit 
    down and reflect upon the basic values and principles of human dignity, 
    relationships, work ethics, etc.
    
    Come on, face it people (all those who want to run): how long can you
    keep running and hiding??  Don't you think if something is not done to
    correct the disease (instead of treating the symptoms, as sugggested)
    we may find this company filled with such *bad* managers (and then you
    won't have a place to run) ?  
    
    Especially when Digital (and other US companies) is entering into this 
    crazy race with global competition heating up and the speedometer going 
    crazy, the company needs to cherish and nurture its most valuable asset: 
    ITS WORKER BEES !!!  And how do you do that ? by covering up its most
    incompetent (in terms of people skills) managers ?? or really taking
    action against them ??
    
    Mike Foley and others: suppose the top mgmt shows publicly how it won't
    tolerate *bad* managers and fires a bunch of them, don't you think the
    employees would feel safer and not want to 'cut and run' ??  The
    positive effects would be pervasive throughout the company.  This does
    require EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT through 2-way PAs as noted before.
    
    Re: .33
>   	The reality is that it's easier on your stress level and
>       definately on your career to just blow doors and find a better
>       place.
    
    But its not better for YOU and the COMPANY in the LONNNNGGG run...
    (actually even in the short run its not benefitting the company: if you
    are a valuable, highly productive employee, does it benefit the company
    to have you 'cut and run' from a position where you have been
    contributing heavily ??)
           
    Re: .34
>   I've seen enough cases of power
>   abuse, disregard for employees, and petty retaliation to make everyone who
>   believes in 'corporate culture' ill for a week.

    KO believes in corporate culture, right ??  Let's save our President
    from getting sick for a WEEK...
    
    Re: .35
>   How do you 'measure' a bad manager?
    
    Easy!!  Satisfaction, motivation, enthusiasm, turnover and productivity
    levels in a manager's direct reports.  A *good* manager is not one who
    is just SUGAR and HONEY, but one who can truly *motivate* by using people
    skills.
    
    Re: .36
>   Give management a free hand to bestow zero raises on the deadwood, and as 
    > much as can be afforded to the superstars, with an infinite range in
>    between. This has the added benefit of encouraging the deadwood to
>    seek employment elsewhere.
    
    Boy oh boy, you really must think you are a superstar..  you are
    suggesting exactly what the *bad* managers want.  Wait till you get
    under someone who does not value your work as much as how you fit
    *their* image.
    
    In conclusion,  EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT cannot come without employee
    empowerment, which cannot happen unless you have a say in how your
    *leader* is performing.
    
    I endorse the other ideas which also empower employees:
    
    1) Profit sharing.
    2) Training dollars set aside from the corp, not the CC.
    etc..
    

    Re: -.1:
    
>>   How do you 'measure' a bad manager?
>    
>    Easy!!  Satisfaction, motivation, enthusiasm, turnover and productivity
>    levels in a manager's direct reports.  A *good* manager is not one who
>    is just SUGAR and HONEY, but one who can truly *motivate* by using people
>    skills.
    
    I agree with everything EXCEPT the turnover.  It just isn't a valid way
    to measure satisfaction in a situation where the job market in the
    field is soft, or the people that quit are trying to make sure they
    don't burn their bridges so they leave a bunch of meaningless
    platitudes behind in the exit ineterview and never touch the REAL
    reasons, or they get buried in the "well our turnover is only n% and
    the industry is 2 or 3 or 4n% so we're doing GREAT."
    
    A better measure would be the number of people that QUIT WITHOUT
    QUITTING.  They stay in their job, but they stop being "superstars"
    that consistently go the extra mile and just become average.  And God
    help you with the ones that weren't superstars to begin with... 
    
    Someone in another note stated that a company's welfare was directly
    tied to the amount of overtime its employees were willing to
    contribute.  That's probably true, but there MUST be reciprocation. 
    Not just in salary, but in appreciation.  Especially in appreciation.
    
    In my mind the simplest way to put it is "you want HAPPY customers,
    MAKE HAPPY EMPLOYEES!!!!!!!!"

Re: .44
    
>    AMEN.
>          ...     May be it is understandable because of the hectic nature
>    of today's life - its possible that people do not have the time to sit 
>    down and reflect upon the basic values and principles of human dignity, 
>    relationships, work ethics, etc.
    
    You hit one of my hot buttons, but I have got to add one thing - the
    time to talk about it after you have thought about it!  This "hectic
    nature" business is making everyone's world go crazy; or is it just
    me?  I could go on, but what good would it do?  I am beginning to
    get a better understanding of what "getting tired" really means.
    
    Fr 

     <<< Note 892.0 by ODIXIE::CARNELL "DTN 385-2901 David Carnell @ALF" >>>
                           -< EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT >-
>    Some have been asked to contribute suggestions and ideas, one being
>    myself.  I in turn invite everyone reading this conference to make
>    one REPLY containing an idea or detailed suggestion on exactly what
>    changes should take place that would facilitate and nurture such
>    an Employee Involvement Program that would make it REALLY work,
>    both for all employees and the corporation.
    
    
     Allow employees insight into the companies long-term goals;
    participation in long term training plans and implementation; allow
    cross-functional movement without artificial barriers ("you're in SWS,
    you can't move to Engineering"); pay incentive bonuses for good ideas
    that save the company money; don't treat employees as sheep to be
    hereded to where you want them to go.
    
    Andy Leslie
    CSSE Newbury, England

re:
    
:    >   How do you 'measure' a bad manager?
:    
:    Easy!!  Satisfaction, motivation, enthusiasm, turnover and productivity
:    levels in a manager's direct reports.  
:

    	I will grant that some measures of motivation and productivity
        would be appropriate measures of a manager.   However,
    satisifaction, enthusiasm, and turnover have absolutely no bearing
    on the success or failure of a group (and ultimately that group's
    manager).   There are just FAR too many people in this company who
    seem to think that their satisfaction is one of the reasons the
    company exists.  I submit that the company exists for one reason,
    and one reason only:  to return a profit to the shareholders.  
    Research has determined that there is no correlation _at_all_ between
    employee satisfaction and productivity of those employees.
    (In other words, the manager who is no good so-and-so, always yelling
    and screaming, pushing employees to the brink, and constantly creating
    adversity, may be just as effective as the manager whose employees
    are satisfied and enthusiastic.)  It just isn't an accurate assumption
    that a manager who is intensely disliked by his or her employees
    is an ineffective manager.
    
        A manager may have _very_ dissatisfied and unenthusiastic employees
    and still be a successful  (and "good") manager.  It's rare, and
    rather distasteful, but that's the way it is.
    
:        In conclusion,  EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT cannot come without employee
:    empowerment, which cannot happen unless you have a say in how your
:    *leader* is performing.
    
    	Firstly, most research on the subject shows that "Employee
    Involvement" does not necessarily lead to better corporate or
    organizational performance.  In many (most) cases, the organization
    which has implemented some sort of E.I. program (SGIA's, Quality
    of Work Life Groups, Suggestion Programs, etc...) has indeed realized
    some improvement in operational results, but those improvements
    are usually due to a corresponding change in the discipline applied
    to operations.  Also, many improvements are due to the "Hawthorne
    Effect", which, in summary, means that _any_ change or attention
    given to an organization will temporarily increase productivity
    and quality.  In the Hawthorne studies, the original hypothesis
    was that improving working conditions (by using brighter lighting,
    better ventilation, better work areas) would improve productivity.
    What happened was that the improved working conditions did in fact
    improve productivity.  However, productivity also improved (by the
    same amount) when working conditions were made _worse_!  It was
    determined that it wasn't the conditions themselves that improved
    productivity -- it was the extra attention given to the experimental
    group.

    Strangely enough, I _still_ believe that empowered and involved
    employees will benefit a company in the long run.  Even though it
    isn't specifically E.I. that improves operational results, any
    improvements due to the Hawthorne effect or other extraneous factors
    are still improvements, and are therefore desirable.
    
    Secondly, I believe that it would be ridiculous to formally review
    managers based on their employees' input.  I do believe that employees'
    input is valuable for the manager, so that the manager may improve
    his or her effectiveness, but I do not believe that a formal mechanism
    for using employees to review their manager would be a good thing.
    An effective manager is a leader, and by virtue of being a leader
    cannot possibly be "judged" or reviewed by those he or she is leading,
    because the employees cannot possibly understand or even see that
    manager's vision -- only the tangible results of turning the vision
    into reality through effective management.
    
    -Don-

    
    re: .44
    
    	The ideas you suggest sound neat, but if the guy who sticks
    	his neck out loses,  he loses his JOB !
    
    	Come on !  If you've got a bad manager, you've got two options
    	in the real world of Digital 1989:
    
    	1) Try to live with the situation, or
    	2) Leave.
    
    	Personnel doesn't like conflict, and can't be depended on to
    	be an ally.  The Open Door Policy is a one-way ticket to
    	the no-promotion (troublemaker) division.
    
    	Let's face it:  Managers want to hang on to their jobs/turf
    	as much as anyone.  Fuzzy-wuzzy Digital goals and ideals go
    	out the window in a turf battle, and the line-employees
    	generally lose.
    
    	I don't mean to indicate that this is all a horrid mess.  There
    	ARE places to go in Digital if you have a bad manager.
    
    	I just think that you've got to look past the platitudes and
    	look squarely at reality...
    
    
    	Steve H

    >Re. How do you 'measure' a manager?
    
    At I*M, and several other companies, the people manged by an individual
    review their bosses' performance yearly. One bad review from the
    majority of the people, you're on warning, and had better get your
    stuff together. Two bad reviews in a row, you're outta there!
    
    This method keeps the bitchers and whiners from destroying a fair or
    good manager, and allows higher level management to get a view from
    underneath of  their staff's performance. Remember, Management 101,
    "Management is getting things done through the efforts of others",
    so some companies check on this....
    
    I know of two instances where managers were relieved of their
    positions, and put into positions that better fit their talents.
    
    Bill

    I really liked the list in reply 4 ( ?) by G.Robert, and would add :

    Require that all internal management projects involve people whose
    jobs are going to be directly changed by the project.

    For a professional project leader it's simply elementary that you
    get a reference group that can check and input to the design.

    Over several years I've seen several projects in FS, now Customer 
    Services. All were either total or half failures. The most obvious
    reason for it is that projects are done by managers that don't know in
    detail how things work.

    Few examples.


    Integrated service delivery. Need to say more ? 

    SPR process in Europe was changed without any involvement of SPR admin
    nor Engineering. Support managers simply didn't know that Engineering
    has a precise SPR commitments.

    There is a project to change Engineering review boards. Inputs were
    gathered, non came from peons. The process is broken, everybody, even
    top managers know that and privately admit that, but nothing is
    changing.

    Recent CLD procedure changes are a disaster. 

    Involvement with the projects is the only really direct and efficient 
    way to involve people . Yes, this IS sharing power .
    Suggestion boxes, contribution boxes, money award, all this is balooney
    to me.

    So, could executive committee please REQUIRE that people affected by
    management projects get directly involved, "people" meaning not only
    line managers but explicilty employees ? 

    This is one of the ways to break old boys mentality.


    				respectfully submitted.

    						Wlodek

    Perhaps my glasses are Rose-Colored, but I don't see "Employee
    Involvement" in assisting Digital in "growing, developing, building,
    and directing" as being restricted to streamlining business and
    increases sales to boost profit margins.
    
    Can Digital not grow through Employee Involvement in activities
    that boost the Company's image and not it's bank account?
    
    "Employee Involvement" in my dictionary includes Chairing the United
    Way Campaign, organizing a site barbeque, playing left field on
    the Digital softball team, raising matching contributions for a
    local cause, and the list is endless.
    
    I have grown, developed, built, and directed myself toward the future
    by increasing my worth to Digital through my job assignments.  I have
    also capatalized on the opportunities that Digital has afforded
    me to get involved in activites that improve the "Self Imagine"
    as well as the "Company Image".  If Digital could not have spurred
    my personal growth, I would have gone elsewhere.  My coming to Digital
    over 4 years ago was for my benefit first; if I do my job and do
    it well, Digital becomes a beneficiary.
                                   
    "Involvement" expands beyond the daily work arena.
    
    Is Digital's vision of the future all dollars and cents or are we
    striving for employee and customer respect as the priceless Profit
    Margin?
    
    
    Sue Haight
    East Central Area

    In my own thoughts, here are what I see:
        We need to have management teams with global vision, at whatever
    echelon, not only at the ECO levels.  I have seen many supervisors
    and managers with very narrow interested in what is going in
    the world, what other competitors are doing and how successful they
    are. These managers just focuse on getting the job finish on schedule
    to fullfill their requirements, which is always the bottom line
    in our production phase.
    
     However, considering that most of our profits are coming from overseas
    (Europe and elsewhere) but our payroll and overheads are heavily spent
     in the USA.  We are not productive and are loosing our competitive
    edge to Japan and other industrialized countries.

    Why are we so inefficient and lagging behind other businesses? 
    The convenient way of pointing fingers is to blame the unions who demand
    higher wages, the other is managers who do not know how to manage
    or capitalize on their assets.  
    The first scapegoat is not applicable in Digital because we have
    no union to speak for the workers, the second, I am very skeptical with the
    promotional processes which promoting people because they have no other
    options or positions which foster their professional growth  except in 
    management.
    
    These people do not have adequate training, skills, experiences,
    aptitude, or even a vision to call themselves leaders to manage people
    effectively.  In engineering environment, we are expected to keep
    abreast of the technology changes, What is management expected to
    do?  
    Payroll is the company biggest investment and Do we get a high
    return on our investment?  If not, then besides salary and hiring
    freezes, the decision makers need to take a serious look at how
    to best utilize their work force from both individual contributors
    and managers to keep Digital afloat. 
    
    No one in this entry ever mentioned the projected demographics of
    the 90's which demands a completely new set of management tools
    to manage the work force of the future.  Are our manager prepared for
    it?  I doubt that they are if currently they are still having problems 
    managing our mostly homogemous workforce!
      
    
    
    
    
    
    

                    Employees find ways to make a difference

  Most employees occasionally wonder why the Company seems not to recognize 
  obvious ways to save money, improve quality or increase productivity. In many 
  cases the answer is simple. Management in general or specific managers may 
  not have the same perspective on a situation as the employees closest to it. 
  When employees are actively involved in problem solving and innovation, 
  opportunities to improve are less likely to be overlooked. 

  Employee involvement has always been an important part of Digital's success. 
  The Company is determined to make sure that our rapid growth in recent years 
  does not prevent employees' good ideas from being heard. Every organization 
  at Digital has committed to develop an employee involvement system to tap the 
  reservoir of employee ideas. 

  Alan Zimmerle is the senior consultant coordinating the employee involvement 
  effort at the corporate level.  That effort is called "You Make A Difference,"
  and it is intended to ensure that each organization receives the initial 
  training and support it needs to launch a successful employee involvement 
  system.                                                         

  "We are working with organizations throughout Digital to ensure that employee 
  involvement systems are in place," Alan said. "Some organizations already have
  systems in place, while others will start with simple 'idea' systems in the 
  next few weeks.  In all cases, we are committing ourselves to a journey -- 
  towards increased productivity, continuous quality improvement and reduced 
  costs."

  There has not been a lot of fanfare about employee involvement yet, but there 
  is no shortage of creative ideas. For example, a suggestion in Corporate 
  Payroll to consolidate the use of Federal Express should save more than 
  $50,000 over the next year. A saving of $96,000 is expected from the 
  suggestion to publish "European Sales Update" on VTX. A suggestion from 
  Software Sales Operations in GIA to simplify the software licensing process 
  should save $100,000. And it is estimated that a suggestion from South Central
  Area to use a single vendor for travel will save $1,000,000 a year.
  
 Hundreds of other valuable ideas have been submitted.  Over the past month, 
 each organization has started to communicate with employees to explain how 
 the employee involvement effort will be organized and implemented. The 
 implementation timeframes will be different for each organization. If you 
 have an idea and don't yet know what to do with it, you can send it to Employee
 Involvement @ CFO.

    My first suggestion is that they give an alternate (VAXmail) address
    for Employee Involvement ... 

    BTW, my note in .54 is completely from LIVEWIRE and as such may
    be freely re-posted or mail elsewhere with in Digital.
    
    			Alfred

RE: .55

Marge,

Try sending to MTS$::"CFO::Employee Involvement"

where MTS$ is a logical name that equates to some MTS Node in your area and
MRGATE (ie: "mtsnod::MRGATE::")

Look in the back of any Corporate Directory for more information.

Perry 

        Perry, that's good advice, but it only works if someone has been
        kind enough to figure out the name of a reliable MTS router that's
        running the MRGATE gateway software, and then has set up the
        logical name to point to it.  On some systems, that has been
        done, and on other systems, it hasn't, no matter what it says
        in the Digital telephone directory.
        
        Tom

Tom,

I think the idea in .57 was for YOU to define the logical to point
to some local MTS node.  i.e. in your login would be
$ DEFINE MTS$ mtsnod::MRGATE

Presuming you are resourceful enough to find such a node (DIS should
be able to help you), you should be all set up.

Kevin

    Did I miss the bit about the rewards for those saving the company vast
    amounts of money?
    
    - ���

        RE: .59 -- Give me a break.  The groups running the systems
        are supposed to take care of this, no one should have to do
        it for themselves.  That's the whole idea behind having MTS
        as a corporate Mail Transport Service, but on most nodes, you
        have to do battle to find out who's hiding behind the mask.
        
        RE: .60 -- No, you didn't miss it, it wasn't there.
        
        Tom

    re: .61
    
    How absolutely encouraging.
    
    - Andy ��� Leslie

Re: .61;
I was trying to give you a break.  I'm not here to defend DIS.  I have as
little to do with them as possible.  I was just trying to give pointers
on how to work around an apparent deficiency and get the job done.
In the case that you live on an independant workstation, or the folks
running your node/cluster are not responsive, the approach I gave will work
and get the job done.  I fully agree, it would be nice if we always had
all the loose ends taken care of for us, but it doesn't often happen like
that, does it?

Kevin

    
    
                   I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M

                     V  R  O     A L L - I N - 1   S Y S T E M

                                        Date:      24-Oct-1989 10:42am EDT
                                        From:      Employee Involvement @CFO 
                                                   EMPLOYEE.INVOLVEMENT AT A1 at BARTLE at CFO 
                                        Dept:      
                                        Tel No:    

TO:  Gail Koski                           ( KOSKI.GAIL AT A08 AT RELIEF AT VRO )


Subject: RE: Mail address

Gail:

Thank you for your inquiry; we apologize for the delay in responding.
The VAXmail address for employee involvement suggestions is:

                        SOCIAL::INVOLVEMENT

We'd appreciate it if you could post this. Thank you again for bringing
this issue to our attention.

Best regards,

Alessandra Kingsford
For Alan Zimmerle

> The implementation timeframes will be different for each organization. 

  Does this mean an organization can delay implementation indefinitely? I can
think of several reasons why an organization might not want to implement this
program, such as the fact that going over employees' suggestions is time-
consuming. Many suggestions that people think of are specific to a plant or
organization and therefore might not be considered if submitted to corporate
headquarters. 
  I think a suggestion program is an excellent idea; GE implemented it at least
25 years ago and some suggestions have saved over $100K a year.
  Why doesn't DEC simply call this a "suggestion program"? "Employee involve-
ment" sounds good but implies a wider scope than what will actually be imple-
mented at most sites.

    
    Doesn't IBM give you back 5% of the savings at the end of the first
    year for coming up with the suggestion?  I know that they used to
    5 or 6 years ago...
    
    Seems like the company can't lose with a policy like that...
    
    regards,
    
    steve

    Re:  .67
    
      < Doesn't IBM give you back 5% of the savings...>
    
    Used to be 10% in Canada.
    
    I remember a famous memory manufacturing suggestion which netted
    the employee a mere $75,000 in 1969 - that'd be about $500,000 today!
    
    Companies which reward suggestions by ratio leave themselves open
    to workies who make as much or more than senior management.  This
    is a no-no in a bureacracy.
    

    As a contributor to Social::Involvement my motivation is to have this
    company continue to be a leader, and to offer whatever suggestions I
    can to prevent further need for downsizing.
    
    I don't think this program has to have any "what's in it for me"
    considerations. If we can keep on growing and stay healthy that's
    reward enough.
    
    (flame off)
    
    My suggestions have been acknowledged quickly, The response indicated
    that they have been forwarded to appropriate groups. I hope they do
    what I intended (generate revenue). I urge others to send down their
    ideas.
    
    dick

    
    Ref: .69
    
    I too have had every suggestion acknowledged; and in fact, Alan
    Zimmerle, the driver of this program on behalf on the Executive
    Program, even flew down to meet with me to discuss some of the contents
    of some of my suggestions.  From the meeting, I believe that the
    Executives of Digital are serious about encouraging employee
    involvement and employee empowerment.
    
    And they are taking measures to ensure that all input into the
    corporate suggestion box is reviewed and considered.
    
    Any employee who truly wants a more successful Digital must get
    involved and be willing to put his or her thoughts and ideas to
    writing.  No longer can any employee say that "they" should do
    something, for in fact, they is us.  Each of us as a member of the
    Digital family, do and can make a difference -- but only if we get
    involved in bringing about constructive, positive change.
    
    I encourage everyone to share their thinking with the employee
    involvement focal point, speaking from your heart with passion, on what
    you believe would lead to a more successful Digital into the decades
    ahead.
    

>    < Note 892.69 by DNEAST::STARIE_DICK "I'd rather be skiing" >
>                    -< Continued Success is Reward Enough >-
>
>    As a contributor to Social::Involvement my motivation is to have this
>    company continue to be a leader, and to offer whatever suggestions I
>    can to prevent further need for downsizing.
>    
>    I don't think this program has to have any "what's in it for me"
>    considerations. If we can keep on growing and stay healthy that's
>    reward enough.
>    
>    (flame off)

I take it from your "(flame off)" that you are angry at others for having
    the gall to think that an extra reward is necessary for outstanding
    contributions.  I think that depends on how much the individual
    values their work as well as how they are motivated to do work.
    Apparently, you are more altruistic than some others, wanting to
    do good for the "company" (read: "stockholders") ahead of "yourself".  
    Some of us are apparently more "capitalistic" in our approach:  I will 
    work to the highest level of my ability and expect to be paid to that 
    level.  
                                                        
Although you say others should not have a "what's in it for me" attitude,
    you expect to be paid a salary, have job security, receive decent
    benefits, etc.  You want the company to share its' success with
    you, others just want a bigger slice of the success.
    
-paul        
    

    RE:.71
    
    Yes you are right that I am upset that others have a "Whats in it for
    me" attitude.
    
    I am not opposed to the concepts of rewards, They are fine if deserved.
    Pay for performance is a fantastic concept. What I am opposed to are
    folks who have to know "whats in it for me" BEFORE the will do
    something.  We also need to look around at the current state of affairs
    in the mini-computer industry. Wang down 6000 folks in less than a
    year.. etc. If we don't keep being inovative we may well join them!

    The United States was founded on the principle of "enlightened
    self-interest," that is, knowing what's best for you, then doing what's
    best for you.  I make no apologies for entering into a contract with my
    eyes open, and asking to know all the terms and conditions before doing
    so.  In the case of an employee suggestion program, I would make no
    apologies for asking "What's in it for me?" first.  If the answer is
    "Nothing but the increased profitability of the Corporation," I will
    take whatever action I feel is in my best interest, which may, or may
    not, involve submitting a suggestion.

    There is surely some mutually agreeable value attached to employee
    suggestions, as there is for any idea one person sells to another. 
    I'll spin three short tales to illustrate my point.  

    (1) A small manufacturer had purchased the trademark to a number of
    words he thought one day he'd use for products.  A lawyer called him up
    and offered $1,000 for one of them.  Thinking quickly, the manufacturer
    said no and hung up.  The attorney called back and offered $10,000.
    Eventually, they reached a figure, and the trademark was transferred.
    The mark was "Scoundrel," and the buyer was Revlon.  Both sides were
    satisfied with the sum transferred.  This is not greed; it's a
    contract.  [Source: "All Things Considered."]

    (2) In the Thirties, a man walked into the offices of a tobacco company
    and asked for $100,000.  In return, he would recite a slogan, one time.
    The company paid.  The man said, "Be happy.  Go Lucky."  Then he left.
    Both sides were satisfied with that deal, too.

    (3) The two men who created the comic-strip character Superman sold
    their rights in perpetuity for some trivial sum like $500.  In the
    fifty years since, after all of the comic books, movies, and
    merchandise, the royalties paid to the creators were zero.  They were
    NOT happy about this.  It was, of course, for the good of the company
    (DC Comics), if not the originators of the idea.

    American Honda Manufacturing has a suggestion program that's as
    successful as those in Japan, but it seems like unlike Japanese
    Honda, they have put in mechanisms for employees to get something
    back for good suggestions. Unlike lip-service suggestion programs,
    HAM guarantees that every suggestion would be responded to within
    48 hours(!) and depending upon how much the company saves/benefits
    by the suggestion, points are accumulated for the employee.
    These points lead to BIG(Really BIG prizes like a free vacation
    PLUS a HONDA ACCORD Lxi or coupe) prizes. It seems that two employees
    have won this grand prize in the past ten years. It seems that half-way
    through your accumulation, you can win a lesser prize like a CIVIC
    AND KEEP THE POINTS TOO! The idea behind this seems to be that the
    employee has contributed a lot in the past  and keeps contributing,
    is an asset to the company and is rewarded for the long-term 
    commitment.
    
    If suggestion programs should grow beyond the lip-service stage,
    the company should put in place rewards that the employee accrues
    immediately and still motivates him/her to be involved for the 
    long haul. Why not take an example from HAM?
    
    Nari
    

    re: .last bunch:
    
       One question.  If an employee should make a suggestion which is
    implemented which instead COSTS the company big bucks, should they owe
    the company some percentage of the increased costs?
    
       I.e. suppose I wrote a super-nifty distributed relational database,
    NiftyBase 1999, and put it in assets, where a license to run NiftyBase
    1999 cost 1/100th of the license for VAX Rdb on a similar machine. 
    NiftyBase 1999 sells 10,000 copies, and Rdb sells two licenses as a
    result.  (Ok, Rdb licenses come with VMS, so I realize now that it's a
    bad example, but you catch my drift.)   And those 10,000 customers
    WOULD have bought Rdb licenses.  Do I owe DEC money?  Or just the Rdb
    developers who are now out of a job?  :-)
    
    
    					-mjg
    

Re .75: Bad example, but interesting point.

The example (your "NiftyBase 1999" sofware) is flawed because the fault in
this case rests with Digital's management, who would have made a poor business
decision (i.e., to sell your superior product at far too low a price, rather
than offer it as a replacement for Rdb/VMS at the same or a higher price).

However, your point is interesting. What if your product or proposal was
inherently flawed and as a result cost Digital money? Some examples:

     - What if your NiftyBase 1999 software contained major bugs that
       caused Digital to lose millions of dollars in a lawsuit?

     - What if you made a suggestion to improve some manufacturing
       process, but when Digital adopted it, it turned out to cost
       the company millions of dollars rather than save any money?

Is there anyone who would argue that Digital should charge the employee
a percentage of the loss (and sue or withhold wages if necessary) in 
such cases?

    About suggestions that cost money instead of saving money for the
    company: 
    
    As I understand it, any suggestion that IMPROVED a process or product
    would ONLY BE ADOPTED AFTER the cost Vs. benefit analysis is performed.
    
    
    Any suggestion that suggests a new product should ideally undergo
    verification against current strategies. If you suggest a new
    Rdb system, they may not even look at this suggestion  ONLY since
    we already have a product that satisfies (whether it does or not
    is another topic) that market irrespective of how superior your
    ideas may be. Again it may be question of what it would cost us
    (including the money already spent developing Rdb) vs what we benefit 
    from it. 
    
    So I don't see a situation where the benefits are not thought of
    even at the time of considering the costs. Usually suggestion
    programs that work deal with smaller improvements to products or
    processes and not strategies as a whole. I don't believe workers
    in Honda waste their time designing new cars, but suggest improvements
    to the processes they observe everyday at the department they are
    responsible for. 
    
    Nari
    

    Re: .76
    
    A suggestion adopted by the corporation represents a management
    decision -- good or bad.  Not to argue the case for the employee
    receiving an award if the idea saves the company money, there should
    certainly be no penalty if the idea goes bust.  It's not the employee's
    fault.  For that matter, it's not necessarily true that a bad decision
    (by management) was made if a loss accrues.  Could be lots of other
    reasons.
    
    /Ed

    The goal of a suggestion plan and subsequent reward system is to
    encourage employees to speak up.  Not all suggestions are adopted,
    of course.  Some for business reasons which require a broader scope
    than the individual employee might have (the database example) and
    some because they don't work, or are counter to some corporate policy
    (like when there's an odd number of males and females on a course,
    why don't we bunk the last girl with the last guy?).  The point
    is that in the real world, dealing with real people, there must
    be an incentive to over-ride the fear of rejection, shyness or lack
    of confidence which might discourage a suggester.
    
    All the nice motherhood talk about being a team and all in this
    together, etc. may be true, but it sure won't be in everyone's mind.
    There's no way valuable ideas are limited to the mouthy few.
    
    Don
    

    Re: .76:
    
       You saw what I meant.  The manufacturing process thing is a better
    example, but I couldn't whip up an example off the top of my head.  The
    example came up because of the continuing controversy about paying
    employees for software which is put in ASSETS, which is really just a
    facet of the overall topic.
    
       The way *I* see it, while an overly large management structure can
    weigh on a company (some see this as a major problem Digital is growing
    into...), some management is certainly necessary, to make those high
    level decisions which are risky.  Personally, while I trust myself to
    make a resonably competent technical decision, my bank book knows all
    too well that I shouldn't be in charge of money... :-)  That's why I'm
    very much in favor of the managers who are good at making those kinds
    of decisions, and the ones who make good analysiss(sp?) of the situation
    and good risk-management decisions should be successful and are very
    valuable, while the ones who play the management game for political
    power are worthless to me.
    
       So, to tie this philosophy in, objectively I feel that the decision
    is on the part of the manager, and they deserve credit for either
    success or failure.  The employee's value to the company is definitely
    increased if valuable suggestions are made, and should be reflected
    in their growth pattern and salary, not with direct feedback from the
    benefits of the suggestion.  As we have the philosophy in Digital,
    every employee has not only the right, but the duty to try to do the
    right thing in all cases - including improvement programs.
    
       Non-objectively tho', I know that directly rewarding successful
    efforts is valuable, and would result in higher levels of employee
    involvement.
    
       All I can say is that I hope that one of those valuable
    management-type people can look at this issue and make the right
    decision.  :-)
    
    					-mjg (who never ever wants to
    						be a manager.  Leader,
    						yes.  Manager, no.)

    re: 10% & IBM
    
    Citicorp has a suggestion program that gives (at at least used to give)
    10% of the first year's savings to the employee.  Every now and then an
    employee would get a 5-digit sum.
    
    __Rich

    When I worked for a large bank, a coworker got a reward for suggesting
    that the bank could save money by turning terminals off at night.
    I mentioned that I was under the impression that this would reduce
    the life of the terminals.  He joked that he'd submit another money-
    saving suggestion -- that terminals *not* be turned off.

    I made a submission to the employee involvement program.  (I suggested
    that to save the company money in thousands of people learning to use
    it, ELF v2 be delayed until it can do all the things ELF v1 does and do
    them equally simply.)  I got back what appears to be a form letter from
    Alan Zimmerle, Senior Consultant, Employee Involvement Program.
    
    The moderators of this conference have decided that I can't post the
    form letter without permission of the author, given the new noting
    rules, so here is a paraphrase of the letter's text:
    
    "Thanks for suggesting how to improve Digital's performance and make it
    a better place to work.  It is spirit and energy like yours which makes
    the Employee Involvement program.  We appreciate your interest."
    
    (If I were Alan Zimmerle, I would prefer to have my original posted.
    Perhaps he can do that here.)

    re .83:
    
    I too have made suggestions to the program, and received replies
    from Alan Zimmerle.   However, the replies I received showed clearly
    that Alan (or someone working with him) had indeed read my suggestions.
    While the reply may have been mostly a boilerplate with certain
    parts filled in, it definitely had enough personalized info in it
    to convince me that it was more than just a form letter.
    
    When Alan's Employee Suggestion Program was first being conceived
    and planned, I did a little bit of work with his committee.  Due
    to my graduate work and research in Employee Involvement programs,
    I had some knowledge to add to the planning.  One the most important
    things in implementing a successful E.I. program, as I told Alan,
    is ensuring that _every_ suggestion gets a reply.  Workers will
    not go out of their way to make suggestions if they don't believe
    the suggestions will be valued.  Alan and the people in the program
    are 100% committed to this fundamental idea, and I know for a fact
    that they will ensure that _all_ suggestions are read and acknowledged.
    The apparent "form letter" is a symptom of the problem of trying
    to manage a process involving a potential of 125,000+ people's
    suggestions through a single focus.  It is very, very difficult
    to create a new reply to every single suggestion, so the boilerplate
    is used.   Still, I want to emphasize that _all_ suggestions are
    read, valued, and considered.
    
    Don

    
    I would not perceive that there has yet been a BLAZE of creativity
    within all 125,000 employees, either at a local level (especially in
    the field) nor deluging the Employee Involvement electronic mail
    suggestion box.  One might ask: Why not?
    
    Regarding form acknowledgements, I see this as acceptable for I too
    believe all submitted to the corporate box are being seriously read for
    value, and if they are implemented, I would expect the author to
    receive acknowledgement, and to BE acknowledged for his or her
    creativity and contribution, with the reward being promotion for
    demonstrated leadership in BUILDING a more successful Digital.  If no
    reward, why be creative?
    
    Regarding the award of a individual monetary cash rewards for ideas, I
    have come to believe this is NOT the best approach primarily because it
    still nurtures individual personal achievement and COMPETITIVENESS
    versus being creative, and driving one's ideas into reality, working on
    a basis of cooperation with ALL other employees for mutual success.
    
    The piece that is still missing is the reward of mutual success.  There 
    is in fact no constructive interdependency of virtually all employees
    for a COMMON reward for being creative, driving tens of thousands of
    ideas and changes into reality that would build a more successful
    Digital, and if all are successful in making more money for the
    company, primarily from the generation of NEW money from the
    marketplace, customers, then all further sharing in that success.  The
    only obvious best answer to ensure this interdependency is a profit
    sharing bonus -- if we generated a given amount of so much EXTRA
    operating income above a certain percentage of total revenue, then that
    extra should go into a bucket where at the end of each fiscal year it
    is divided EQUALLY by the number of employees present, and we all get
    the same size profit bonus check.
    
    With this approach we'd be more fired up, and driven to work as one
    group toward a common goal, with all receiving a common equal award
    based on our success to work together MORE EFFECTIVELY AND EFFICIENTLY. 
    There would be no limit on either the quantity or quality of ideas
    created, and driven into reality, since no employee is COMPETING with
    other's to get idea awards.  The goal is not ideas or their
    implementation but rather the results of those ideas: Digital making
    more money from the marketplace as every employee's actions affect our
    ability to make money, the function of our corporation.
    
    I sent this suggestion up to the Employee Involvement box along with
    another on more nurturing and support of BIG ideas that would lend
    themselves to large revenue-generating BUSINESSES that sell total
    solutions, not just products and services.  I sugggested that if
    virtually any employee had a vision, and a drive to make it reality,
    for such a business, they need just create a brief business and
    marketing plan (with help to write it provided by the company) and
    submit it to an official skunkwork's committee.  If you had the drive
    to write it, you would get the opportunity to sell it further via an
    in-person presentation to the committee.  If you sold your plan, and
    they bought in, you would get money, support, people and resources to
    make it reality.  You would be the manager who would create, build and
    manage what hopefully would be a new company division (revolving around
    using our proprietary information technology) and your salary would
    rise in direct proportion to the successful realization of YOUR vision
    and dream.  Your success was limited only by your imagination and
    motivation and drive and creativity (same factors for building a more
    successful Digital overall with a common and equal profit bonus
    incentive).  Internal "intrapreneuring" as I recall a term.  3M does
    this and successfully, generating, I think, almost 18 billion, with
    almost all "businesses" being created THIS way, with most highly
    profitable to the corporation.
    
    When will Digital begin truly to harness, nurture and support the
    creative intelligence and wisdom of all its employees?  If there are
    20,000 employees at a minimum READING this conference, has ANYONE been
    grabbed by the collar and asked, in-person: "What ideas and suggestions
    do you personally have that would lead to a more successful Digital if
    implemented, and how can I help and support you to make them reality?"
    
    
    

    An observation:
    
    Out here in the field, I saw one or two (max) "official" communications
    come down in the usual way (i.e., unit manager forwards a memo from
    someone that no one has ever heard of) about the employee suggestion
    box.  Since then, it has been a practical non-entity.
    
    The _only_ place I've seen it discussed after its inception is right
    here -- and most PSS folks around here don't have the time to keep up
    with this conference.
    
    So why is there no "blaze of creativity" (to quote David C.)?  Simple. 
    Most folks -- out here, anyway -- have forgotten about it.  Those that
    may remember it are probably far from convinced that it is anything but
    another "corporate black hole".  Things that get mentioned _once_
    aren't real -- things that get used and talked about _are_ real.
    Most of us don't have time to waste on things that aren't real.
    
    $ SET PERSPECTIVE=LOCAL
    
    I have some ideas I could write up and send in.  Have I done so?  No,
    because it seems clear that local management doesn't give a hoot -- no
    one _ever_ talks about it.  And if local management could care less,
    then could corporate management care more?  If they did, why wouldn't
    they motivate local management to talk it up?  From the local
    perspective, this appears to be another temporary "corporate black
    hole" which will fade away into obscurity once everyone manages to
    forget about its existance.  At this rate, no one will remember it even
    exists by the end of Q2 (Q3 max).
    
    $ SET PERSPECTIVE=GLOBAL
    
    After reading some of the recent remarks about this program, I might be
    tempted to give it a try.  I wish there was more local encouragement to
    do so, however.  Maybe that should be my first suggestion...  8^|
    
    -- Russ

    
    Regards .85
    
    Do you have anything to substantuate that 20,000 employees at a
    minimum read this conference? I mean is someone counting somehow?
    I am not asking to discredit your input. However, it is my perception
    (purely provincial) that a small minority of employees in our field
    office can 1) use NOTES and 2) find a given conference. SWS folks
    for sure (if they have the time) ... but beyond that it gets real
    sketchy. I surely can't tell what it looks like from other 'types'
    of peoples perepectives but would guess that engineering (SW & HW)
    types would be real active, 'support' (CSC, CSSE, etc) would be
    real active ... but beyond that?
    
    Is there anyone actually counting NOTES users? I just have a hard
    time believing that as much as 1/6 of us really read these - if
    so, then an even smaller % actually input and I'm not encouraged
    that the rest of the population even knows what we are saying here
    ... or that they care.
    
    Dave 

     
    REF: <<< Note 892.87 by MUSKIE::BLACK
    >><Do you have anything to substantuate that 20,000 employees at a
       minimum read this conference? I mean is someone counting somehow?>
    
    This number was a guesstimate on my part based on prior replies
    (somewhere) by Alfred Thompson who seems somewhat knowledgable on
    VAXnotes usage in Digital.
    
    How many are or are not accessing and using this tool (VAXnotes) is not
    that revelant to my point in .85  -- the question was to determine if
    ANYONE reading this conference had been approached in-person and asked
    point blank if he or she had any thoughts/ideas/suggestions for
    building a more successful Digital, and what could be done to support
    turning those ideas into reality.
    

re 892.88

   " -  the question was to determine if ANYONE reading this conference
had been approached in person and asked point-blank if he or she had any
thought/idea/suggestions for building a more successful Digital..."

   Answer:        A.  No. Nor do I know anyone who has.
 
   And to add,    B.  I have in the past five years offered
                      thoughts/ideas/suggestions.

   And,           C.  Consistently been made to feel that
                      those thoughts/ideas/suggestions were
                      in no-way solicited and given no regard
                      or consideration at all.

  Four times this past year in discussions with managers about such
thoughts/ideas/suggestions (that they cared not to discuss in the first
place), all that was offered to me was, to paraphrase, that if I was not
happy with the company/organization I should seek another career-path.

  When our group was formally introduced to Six-Sigma it was received
with not but a-little cynicism.  Apparently I was not alone in the 
experience of the previous paragraph. The group also wondered how effective
could Six-Sigma/Employee Involvement be when the same management and
management philosophy was still in place.  And just what would that 
employee's career be worth if he/she were to make an end-run around that
management structure and go directly to Alan Zimerlees group?

  No Thank You.  I give up.  

.89>  Four times this past year in discussions with managers about such
.89>thoughts/ideas/suggestions (that they cared not to discuss in the first
.89>place), all that was offered to me was, to paraphrase, that if I was not
.89>happy with the company/organization I should seek another career-path.

    Good lord! What did you *suggest*?

re. 892.90

   "What did you *suggest*."

   I never got the chance to suggest anything.  That's my point.  I
was never able to engage any management person in a meaningful give
and take discourse.  Using the so-called "open door policy" I would
first offer, with tact and respect, observations of how work I'm involved
in is effected, or not as the case may be. Constructive criticisms, if
you will. But before I could offer any thoughts/ideas/solutions on how,
I honestly believed, could improve the work cost-effectiveness and 
quality I would hit a wall.  I would quickly find myself entangled in
a "price of fish" discussion over "metrics, organizational matrix, 
business strategy," so on so forth.  In trying to break away from
that path I'd then be hit with "you don't see the big picture" speech.
I was never allowed to cross that wall. No-one ever said, "You obviously
have some concerns. Can you offer any suggestions or solutions?"  I was
not obnoxious. I did not shove or rage. But it did not take long for me
to be labeled a "trouble-maker".

   I enjoy and care about my work. I have a good reputation both
personally and professionally. And in a technical sense I see the 
steady, bleeding loss of our (U.S.A.) competitiveness, and hence 
industries, to a global market. And the loss of U.S. Industry in
years to come is going to have a shattering effect on our society.

   These days there is a lot of fear out in the management ranks.
They know change is inevitable. But they will not loosen up on
the reins.  They've got theirs, by God, and they are going to keep
it no matter what. They consider themselves aristocracy.  They must
realize;  Management is a function, not a class. 

   But I am tired of being a "trouble-maker".

    
          RESULTS OF "APATHY IN DIGITAL" BRAINSTORMING TOPIC
                   CIDNI ALF Brainstorming Meeting
       5:00 pm, Tuesday, January 23, 1990, in the ALF cafeteria

   WHAT IS IMPEDING TRUE EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT IN BUILDING A BETTER AND 
   MORE SUCCESSFUL DIGITAL?

   o  Bureaucrats who put personal agenda ahead of their people and 
      ahead of the interests of Digital

   o  Fear in some employees who feel expressing their ideas and 
      opinions will be "career-limiting"

   o  Apathy -- why bother attitude within many employees (managers 
      and individual contributors alike) -- can't change "the system" 
      and "what's the reward for making waves and taking risks, none."

   o  Tyranny practiced by some managers

   o  Elitism -- if you are not in the "in" crowd, the message is your 
      opinion is not to be expressed

   o  Sabotage by some managers and even peers against those who 
      express ideas affecting change

   o  "Group Think" mentality -- odd opinions suppressed and 
      discouraged

   o  Inadequate management training in leadership -- some managers 
      refusing to attend mandatory training or giving only lip service 
      to it

   o  Vague or non-existent employee job, training and development 
      plans -- being in limbo discourages freedom of expression

   o  Employee productivity measured only by numeric metrics versus 
      qualitative creativity to build a more successful Digital

   o  poor managing by some managers -- no leadership devoted to 
      helping direct reports to excel whose work and creativity will 
      build a better and more successful Digital

   o  "Speaking Up" not loudly encouraged by most managers, nor loudly 
      supported and reinforced by higher level managers within Digital

   o  Employee training often withheld as a punishment from those who 
      express ideas and opinions that are not wanted

   o  Dedicated reprisals visibly seen against those who have rocked 
      the boat, even to the point of harassing those employees from 
      Digital -- sends a clear message to keep quiet

   o  Over-bearing "control" by some managers of direct reports

   o  Not being appreciated and recognized for being conscientious and 
      doing extra, including creating ideas to build a more successful 
      Digital

   o  New ideas "cost money" mentality

   o  New ideas "mean work and problems" mentality

   o  Being denigrated by some managers and some peers for suggesting 
      new ideas that affect changing the way things are now

   WHAT ARE SOME IDEAS FOR INCREASING EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT?

   o  Letter from Ken Olsen direct to every employee addressing 
      employee involvement and what is desired from every employee

   o  Discipline from upper management to remove managers who oppress 
      employees for expressing their ideas and opinions

   o  For those who want it, guaranteed anonymity to those wanting to 
      send ideas to corporate suggestion boxes

   o  For those who want it, guaranteed anonymity to those wanting to 
      express ideas in either the CIDNI ALF e-mail DL or the VAXnotes 
      conference, CIDNI_ALF (this we can do -- for ALF employees, if 
      you want anonymity for CIDNI discussion, send your memo to David 
      Carnell @ALF, clearly stating ANONYMOUS PLEASE at top of memo, 
      along with a subject of your new idea topic, or which topic if 
      you are writing something pertinent in reply to an existing 
      topic.  Your header will be deleted forever and text will be 
      edited as required)

   o  Employee opinion survey conducted by employee involvement group 
      of all Digital employees with results published for all to see

   o  Employee opinion survey conducted by employee involvement group 
      of all ALF employees with results by cost center to all 
      employees within a given cost center, and a consolidated summary 
      for entire ALF facility published and distributed to all ALF 
      employees

   o  Equal profit sharing for all, interdependently linked to higher 
      levels of Digital success, as an incentive to creating new 
      ideas, and driving them into reality

   o  Monetary rewards for individual creativity, with the bigger the 
      impact on Digital, the bigger the monetary reward

   o  Performance appraisals by direct reports on their manager, 
      including leadership measurements, that go into a manager's 
      personnel folder

   o  All employees should be sent to local employee involvement 
      seminars presented by employee involvement group

   o  To ensure good management and real leadership to nurture new 
      ideas and employee excellence, give all direct report employees 
      real empowerment via an equal say in an annual vote of 
      confidence on whether to keep or replace their given group 
      manager (if vote to replace, manager becomes an individual 
      contributor or seeks to become leader of another group looking 
      for new leadership)

   o  Design a system for publicly tracking and following through all 
      ideas and issues, with results published

   o  Have managers measured, from the top down, on how well they 
      encourage creativity in their direct reports, number of ideas 
      created, quality of ideas, impact of ideas, with each tracked to 
      implementation, or to a written justification of why an idea was 
      not implemented or championed.  Managers measured on nurturing 
      REAL creativity that leads to building a more successful 
      Digital.

   o  Upper management should take measures to facilitate the ease of 
      getting new ideas implemented -- less red tape, less hassle

   o  Make public and visible all new ideas created, and 
      justifications on why any idea is not implemented

   o  Promote CIDNI and employee involvement to all ALF employees

   o  Increase personal satisfaction within all employees by truly 
      giving all employees a say in creating positive changes, 
      affecting ANY part of Digital, in order to build a better and 
      more successful Digital.

   o  Create a separate Employee Relations Group that investigates and 
      ensures corrective actions against those would oppose open 
      creativity by all within Digital.  Provide anonymity to those 
      asking for it.

   o  Insert real discipline into ensuring the philosophy that built 
      Digital, and the good rules publicly written, are truly 
      enforced.

   o  Throw out all red-tape, overly rigid rules that protect stifling 
      bureaucrats

   o  Have Ken Olsen attend open-forum brainstorming employee 
      involvement forums throughout Digital, sending a message that 
      total employee involvement and open-forum presentation and 
      debate of any ideas, good or bad, and subsequent change from 
      ideas implemented, is truly desired by Ken Olsen and senior 
      executive management.
    
    
    Permission is granted for this note to be copied and forwarded by
    anyone in Digital to anyone in Digital.  For explanation of CIDNI
    concept, see topic CIDNI Groups.
    

    Here is the content of an Employee Involvement @CFO suggestion I sent
    up today regarding some ideas used at Milliken.  What does everyone
    think of what Milliken is doing in terms of employee involvement and
    empowerment?
    
    MY SUBMITTED SUGGESTION (permission to forward by anyone in Digital to
    anyone in Digital is given):
    
    In order to increase real employee involvement in Digital, 
    and to overcome fundamental issues impeding real employee 
    empowerment within Digital, my employee suggestion is that 
    the Digital Executive Committee consider some of the employee 
    involvement ideas implemented by Roger Milliken, CEO of 
    Milliken & Co ($2.9 Billion) as noted in the recent USA Today 
    Profile article, encoded below without permission by USA 
    Today.
    
    And as another suggestion, that Ken Olsen perhaps arrange 
    to meet with Roger Milliken for a one-day meeting to discuss 
    Roger's "implemented and tested" ideas for achieving real 
    employee involvement and empowerment that works.
    
    A side benefit would be the additional conversation that 
    would develop, along information technology, Digital CEO to 
    Milliken CEO.
    
    Here's the article:
    
                 EVERYONE WEAVES IDEAS INTO MILLIKEN
                  All 'associates' treated equally
                                 by
                            John Hillkirk
                              USA TODAY
    
    SPARTANBURG, S.C. --  The man some consider to be the 
    country's best CEO walks into the cafeteria at Milliken & 
    Co., quietly picks up a tray and begins to study the roast 
    beef.
    
    "Well, Gloria, what's good today?" asks Roger Milliken, the 
    CEO and great-grandson of founder Seth Milliken.
    
    To Gloria, who dishes out the hot food, Roger Milliken is 
    just another customer.  You'd never know that he runs the 
    show at this textile giant, which has had an estimated $2.9 
    billion in 1989 revenue.
    
    Milliken's magic is rooted in the philosophy that nobody is 
    better than anybody else.  At Milliken, no one has a private 
    office.  All 14,300 employees are referred to as associates.  
    No one except the associate of the month gets a reserved 
    parking space.
    
    "The secret is in asking workers what they think and showing 
    them that you really care," Milliken says.
    
    Roger Milliken's obsession with teamwork and employee 
    involvement has served his company well.  Over the last five 
    years, the privately owned firm has emerged as one of the 
    USA's highest-quality manufacturers.
    
    In 1988, General Motors gave 10 awards for excellence to 
    factories run by its 5,000 U.S. suppliers.  Milliken plants 
    won five of the 10 awards.  In 1989, Milliken won the Malcolm 
    Baldrige National Quality Award.  At the awards ceremony, 
    President Bush said that the company's "management style is 
    sheer 21st century."
    
    That style emanates directly from its leader.
    
    "The key to being where we are is him," says Milliken 
    President Thomas Malone.  "And the key to him is being 
    obsessed with being the best."
    
    Tom Peters, co-author of In Search of Excellence, dedicated 
    his latest book, Thriving on Chaos, to the 75-year-old 
    veteran, noting, "It is Roger Milliken's brand of urgency -- 
    and taste for radical reform -- that must become the norm."
    
    Nine years ago, Milliken & Co., was a lot like any other U.S. 
    corporate giant.  Management told workers what to do and how 
    to do it.  Ideas for improvement flowed from the top.
    
    Then Roger Milliken read Phil Crosby's book Quality is Free.  
    He began to understand that management, not labor, is 
    responsible for the relatively poor quality of U.S. goods.  
    He also realized that if the company didn't radically 
    restructure, it might not survive.
    
    "The imports were just pouring in," Milliken recalls.  "There 
    was no way we could win the economic war without a totally 
    new plan."
    
    Milliken decided to turn his company upside-down.  He 
    snatched power from management and gave it to the people on 
    the front lines.  He eliminated 700 supervisory positions and 
    assigned those people to do nothing but help workers do their 
    jobs.  Associates organized into about 1,600 corrective-
    -action teams.
    
    You can see those changes at work in Milliken & Co.'s 
    super-efficient factories, which bear stark similarities to 
    plants in Japan.  At Milliken's Gayley Plant in Marietta, 
    S.C., signs proudly proclaim the number of "defect-free days" 
    in each operation.
    
    At the end of each assembly line rests a bulletin board 
    plastered with notes.  The notes contain suggestions 
    handwritten by hourly associates.  The foreman in charge has 
    24 hours to acknowledge that he has read each idea and 72 
    hours to respond to it.  Often, a solution comes from another 
    hourly worker, not a manager.
    
    The average associate has submitted 20 suggestions this year, 
    and 85% of them have been implemented.  When a team reaches 
    20 ideas per associate, it throws a party to celebrate.  But 
    the company has learned that U.S. workers, unlike Japanese, 
    need be recognized individually, not only as part of a team.  
    Hence, the associate with the plant's best idea gets a free 
    parking space.
    
    "It used to be that management found the problems and then 
    tried to solve them," Malone says.  "But we've empowered 
    workers to take care of that."
    
    Perhaps the biggest change of all has been psychological -- 
    convincing hourly people that nothing is more important than 
    what they think and how they feel.  Pointing to his head, 
    Roger Milliken offers, "80% of it is right up here."
    
    To change attitudes, workers' achievements must be tracked 
    closely and rewarded every step of the way.
    
    The hard-driving Malone, a former college football player, 
    puts it this way: "I broke my nose five times, lost one third 
    of my teeth in football.  Do you think I'd do that if there 
    were no fans in the crowd and no scoreboard at the end of the 
    field?"
    

	... I doubt that KO will sit down close enough to Roger to do any good!

	Anyway, what they describe is a very good idea for a self-contained,
narrow-focus, and RELATIVELY small manufacturing operation.  I note they didn't
mention anything about sales or marketing having "empowered" employees.

	It's hard for me to compare a textile plant in SC to a company with em-
ployees all over the world, offering a range of products and services, and tied
so closely to our customers' businesses.  Sure, we need some changes, but let's
remember just WHO we are, and what we do for a living.

    REF: <<< Note 892.94 by YUPPIE::COLE >>

    <<	Anyway, what they describe is a very good idea for a
    self-contained, narrow-focus, and RELATIVELY small manufacturing
    operation.  I note they didn't mention anything about sales or
    marketing having "empowered" employees.

    <<	It's hard for me to compare a textile plant in SC to a company with
    em- ployees all over the world, offering a range of products and
    services, and tied so closely to our customers' businesses.  Sure, we
    need some changes, but let's remember just WHO we are, and what we do
    for a living.>>
    
    The tone of your reply seems to suggest 13 Billion high-tech Digital
    has little to learn from the intelligence within the employees of 3
    Billion low-tech Milliken, as it relates to achieving more effective
    employee involvement and empowerment.
    
    Hmmm...let's see.  The article seems to suggest that Milliken can
    document at least several thousand employees who have created an
    average of 20 suggestions per year to build a better and more
    successful Milliken, with 85% of those ideas turning into implemented
    reality.
    
    Okay.  How many thousands of Digital employees can be documented for
    last year, the average number of sugggestions per year to build a
    better and more successful Digital, with what % of those ideas turning
    into implemented reality?
    
    100,000 employees?
    10,000?
    1,000?
    100?
    10?
    None
    
    How many suggestions?
    
    What percentage made reality?
    
    World-class superior organizations of the future will learn good ideas,
    and use them, methodically SEARCHED OUT, from ANYWHERE in the entire
    world, from ANY TYPE of organization, reviewed without bias and
    pre-judgement and prejudice.

Having also had quite a bit of experience with Milliken...

Like Jack I'm quite skeptical of reports that Milliken could have really
turned into the kind of company described in the article.  Eleven years
ago, when Milliken was still my customer, they were certainly not the
kind of engineering company I'd expect to find suddenly paying attention
to employee opinions.

/john

    re .96 (and .95?)
    You're having doubts based on an 11 year ago experience!?  In companies
    highly motivated to change, a year can be significant.  And according
    to the story, Milliken was.

	I think the overall intent of increased Employee Involvement is
    good, however, I wonder whether some of the methods suggested here
    might actually add to the already overburdened level of process which
    already exists within Digital (and which, by the way, Ken Olsen has
    already suggested we set aside for the time being in order to get the
    job done - see the State of the Company address posted in another note).

	I suppose the idea of measuring each plant by the number of defect-
    free items produced seems ok, but to try and implement what amounts to
    an employee suggestion quota system coupled with a requirement that each
    manager respond to the notes within 72 hours or whatever seems totally
    unreasonable.  This might work for certain facilities (and one reason
    DEC is divided up into smaller facilities is to maintain the feel of a
    smaller business by the way), but I can't imagine trying to do something
    like this on such a broad scale.  It would simply seem to add more process
    and measurement to a company which is already literally drowning in process
    and measurement.

				   -davo

p.s.	Besides, what's wrong with continuing to use the notesfiles?  Maybe
	if we could just encourage a few more high level managers (including
	Ken Olsen) to reply to our notes in here?  Maybe then we would begin
	to feel as though our prayers are being heard.

    I see no reason at all why this system could not, or should not, be
    implemented at Digital.  Reply .98 (davo) is concerned that this might
    be an additional bit of process, but so long as we don't get a *quota*
    of suggestions (I've worked for a company that did that!), it's no
    burden.  Of course, a required rsponse time by management is a burden,
    but they deserve it 8^)
    
    A previous reply casts doubt on whether Milliken could have turned
    around its attitude.  From the insinuation of its attitude, and the
    news account reproduced in a somewhat earlier reply, maybe Milliken
    *needed* to turn around its attitude.

	It's been a while since I've been on-site at Milliken, too, and I 
wasn't saying they didn't do something good.  Just that the idea of 
"copy-cating" them was short-sighted considering the difference in the 
companies.  I even confess to a short-sightedness myself, one of seeing things
from the field district level. 

	I too feel we are processed to death sometimes, but the processes I 
dread are the ones that don't add to customer sat, our revenue, our 
product/service quality, or our profits.  The last time I looked, those things 
seemed to stand out in our mission statement.  I would rather see our 
managers, from the units up, spend their time on customer sat, employee sat, 
profitability, good business skills, quality, etc.  They don't need another 
useless "box" to check off on their goal sheets.  Actually, I like the idea of 
the central electronic suggestion box because it doesn't burden down the field 
managers.  And it doesn't cause every district or region (or plant) to be
duplicating the same solution to the same problem.

	As my sub-title alludes, until we start valuing TRUE communication 
among the levels, any process, simple or complex, high-level or low, will seem 
like a millstone.  We have about all the tools we need to communicate well, 
what we need is for our corporate leader(s?) to say in clear and unmistakable 
terms is that THEY are listening and acting , and expect everyone below them to 
do likewise.  Then we will all have an attitude adjustment, I would bet!

	I think that we all basically agree that high level management still
    has a long ways to go in terms of simply opening up to employees and
    kicking ideas around (here for example).  What I objected to in my reply
    a few back was the notion of forcing management to "reply within 72 hours"
    or some other equally arbitrary quota system based upon some sort of
    magical number.

	Actually, the problem here isn't so much one of "EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT"
    as one of "MANAGEMENT INVOLVEMENT".  Think about it, we are discussing
    Digital Equipment Corporation right here in what is probably the most
    "official" notesfile on the network, and we have yet to hear a peep from
    upper level management (other than the usual impersonal copies of memos
    and such which trickle down from the usual channels).  It's almost as
    though someone locked them in an ivory tower someplace and will not let
    them out onto the network.

	The thing I would like to see more than anything else is a simply
    an occasional reply to a note (or better yet even a few topics written)
    DIRECTLY by our high level management in this as well as other such
    notesfiles on the network.  What are they afraid of?  That we would
    instantly run out and publish anything they write in here?  Well, maybe
    some of us might be tempted to at first (simply because we wouldn't be
    used to it maybe), but after the initial shock of communicating with the
    managers upon high had subsided a bit, I think we could perhaps settle
    into some constructive communications channels (or unchannels - as the
    case may be).  What else?  Are they afraid of lowering themselves?  Come
    on, this is DEC - not IBM!  DEC founded the open door environment.

	I think we would all be invigorated by an opening of the "electronic
    door" in which high level management step out from behind the curtain and
    join us here by openly participating in discussions involving DEC policies,
    strategies, and other such discussions.  I would like to see this happen
    naturally however, as opposed to forcing managers to participate.  The
    best way to do this would be one of positive reinforcement for those high
    level managers brave enough to step forward and consort with "the troops"
    here in the notesfile trenches (as opposed to negative reinforcement to
    those who don't).

	What we need are a few Pattons here who are willing to roll up their
    sleves and come talk with us.  Such participation would be seen as a real
    ice breaker between upper-level management and the rest of the corporation.
    It would build morale and would allow us all to feel a little less like
    the huge impersonal corporation that we have become, and a little more like
    a family business (which is something you normally only see at the smaller
    startup companies such as Stratus, Data General, etc.).

	I might add that in the six years that I have worked at DEC, I have
    yet to actually get a chance to talk to Ken Olsen, Win Hindle, or any of
    the rest of the upper management of this company (with certain exceptions)
    and I even work in Maynard (PK03)!  I can't begin to explain how much it
    would mean to a humble employee such as myself to be able to casually
    discuss things with the upper levels of DEC management in a forum such
    as this (as opposed to one-on-one which is slightly unrealistic to expect
    high-level management to meet one-on-one with every DEC employee).

	Heck, I've had two or three casual discussions with Edson De Castro
    and I never even worked for DG (although my wife used to - dont worry, we
    didn't talk about business)!  Now that my wife works at Stratus, I have
    already had a chance to at least see their president up close at a recent
    function.  I could list off hundreds of famous film personalities that I
    have had the opportunity to meet back when I worked in the film industry,
    and I feel that those experiences made the whole experience so much more
    worthwhile and meaningful to everyone involved.  I feel that this sort of
    camaraderie is extremely important in any business, and it is something
    which could be accomplished right here in the notesfiles!  I say the
    sooner we can encourage upper level management to join us here the better
    (I just don't want to force them).

				    -davo

    I don't think this conference is anywhere near the most "official"
    conference on the network. A large number of project owned and budgeted
    conferences are far more "official" then this one. But that is a nit.

    I've seen high level managers write in Notes. The managing director
    of DEC-UK for one. I'm sure it's nice and I'd like to see it happen
    here but it's not likely. Too many people are likely to jump on what
    someone says and say it's policy when it wasn't meant that way. In
    the US at least managers have to be very careful what they say in
    print least it come back to haunt them. There are a lot of people
    who will take things and twist them to make them fit weird ideas. You
    just have to read SOAPBOX, WOMANNOTES, WORLD_FORUM, or any number of
    others to see that. You even see it in this conference with the weird
    twisting of the network use policy.

    Besides Notes does not appear to be as easy to use for some people
    as it is others. Not everyone, least of all high level managers, has
    the time to learn how to do it well.

    The idea of face to face meetings are more likely to happen though.
    Perhaps each Senior VP and Ken could each meet with some random group
    of 5-10 peons once a month or so. Or perhaps meet with a small number
    of "squeaky wheels". Say the people most out spoken in this conference
    or from a lottery of readers and writers who put their names in a pot?

    ~Cliff

re: .102,

>    I don't think this conference is anywhere near the most "official"
>    conference on the network. A large number of project owned and budgeted
>    conferences are far more "official" then this one. But that is a nit.

	Ok, so you hung on my use of the term "official" (notice I italicized
    it too because it is a little pretentious to think that anything in here
    is or ever could be deemed official).  It's just that if any notesfiles
    were to come close to representing a corporate-wide consensus - then it
    would follow that this particular notesfile would have to be it.

	Besides, What makes electronic mail any more of an "official" source
    of information than a notesfile?  I'll tell you what - *tradition*. The
    concept of electronic mail is older and more established than that of
    notesfiles, and this is a fact that we somewhat more avid noters have
    all had to live with for the past few years as we patiently waited for
    the rest of the corporation to catch up.  Now it appears that upper-
    level management is finally beginning to see the value of notesfiles
    as they allow the corporation to pool our information resources into
    some semblance of organization (sure beats mailing lists).

>    Besides Notes does not appear to be as easy to use for some people
>    as it is others. Not everyone, least of all high level managers, has
>    the time to learn how to do it well.

	Now tell me, is it really easier to use mail than notes?  How hard
    is it to type the following commands:

$ NOTES
Notes> ADD ENTRY HUMAN::DIGITAL
Notes> OPEN DIGITAL
Notes> SET SEEN/BEFORE=TODAY
Notes> <enter-key>
Notes> <enter-key>
         .
         .
Notes> <enter-key>

	...I would think that most managers could possibly handle this given
    adequate training and a little help from John Q. Noter in the NOTES$SAMPLE
    notesfile.  I don't think that the ease of use issue holds much weight.

>    ...Too many people are likely to jump on what
>    someone says and say it's policy when it wasn't meant that way.

	So instead we get the rumor mill.  Great...

>    ...In the US at least managers have to be very careful what they say in
>    print least it come back to haunt them. 

	Nothing haunts a person worse than a rumor.  At least in notes you
    can clarify, set hidden, even delete a note if you later determine it was
    a mistake.  This happens all the time.  As far as managers worrying about
    what they say - their jobs require them to say things (if they don't do
    anything else, they are at least expected to put in their two cents now
    and then).  It's like anything else: "lead, follow, or get out of the way".
    When it comes to expressing themselves in notesfiles, it seems that most
    upper-level managers have chosen to stay out of the way.

>    ...who will take things and twist them to make them fit weird ideas. You
>    just have to read SOAPBOX, WOMANNOTES, WORLD_FORUM, or any number of
>    others to see that. You even see it in this conference with the weird
>    twisting of the network use policy.

	Twist it baby!  Twist it!  That's what discussion is all about.
    You can try to twist somebody's statements in a notesfile, but chances
    are they will get instantly untwisted in a clarification or rebuttal.
    In addition, it isn't too hard to see when someone is twisting a note
    "to make them fit weird ideas", and that reflects more on that individual
    than anything else (who knows, sometimes good ideas are born that way).

	On the other hand, when somebody twists words emanating from a
    quarterly management memo, then it can take weeks or even months for
    the follow-up clarification memo to trickle down (and in the meantime,
    confusion reigns).
    
>    The idea of face to face meetings are more likely to happen though.
>    Perhaps each Senior VP and Ken could each meet with some random group
>    of 5-10 peons once a month or so. Or perhaps meet with a small number
>    of "squeaky wheels". Say the people most out spoken in this conference
>    or from a lottery of readers and writers who put their names in a pot?

	Well, in the few encounters I have had with upper-level management
    they have always been relatively casual one-on-one encounters (usually
    by accident or at a demo or something), and have always been very pleasant.
    I think that if I was granted a meeting with the operations committee,
    that I might look a little too much like the Cowardly Lion in the Wizard
    of Oz when he, Dorothy, the Tin Man, the Scarecrow, and Toto were allowed
    in to see the Wizard.  I might not jump out the nearest window, but I would
    certainly be thinking more about doing that than anything constructive!

	Seriously, I do hope to someday get the opportunity to meet with
    upper-level management in one way or another, but that sort of meeting
    is entirely different from what we are talking about here.  What is needed
    here is simply an even exchange of ideas in the notesfiles.  It's much
    less stressful and I see it as much more productive in the long run as
    it would help to build long-term relationships between upper-level
    management and the rest of DEC's employees (as opposed to trying to
    build long-term relationships via a once-in-a-lifetime meeting with KO).
    Besides, the one-on-one meetings would be way too expensive!

				     -davo

p.s.	If this computer way of doing things truly is as wonderful as we
	would like our customers to believe, then it would follow that upper-
	level management would set a good example and utilize it as well.

    I used to participate in the Arms Digest, a moderated newsgroup
    propagated over the Internet, during the initial stages of the
    Strategic Defense Initiative (the "Can Star Wars really work?" stage.) 
    There were many technical questions posed about the physics of SDI, and
    hashed over by some people who knew what they were talking about and a
    lot of people who didn't.
    
    One day, a question about X-ray lasers was answered by a gentleman
    named Lowell Wood.  This was a shock; Lowell Wood is the researcher at
    Lawrence Livermore Labs who was *doing* the work on X-ray lasers.  It
    was like being at a cocktail party in the Fifties and shooting the bull
    about H-bombs, and having Edward Teller appear at your elbow and answer
    your question.
    
    It was a blast (so to speak) to have Lowell Wood in on the discussion.
    Someone else asked a question a few days later.  Wood answered. 
    Someone disagreed with him (!).  Wood replied with a painful statement,
    the sense of which was, of *course* it works!  We've just spent *years*
    studying it, spending *millions* of dollars in the process!
    
    The more he contributed, the more people asked him questions, and the
    more he was drawn in to arguments.  Remember, he was doing work that
    was classified at the highest possible levels of secrecy.  There was a
    limit to his candor, his time, and his patience.  He broke off as
    abruptly as he started, and we never heard from him again.
    
    I think top-level executives ought to be reading this and other Notes
    conferences.  (I just sent a suggestion to that effect to
    SOCIAL::INVOLVEMENT.)  But I'm not wild about them replying to notes. I
    agree with an earlier reply: there are some Noters who would seize the
    moment, get in a VP's face, and never let him go.  Answering five
    100-line replies arguing points of grammatical and logical minutia
    would wear him down real fast.  There's also the problem of the
    practiced cynics who lurk around the water cooler (or the Notes
    conferences) looking for a forum for their jaded views.  There would be
    a few people who would abuse the opportunity to deal directly with top
    management.
    
    If Ken Olsen wrote a note in here, he'd get 1,000 replies in 24 hours.
    He has better things to do than to get into Notes.

re: .104,
    
>    If Ken Olsen wrote a note in here, he'd get 1,000 replies in 24 hours.
>    He has better things to do than to get into Notes.

	Like I said, at first people would be tempted to react that way.
    But Ken wouldn't need to hang around and argue his points if he didn't
    want to (that's what vice presidents and public relations people are for).
    Focus on the point you made about exactly how exciting it was to read
    a note from the laser developer himself.  Now imagine what something
    like that would do for morale at DEC...it would be amazing!!!

	The other point is that DEC isn't just selling iron here. It is
    selling an entire style of computing; a style of working.  This style of
    working is and always has been a peer-to-peer style of working (as opposed
    to a hierarchical style of working offered by IBM and its clones).  The
    style of working suggested by notesfiles is the epitomy of this peer-to-peer
    working style (as opposed to being copied on a mass-distribution mailing
    lists - which is how most other companies communicate with each other).

	If we (DEC) are to capitalize on this peer-to-peer style of computing,
    then it would make sense for the entire corporation to utilize the heck
    out of this software environment.  Our upper-level management should take
    the lead and bring management into this spectrum to pioneer this working
    style.  How can we expect CEOs from other companies to get excited about
    our peer-to-peer working style if our own CEOs are afraid to use it???

				    -davo

    re: last several

    How about:

    	(1) Send senior managers a daily notes extract of unseen notes

    	(2) Pick an issue; if it were obvious that some observations were
    	    necessary, a memo concerning that issue would be sent out, just
    	    like memos are sent out now [also saying it was OK to post or
    	    circulate]

    	(3) We'd get to discuss the latest update from management

    <DREAM_ON>
    	(4) every two months we nominate a group of ten people to have an open
    	    discussion with management [you can't nominate yourself],
    	    votes sent by mail and tallied with an automated procedure
    <DREAM_OFF>

    When I was a manager, my "Noting" in our local notes file caused a bit
    of a culture shock. Taking on others in spirited discussion caused even
    more of a shock. But, people also knew me well enough -- or figured out
    soon  enough -- that what counts with me is performance and integrity,
    not whether I agree or disagree with someone's opinion.

    Sadly, there are quite a few cases around DEC where agreement, not 
    performance or integrity, is what counts. I, for one, am tired of a lot
    of the yes-saying platitudinous and vacuous garbage floating around DEC
    and vote for a bit more bluntness and honesty.


    /Peters

       
       
       	Personally, I don't want to see someone in our company who is
       making in excess of $2k an hour be "required" to Note.. I think
       it's a waste of Kens time.. (then again, who am I to say??) On the
       other hand, I'd love to see people picked at random from say this
       conference and called in to Kens or one of his direct reports office 
       for a 1 hour chat on what they think is wrong or right with the way
       things are done in DEC.
       
       	I'd go.
       
       						mike

    re .105 & .106 (Davo & Peters)
    
    A hearty AMEN!

   About three months ago, I sent a suggestion to the employee involvement
   program. I received the standard "personalized" form letter that sprinkled
   a couple of words from my suggestion here and there, saying action would be
   taken on it "by the concerned people". I haven't heard from them since.
   I would be happy to even hear from them "Due to blah! blah! blah!(even
   some lame excuses in doublespeak) we are not in a position to take your
   suggestion further". Nothing. Total Silence. Please don't tell me you had a 
   different experience and half your suggestions have been implemented
   already. It just doesn't cut it for me. Unless they make it a policy to
   make it known to all employees who suggest things where exactly their
   ideas stood with respect to implementation as a rule without fail, I am
   not sure it's going to work. It would go the way "Employee Participation"
   "Quality Circles" and other buzzwords-of-the-day went.

   As for me, to hell with the Employee Involvement Program. They're not
   taking me seriously. Mind you I am not asking for my suggestions to be
   implemented. I just want to hear what happened to it.

   Why should I waste anymore of my time?

   Nari


   

re: .109

Why don't you at least "waste" enough more of your time to submit
your suggestion about how they track suggestions to them?

- greg

re: .109

Did the customized form letter actually say that they would get back to you
or periodically inform you of your suggestion's progress? I'm curious.

/Petes

>> Why don't you at least "waste" enough more of your time to submit
>> your suggestion about how they track suggestions to them?

   I guess I should it. It's a good idea.

>>Did the customized form letter actually say that they would get back to you
>>or periodically inform you of your suggestion's progress? I'm curious.

   I went back and looked at the message. It says that I shall be notified
   if it is implemented. I guess I made a mistake in forgetting this and 
   expecting a reply.

   However, with this kind of approach there might be a couple of problems.
   If Employee Involvement wants to extend beyond the clearing-house
   model that diverts messages to concerned groups, it is no more than
   a suggestion box in my facility. If all groups were to take this program
   seriously, then some kind of feedback is absolutely necessary to ensure
   that any or certain groups don't just throw the suggestions in the
   garbage can. Meanwhile I sit here thinking "maybe it wasn't such a good
   idea. That's why they did not implement it". I understand that existing
   power structures coucl be ruffled by some suggestions that require
   interaction between different groups; but atleast requiring groups to
   report back on progress may ensure that every suggestion gets read by all
   parties concerned.

 Nari

    
    REF: Previous Several
    
    Here's my employee involvement solution for tracking all idea
    submissions made to Employee Involvement, DELTA, SIX-SIGMA, etc, etc.
    
    All idea submissions get posted in one public VAXnotes conference,
    making visible the ideas submitted by Digital's 125,000 employees.
    
    One topic per employee per official submission.  Only the moderator can
    create new topics.
    
    The next "reply" in that topic shows the manager(s) to whom the idea
    was sent for review, consideration, action, or explanation on why no
    implementation.
    
    The next "reply" shows the outcome -- namely the memo from the
    manager(s) considering that particular idea, and what the outcome
    and/or explanation or next step.
    
    Finally, each topic is open for any further feedback "replies" from any
    employee with access to VAXnotes who wants to follow this particular
    conference.
    
    One conference that gives the HIGHEST VISIBILITY to the creativity of
    the employees of this company, made official by the Executive
    Committee, and owned by the Employee Involvement Group chartered by the
    Executive Committee to make real employee involvement work in Digital.
    
    Everything out in the open: ALL ideas "officially" submitted, who owns
    responsibility to give it action and real consideration, the outcome
    and explanations, next steps, plus additional employee involvement
    directly into that conference.  The key is TOTAL visibility, of the
    entire process.  If the company wants all employees to be truly
    empowered, doesn't this tracking system give a real sense of
    participation and ownership to make constructive ideas and change work
    to build a more successful Digital?
    

.112 is exactly why Milliken (in .previous_somewhere) has a rule
about 24/72 hour turnaround.

It gives the supervisors and associates a tangible measurement for
the performance of the people who listen to and evaluate suggestions.

It is PERFECTLY REASONABLE for a similar time goal to be put into place
at DEC.  Of course, first we have to get a bunch of managers reclassified
(Millikenized?) as suggestion implementors.  If they have nothing better
to do, and they are measured by it, they will act very quickly on the
suggestions, I bet.  [do I insert a smiley face here? maybe a sad face?]

Just a thought.

Karl

    Re: .113 (Carnell):  An excellent idea, David!  I'm sure you've already
    sent it along.
    
    Feedback is important.  I've sent at least three suggestions to
    SOCIAL::INVOLVEMENT, and received not even one form letter.  (In
    fairness, I point out that two were sent this week.)

The issue is whether or not the involvement program is credible; if it
is not then they won't get the participation they need.

Replying to each submission, while a courtesy, isn't absolutely necessary.
Below, I'll give cases where it can have a negative effect.

But credibility is crucical.  If, for example, they published a broadly
available report that showed "the 10 ideas we found this month that we
are working on, and the status of last month's 10 ideas", I'd be relatively
happy.  Lack of my own idea on the list would tell me what they thought
of it.  I might not be thrilled, but I don't care if *my* idea gets
implemented as long as I know they're implementing at least *some* of
the ideas.  Employee involvement doesn't have to be perfect, it just has
to be effective.

- greg

Some "problems" with detailed replies:

	The honest reply might be, "we'd like to do that but
	so-and-so in some department is too screwed up to see
	its value".  Even though this might be the honest
	answer, you'll never see it.  I'd rather they say nothing
	than they either fib, or use boilerplate/unsubstative
	"non-denial denials".

	Certain information relevant to the problem may simply
	not be publishable.  This is especially true where
	business issues are involved.  We cannot always openly
	discuss revenues, costs, profits, and competitive
	strategies.

	Ideas related to new products must, necessarily, be
	classified somewhat more tightly than "all employees".
	There are too many people in the company to beleive
	that every employee can be allowed to know everything;
	some "need to know" restraints must be applied in a
	real world.  I accept this.  (Indeed, I have to do it
	from time to time).

So, lest anyone think that I'm suggesting the above are "excuses
to hide behind" ... NO, I'm absolutely not.  Just that we should
expect from them actions that demonstrate responsiveness, openness
to the extent possible, and, especially, progress.  No progress;
no credibility.  Can anyone point to any progress yet?  There's
no reason they could not have demonstrated progress within a matter
of weeks.  Actually, some of the memos they've published and the
process they've established _are_ progress, so a pat-on-the-back
for the first few weeks.

Now, what have they done lately?

-------------------

Although I haven't written this carefully, and so don't plan to
mail it to them, anyone else can mail all, part, or extract in
any reasonable way they like, either with or without my name.

(I don't think much of the latest P & P forwarding policies
either).

    Such programs serve the "process".  Somewhere's there's a bureaucrat
    that will be writing in a monthly report to some other bureaucrat:
    
    "The employee involvement program is a success. *** suggestions have
    been submitted"  Isn't that the way the metrics work for such programs?
    
    Skepticism and cynicism for such programs is the natural outcome of the
    silence regarding what suggestions which have been implemented.
    
    To be candid, I've been through this exercise so often, I didn't submit
    a suggestion.  I decided I wait to see a tangible result from someone
    else's suggestion.  It still seems like a prudent decision.
                                                                           

       RE: .113
       
       
       	Oh no, not another notesfile to follow.... sigh...
       
       						mike

Re: 109, 110, 116, 117

	I sent this suggestion to the Employee Involvement Program on the 8th
of January and I have still not received a reply to it. Therefore on the 31st
of January, I resent the suggestion to them indicating that this was a very 
serious request and that I was not being flip/sarcastic etc.. But Still not 
even the standard reply has been returned to me - Maybe they are on vacation ?

/Ted

From:	SMEDLY::MACOMBER     "Ted Macomber @ DTN 291-8885"  8-JAN-1990 12:24:58.24
To:	NM%SELECT::MTS$::"CFO::EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT"
Subj:	Employee Involvement


To: Alan Zimmerle
    Senior Consultant, Employee Involvement Program
    
The standard reply from the Employee Involvement folks is that if *your* idea
is implemented, you will be notified.

I would like to suggest the following:

	Please tell Digital, either through

		[1] A memo to Livewire 
		[2] A Memo in Digital This Week
		[3] Or somewhere else

	about ONE suggestion that has been implemented. 

I whole heartedly realize the importance that an employee be acknolwedged 
that they have submitted an idea to the "suggestion box", and that the 
employee be told when/if the idea is implemented. But something that I think
is even more important is the advertisement to the general Digital Population
that "SOME SUGGESTIONS HAVE BEEN ACTED UPON, and therefore KEEP THEM COMING"

If you don't have global visibility to HOW EMPLOYEES are REALLY Contributing 
through their own ideas, people will begin to YAWN at this program.... 

So how about it ?

Regards/Ted Macomber

   Last Friday I sent in my suggestion about providing feedback on where
   the suggestions went and what was acted upon if at all.

   Somebody pointed out the usual skepticism and cynicism that accompanies
   any suggestion program. This is no different than the snickers that
   one would have seen on an assembly worker's face in an automobile plant
   when he hears about "employee participation" in management. It's my
   belief that's exactly the reason, the Japanese and Milliken have the
   mandatory feedback rule. It preempts any cynicism you may have about the
   suggestion program and increases credibility.

   Well. Let's wait and see if the Employee Involvement Program is for real
   or for fancy ornamentation in Company newsletters and annual reports.

   Nari

    re: .last several

    I agree with Pat that we may have more (self-serving?) metrics here.
    You:

    	(a) start an employee involvement program
    	(b) declare success based on incoming count

    and, because you yourself have no control over the organizations that
    the suggestions impact,

    	(c) you say "you can't measure success any other way"

    If none of this program's metrics include "%/# implemented" then we are
    wasting our energy.

    Also, I would send all suggestions VAXMAIL, not NMAIL or through a
    message router gateway to insure that it arrives at the other end when
    you send it. (Unless you have a regular ALL-IN-1 mail account and send
    your mail read receipt requested.)

    /Petes

    I have been reading this note faithfully since it was begun.  As a
    member of the Steering Committee for DELTA, I have taken back some
    of your constructive criticism.  I have written the process statement
    for DELTA which includes 24 hour turnaround for an acknowledgement and
    no more than 1 week turnaround for status.  One of the problems that
    we have is that IDEAS CENTRAL (the central DELTA mailbox) is not the final
    destination for your ideas, it is literally a post office.  We can
    only suggest process to the destination organizations not dictate.
    
    I would be more than happy to receive, via mail, any process
    suggestions that anyone might have for DELTA.  
    
    Please be a little patient with us.  We are trying to put in place an
    infrastructure that will enhance your probability of reaching the
    folks you need to reach, but we are at the beginning of what will
    take a few months to iron out. Ideas are just now beginning to flow
    and we are not 100% prepared.  This is not an excuse but it is reality.
    
    If I can help anyone to get an answer, research a problem, find out
    where the process is stuck - I will.

    Re .-1
    
    Thanks, you've just explained why this program is just a sham. I quote
    
    "One of the problems that we have is that IDEAS CENTRAL (the central
     DELTA mailbox) is not the final destination for your ideas, it is
     literally just a post office"
    
    The first thing DELTA needs is AUTHORITY to get things done. Without
    that don't bother because you'll simply become yet another portion of
    DEC's bloated bureaucracy.
    
    Dave
    

    The book _Barbarians to Bureaucrats_ mentions the suggestion program at
    Honda America.  Something over eighty percent of all suggestions are
    *implemented*.  Their goal is to get many small suggestions, as opposed
    to waiting for a few big ones.
    
    With such a high implementation rate, I'd expect massive employee
    involvement.  Many little improvements add up quickly.

	I suspect that part of the problem may be that lots of people are
	submitting *BIG* proposals. Things like massive restructuring of
	the company or the way we do business. Those things don't happen
	or even get bought off on over night.

	Ideally suggestion programs are made up of a range of ideas. I
	believe that there are supposed to be local plans to handle local
	(smaller sometimes but not always) ideas. I believe there is some
	of that happening but I'm not hearing much about it. Maybe the thing
	to do is ask local management about local plans and submit local
	ideas there.

				Alfred

    re . 123
     The program is not a sham.  Empowerment means that you have the tools
    etc to GET THE JOB DONE YOURSELF or with others help.  DELTA is not a
    suggestion system.  DELTA doesn't need authority - DELTA doesn't 
    implement!  YOU need tools and infrastructure and that is what we are 
    supplying.
    
    The purpose here is not to create another DEC bureaucracy but to cause
    change - to help small groups to solve THIER OWN PROBLEMS - to create
    an environment where YOU know how to get help.
    

 >>   The program is not a sham.  Empowerment means that you have the tools
 >>   etc to GET THE JOB DONE YOURSELF or with others help.  DELTA is not a
 >>   suggestion system.  DELTA doesn't need authority - DELTA doesn't 
 >>   implement!  YOU need tools and infrastructure and that is what we are 
 >>   supplying.

      Iam not sure I understand the philosophy behind this. If I have a good 
      idea that affects my own immediate environment,
      I know enough to talk it over with my boss or his boss or his boss 
      and so on.. Why would I go through a corporation-wide channel?
      All the suggestions I have made so far have
      to do with more than my part of the organization. They have to do with
      really large chunks of DIGITAL, like product-engineering and Customer
      Services. It involved project leaders of product engineering groups
      spending a week or so at the Customer Support Centers doing a variety of
      things like updating support specialists on the latest information
      about the products they are supporting, answering focussed questions
      and taking back a sampling of high-volume problem areas in their products
      as feedback for fixing in the next release. This necessarily involved
      introducing some changes to the phase-review process itself. As such,
      it needs the ears of people very high-up in the company. We are not
      exactly assembly-line workers who have suggestions about where to place
      the spanner for minimum movement and more completed components in a day.
      If we have those kinds of suggestions, you'd not hear about them at all.
      What exactly would be the purpose in sending a suggestion thro' you to
      my manager who sits next door?

      The kinds of suggestions that you can expect people to make would 
      necessarily involve major changes in the way DIGITAL as a whole does 
      certain things. It may involve changes in processes like the Phase-review
      process which needs a lot of support from the bigger Gods. I don't 
      understand how these can be achieved without some authority or atleast
      enough power to demand feedback.

      Please remember that it's all a voluntary thing. All of us want good
      suggestions to be implemented. Saying that we are just an infrastructure
      and don't have any authority may reflect reality very closely. Whether
      it's enough to get the job done, I am not sure. All you may end up with
      is suggestions dropping off in number if the whole program loses
      credibility. 

      Nari

      

      

    
    Re:
    
>     The program is not a sham.  Empowerment means that you have the tools
>    etc to GET THE JOB DONE YOURSELF or with others help.  DELTA is not a
>    suggestion system.  DELTA doesn't need authority - DELTA doesn't 
>    implement!
    
    The '!' mark is yours not mine. I stand by my previous note, the
    program IS a sham. I'm pretty adapt with the phonebook, wonderful
    list of organizations in the back. If I have an idea for one of
    those organizations I can send it to them. The only problem of
    course is that they'll just flush it down the toilet if the idea
    doesn't fit in with their particular stovepipe.
    
    Ah I say lets not send the message directly lets call in the DELTA
    force post office. I send the suggestion to you, you send it to them.
    They pull the chain and idea disappears down the same hole.
    
    You can't possibly succeed unless you have some teeth. WE DON'T NEED
    MORE INFASTRUCTURE (ie bureaucracy) DEC needs more people who will
    stick their necks out and take risks.
    
    Dave

RE: .128

	I'm afraid I have to agree with Dave (shudder! :-) :-)) here.. If 
	you don't have some teeth, it's gonna be pretty damned hard to
	accomplish something, and isn't accomplishing something the goal
	of an employee suggestion system? (and not the by-product)

	Remember, this is Digital, the land of opportunity and turf wars.
	Many organizations are doing/working on the same things others are
	and damned if they'll give up turf unless told to by above. You
	don't need buy-off here, you need the ear of the senior VP's. YOU
	need to coordinate the presentation of ideas. YOU need to also 
	get the VP's to protect those that make suggestions. Yes, protect
	those that try to do the right thing and make a suggestion that
	might get them in hot water for not allowing their boss to do it.

	Bottom line, you need some teeth. You need to be independent.

						mike

    I am beginning to suspect that this program is not intended to produce
    real change in Digital, but only to satisfy somebody's desire for
    change, without actually causing any.  I sent a suggestion, remarkably
    similar to Nari's in 892.127, on October 31, 1989.  I got a form reply
    on November 3, 1989, from Alan Zimmerle.  The phone book shows that
    Mr. Zimmerle has a secretary, so he must be somebody important.  Around
    here, only cost center managers and above get a secretary.
    
    However, several things make me suspicious:
    	1) the acknowledgement did not say who the suggestion was being
    sent to, so I have no way to follow up with the receiver of the
    suggestion.
    	2) the acknowledgement did not provide an identifier or serial
    number for the suggestion, so I cannot refer to it unambiguously in a
    request for its current status.
    	3) I have heard nothing about the suggestion since November 3,
    1989.
    	4) Mr. Zimmerle's address is in CFO.  The telephone book lists CFO
    as "Public Relations and Advertising" (page 327).  Now it may be that
    CFO is not *exclusively* public relations and advertising, but the fact
    that Mr. Zimmerle sits there is certainly thought-provoking.
    
    I intend to take Mr. Crowther up on his offer, in 892.122, to receive
    process suggestions.
        John Sauter

	Among other things CFO holds a number of groups that come under
	Corporate Personnel. For example, Compensation, Corporate Employee
	Communication, and a number of other groups. 

			Alfred

	Think about what is happening here.  A system is being implemented
    which requests that generic business ideas by sent to a central group
    called DELTA (or perhaps distributed DELTA groups at each site or
    whatever).  What happens is that employee ideas would be submitted to
    a central idea warehouse where, in order to keep track of them, the
    ideas would ultimately need to be somehow sorted and filed by someone
    who may or may not recognize the value of each particular idea.

	Turn this idea around for a momment.  Let's suppose that instead
    of all ideas flowing from the idea producers to a central idea warehouse
    (i.e. the bottomless pit), that instead ideas were each made available
    ("for sale" as it were) to anyone who might be interested in them (as
    described in the "info_store" idea - see notes #1024.1 and 1024.8).

	Using the info-store approach, the better ideas would be sought
    after by those who wish to implement them in a free market "survival
    of the fittest" approach, and the process of sorting and tracking each
    idea would be up to the idea producer (each of whom, would then compete
    to have the better, more organized, as well as user friendly "info-store"
    for idea consumers to use for idea shopping.

				   -davo

    .130�    I intend to take Mr. Crowther....
    
    Its Maxine Crowther.  Thats the only one listed for CHM.
    
    
    

    
    The public conference for tracking all employee suggestions (.113) is
    overkill. I don't particularly care about other people's suggestions
    (inasmuch as they don't pertain to me directly), only that mine are
    being taken seriously. I would also suggest that many potentially
    excellent suggestions would fall to the spectre of instant and
    merciless public scrutiny. Is that not why most feedback/suggestion
    forms are identity-optional?
    
    Having also made a suggestion to Employee Involvement, I share the
    feeling of dropping a pearl into a black hole. The slightly customized
    form letter was an acceptable initial response, but what happened after
    that? I thought that .130 contained some excellent ideas to improve
    feedback on employee suggestions:
    
    	o  assignment of unique suggestion numbers
    
    	o  mention of a designated responsible individual (DRI) to whom the
    	   suggestion has been forwarded
    
    	o  a STRONG suggestion to the DRI to respond immediately and
    	   directly to the suggestor, including a rough timetable for
    	   at least entertaining the suggestion
    
    The inclusion of this information would fulfill Employee Involvement's
    important role  --  creating a two-way communication link between the
    proponent of a suggestion and the possible implementor. The proponent
    is then free to expend any desired amount of _well-directed_ energy to
    bring a suggestion to fruition. This would bring a time-honored Digital
    tradition -- "Those who propose, dispose." -- into line with the
    current day reality of a global corporation with 125,000+ people. It
    also supports another excellent tradition -- letting an idea live or
    die on its merit and the strength of its support, rather than
    establishing a Suggestion Police Unit that forces managers to spend
    valuable time entertaining every cockamamie idea the 125,000+ people
    might generate.
    
                                                 
    

    re: .133---How were you able to tell that the author of .122 resides in
    CHM?  By the node name?
    
    I don't wish to create a rathole, but there is a problem with the
    English language here.  How do you address someone respectfully when
    you don't know the person's first name or gender?  Neither was given
    in .122.  I hope Mr./Ms. Crowther is not offended by the form of
    address that I used, if I got it wrong.
        John Sauter

    re:�  How do you address someone respectfully when
          you don't know the person's first name or gender?
          
    

    re . 127
    I haven't been clear - if you can implement locally then DELTA is not
    necessary for you.  Only when ideas are
    cross-functional/cross-organizational AND you need help would DELTA
    be used. 
    
    re .128 & .129
    By putting in an infrastructure that includes process elements, the
    "post office" can assure that black holes do not occur.  Visibility
    is a very powerful ally when DELTA can say that n ideas went to 
    organization x and not one was implemented AND DELTA says that to
    USMC, KO etc.
    
    re.130 
    I have received your suggestions and they are excellent, since even
    DELTA is striving for continuous improvement, they will be incorporated
    in the document that I sent to you. And since you had no way of knowing
    my name, I take absolutely no offense!!
    
    For your information, DELTA has just concluded a 2 day symposium which
    included representative from every district in the US and most of the
    HQ functions.  What you do not see from your perspective is the support
    for the DELTA process from USMC, from MEM, from EIS etc.  Our
    closing speaker was KO!  If DELTA needs any more legitimacy,  or any
    more senior management fingerprints, or any more support from VP's -
    I don't know what rock to find them under!!!
    
    Let me re-iterate - DELTA is a process which for the first time that
    I'm aware of has put in an infrastructure to make sure that Black
    Holes are not the norm for ideas that go across boundaries.  Local
    programs and implementations of Small Group Improvement Activities
    are the most powerful tool that we have at this time to generate ideas
    to keep this company (or get it back to) flourishing.  But local groups can
    only go so far.  DELTA removes the excuses AT BOTH END OF THE CHAIN.
    "I didn't know where to send it", "It went into a Black Hole", "I don't
    like this idea so I'm going to throw it away".
    
    Keep the cards and letters coming.  

    re: .137
    
>    			DELTA removes the excuses AT BOTH END OF THE CHAIN.
>    "I didn't know where to send it", "It went into a Black Hole", "I don't
>    like this idea so I'm going to throw it away".
    
    Let me take off my noter/NEWS-editor hat and put back on my generic
    SW Spec hat...
    
    At the moment, DELTA doesn't exist here.  It was announced months back. 
    A DELTA representative was named for the District.  Since then, it has
    not existed.  No one talks about it.  I doubt most of the people in my
    district could:
    
    	(1) Give a one-sentence definition of DELTA.
    	(2) State how one participates in the DELTA effort.
    	(3) Specify an electronic mail address for submitting ideas to
    		DELTA.
    	(4) State with certainty that DELTA still exists.
    
    As such, one can effectively call DELTA a still-born child in the eyes
    of the folks around here.  Until DELTA is _VISIBLE_ to the lowest level
    folks and is _STRESSED_ by low- and mid-level management, DELTA will be
    nothing but a shadow of what it could be.
    
    Without low-level mgmt's communication about DELTA, SWS people won't know
    that it is alive.  LIVEWIRE is good, but it is often useless to field
    people who dial-in once every two weeks or so.  US FIELD NEWS has a
    bad reputation of being old, toothless news (although the latest
    edition actually had some current information; too bad that many field
    people will tube it anyway because of its prior performance).
    
    In fact, the only people around here I know of who have participated in
    the whole "Employee Involvement" effort did so because they read _THIS
    CONFERENCE_ and were convinced that someone might actually listen to
    them.
    
    If I did not note here and function as the self-appointed NEWS editor
    for my District, I certainly would not have known that DELTA is
    currently alive.
    
    Putting on my NEWS-Editor hat again, if I could get some monthly
    statistics regarding DELTA, I'd be glad to publish them along with a
    network address to encourage participation.  How about something like:
    
    	"DELTA received X submissions last month.  Of these, Y submissions
    	 (Z% of the total) came from this Area/Region/Whatever-the-heck-it-
    	 is-now.
    
    	"If you know of ways to improve Digital, please send suggestions to
    	 <node::username>.  Your suggestion is guarenteed to be brought to
    	 the attention of those who have the authority to make any changes
    	 which would benefit the corporation."
    
    Just my thoughts...
    
    -- Russ

    REF:  <<< Note 892.138 by NEWVAX::PAVLICEK "Zot, the Ethical Hacker" >>>
                       -< DELTA is still invisible here >-
    
    I was a presenter/participant in the DELTA Feb 5-7 Symposium, which was
    essentially both a kick-off as well as a meeting to begin defining 'the
    details' of successful implementation.  The DELTA symposium was
    excellent with about 90 attendees,  representing DELTA groups being
    formed across the United States.  There were many brainstorming
    workshops, designed to work out details of implementation to ensure
    success.

    Dave Grainger is totally behind this and DELTA details have gone  out
    to field managers advocating the DELTA Program.  Essentially,  this is
    management supported where there will be DELTA Support  Councils
    (DSC) within District Account Teams (or whatever is  closest with such
    field locations like hdqs).  Employees who have  ideas they want heard
    can have them reviewed by their local DSC  and send them to other
    appropriate DSC's as appropriate,  including copying the DELTA program
    office (IDEAS CENTRAL @OGO)  to ensure getting collected centrally for
    possible sharing with  DSC's everywhere (and all employees) via an
    electronic medium,  possibly a master VAXnotes conference.  Details are
    still being  considered and worked on.
    
    Enclosed below is the DELTA introduction information received by
    participants attending the symposium, representing Districts and
    various other field functions where DELTA will begin to be seen, whose
    job as DELTA Champions or Facilitators is to begin implementing DELTA
    in the field.
    
    PLEASE NOTE:  There were many details and ideas created in the
    symposium that will no doubt lead to changes in "how" DELTA works,
    which will be different from the initial draft enclosed below.
    
    For inputting your thoughts on how DELTA can work better, I'm sure the
    corporate DELTA Program Manager (Jim Pitts @MLO) and the DELTA
    Implementation Manager (Ed Pasquarosa @OGO) would welcome any
    constructive ideas electronically sent to them. (Sorry, I don't have
    VMSMail addresses).
    
    Here's the data, again written as an introduction for the people in the
    field responsible for leading and managing the successful
    implementation of the DELTA program in the U.S. field:

                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M

                                        Date:     31-Jan-1990 05:13pm EST
                                        From:     IDEAS CENTRAL
                                                  CENTRAL.IDEAS AT A1 at SONATA at OGO
                                        Dept:     QUALITY - DELTA
                                        Tel No:   Ed Pasquarosa  276-8593

TO: See Below

Subject: DELTA Briefing - Symposium Info

Distribution:
 (removed along with unnecessary memo dialogue)

    SEE YOU AT THE DELTA SYMPOSIUM!!
    
       05 February   Monday             7:30 PM  Best Western Royal Plaza
                                    
    06/07 February   Tuesday/Wednesday  8:00 AM  MRO4 Amphitheater
    
    Review of the attached material will help you to enhance your 
    understanding of the DELTA process prior to the Symposium.
    
    Advance review of the material is optional, since we have planned a full 
    program to ensure that you receive thorough coverage of DELTA at the 
    Symposium. Should you wish to review the attached, I recommend that you 
    print this document since it consists of approximately 25 pages.  
    
    The following updated material is attached:
    
    	    	o Memo from Jim Pitts
    
    	    	o Message from Dave Grainger
    
    	    	o DELTA Advice Package
    
    	    	o Ideas Form
    
    Please note that the Ideas Form explains how to electronically fill out 
    and submit the Ideas FORM (To access the Ideas Form only see explanation 
    below). 
        
    INSTRUCTIONS ON USING THE IDEAS FORM
    
    If using All-in-1, file this Ideas Form using the "FA" (File Attachment) 
    command - then edit to fill-in the form or print.  Keypad "Enter" will 
    move your cursor through the form; you can also use keypad "Advance" and 
    "Back-up" in conjunction with the "Enter" key.  All of the All-in-1 
    editing functions are available (Spell Check, etc.)  If you do not have 
    All-in-1, you may use any other editor.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _
| | | | | | | |
|d|i|g|i|t|a|l|
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|            INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM



TO:                               
    U.S. District Mgrs.                     FROM:  James Pitts
    U.S. Field Geography Mgrs.              DEPT:  Corporate Quality
    U.S. Field Headquarters Mgrs.           EXT:   223-5946
                                            ENET:  James Pitts @ MLO
                                            LOC/MAIL STOP: MLO1-5/T55


SUBJECT:   D E L T A 
    
    
    You are being asked to establish and lead an employee involvement process 
    in your organization.  The reasons are:
    
    1. Currently, there is no company-wide formal process to encourage, 
       handle and implement Ideas from all employees.
    
    2. The Executive Committee is reinforcing the idea that Employee 
       Involvement should be fostered throughout the company.  They 
       are calling this initiative "YOU MAKE A DIFFERENCE".
    
    3. Each major organization will design, implement and operate 
       its own Employee Involvement program.
    
    4. In the U.S. Field, our program is called DELTA.  Dave Grainger's 
       goal is to implement DELTA in all Districts and Headquarters 
       organizations. 
    
    5. All employees have access via DELTA to submit their Ideas and/or 
       the Results of their implemented Ideas.
    
    As you implement DELTA you will be asked and expected to:
    
    1. Establish a process to encourage, receive and handle employee 
       Ideas.
    
    2. Establish a DELTA Support Council whose members include you 
       and/or your peers.  This Support Council should represent your 
       organization's top management team.  At the District level, 
       this translates into members of the District Team.  In  
       Headquarters organizations, this would translate into members 
       of your most senior staff. (At the U.S. level the DELTA Support 
       Council consists of USMC members Tom Colatosti, Bob Hughes and
       Rich Nortz.)

    
    3. Encourage employees to make positive changes in their jobs or 
       organizations.  Assist in the implementation of their actions.  
       Act on employee Ideas and record Results. 
    
    4. Establish a process for acknowledging, recognizing and 
       rewarding employees.
    
    5. Be an actively involved leader.
    
    6. Share your successful employee Ideas and Results with other
       organizations.
    
    7. Take advantage of the help and resources that are included 
       in the attached information.
    
    The responsibility to establish DELTA in the Districts rests with the 
    District Teams and will be led by Sales.
    
    We encourage you to use DELTA to inspire your employees to excellence 
    and to institute permanent change in how we manage our business.
    
                                 Best Regards,           
               
                                 Jim Pitts
               
               
    P.S.
    
    The following is needed by Ideas Central.  If you have not provided 
    this information previously, please send the data to Ideas Central @OGO 
    as soon as possible.
    
    1. The names of your DELTA Support Council members
    
    2. The name of your facilitator/driver
    
    3. The name of your IDEAS mail node address where Ideas can be received 
       by your organization.
    
    

      
      DELTA  "You Make a Difference in the U.S.A."
      
      
      A Message from Dave Grainger 
      
      
      `"You Make a Difference" is Digital's corporate-wide initiative for 
      encouraging employees to bring ideas forward, empowering individuals 
      to take action.  This process will allow us to tap into the valuable 
      resource we have---the ideas of our own people.
                                             
      In the U.S., Digital's implementation of this program is called 
      DELTA---signifying both the "Digital Difference" and a renewal of 
      operating philosophy.
                                             
      Through DELTA, we combine the ideas and initiative of all employees 
      to better serve customer needs, to reduce costs, to fully utilize and 
      focus our human resources, and to increase job satisfaction for 
      employees throughout the U.S.  
                                             
      The payoff for you as a manager, and for Digital Equipment 
      Corporation, is significant.
                                             
      This advice package contains the basic information you need for 
      getting your local, cross-functional DELTA initiatives underway.  
      Further information will be provided as the process continues to grow 
      within the U.S.
                                             
      I wish you success as we begin to focus on this important work for 
      the Corporation.'
                                             
                                             

      TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                      
                                                               
           
           Section I:	 EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW                                      
           
           		 A.  DELTA is ...	      
           
           		 B.  The DELTA Philosophy     
           		 
           		 C.  Benefits: What's In DELTA For You?
                                                   
                         
           Section II:	 EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT
                                                  
           		 A.  Overview  		                  
           
             		 B.  Preparing Your People    		      
                         
            		 C.  "Propose and Do"	      		      
           
           
           Section III:	 DELTA 
                                                  
           		 A.  The DELTA Model	                                                        
           
           		 B.  Roles and Responsibilities		      
                	      	       
           		 C.  How-to Steps for DELTA Implementation    
           
           		 D.  Where to Go For Further Help	      
           
           
           Appendix A.	 Inter-DSC Communications     		      
           
           Appendix B.	 Education Resources	      
           
           Appendix C.	 Examples of DELTA Standards  
           
           Appendix D.   Involvement Examples	      
           
           Appendix E.   Ideas Form    		      

      EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW
                                             
      DELTA is ...
      
      A process to help Digital better recognize and handle feedback from 
      employees.
                                             
      An opportunity for managers to deal with rapid change more 
      effectively by encouraging and supporting employees who take 
      responsibility for the improvement activity of an organization.
                                             
      A flexible management philosophy to guide initiatives that are 
      currently underway, to focus on new efforts, and adapt both to change 
      with changing business climates.
                                             
      A method for better serving customers and for improving quality and 
      performance throughout Digital by implementing the ideas of those who 
      are closest to the customer.
                                             
      An opportunity to build momentum that will help our world-class 
      company continue to be an industry leader in the 1990s.
                                             
      
      The DELTA Philosophy
                              
      As we look to the future, it is clear that we must do things 
      differently in order to compete effectively and to maintain our 
      industry leadership position.
                                             
      Our best ideas and initiatives come from within Digital, and are not 
      imposed from the top down.  This core value has made Digital a very 
      special place to work, and needs reinforcement in order to continue 
      to grow. By establishing a special managerial process, we can ensure 
      that our values are reinforced by our behavior in this area. 
                                               
      That is what the DELTA "You Make A Difference" Employee Involvement 
      Initiative is all about.
        
      The DELTA Symbol
      
      The delta is the mathematical symbol for change.  The DELTA was 
      chosen to represent both "change" and "difference."  We know that, 
      although many ideas that are proposed will come from individuals, it 
      is through teamwork that gains will be made.  Therefore, DELTA will 
      also be an acronym for teamwork.
                                             
      D igital
      E mployees                          
      L everage
      T eam
      A ctivites
                                             
      Implementation of DELTA will take commitment, persistence, and a 
      willingness and ability to change.  The change is in both style and 
      substance.  The key management attributes most needed to be 
      successful with DELTA are listening, supporting, and recognizing.
                                             
      This in itself is a departure from the traditional management role of 
      planning, directing, and evaluating.
                                          
      Benefits: What's in DELTA For You?
                              
      "You Make A Difference," and subsequently DELTA, were developed to 
      meet the need for improved business performance.
                                             
      DELTA is an opportunity for all employees to continue to effect 
      change in our corporate culture and processes.  Our ultimate goal is 
      to build a better work environment, and to improve customer service.
                                             
      DELTA can help improve job satisfaction, attract good people, and 
      increase productivity.  It motivates by empowering people to "fix" 
      the parts of their jobs that frustrate them most.
                                            
      DELTA champions the power of teamwork. It encourages communications 
      and leads to stronger inter- and intra- departmental cooperation.
                                             
      START NOW!  You'll begin seeing benefits immediately.  DELTA, your 
      foundation for continuous improvement, will pay dividends for years! 
      
      
      EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT
                                             
      Overview                                       
      
      Involving your employees means utilizing the skills and experience of 
      all people in your organization.  It can range from asking people 
      their opinions to allowing them to make most business and improvement 
      decisions on their own initiative.  Specific programs can range from 
      a suggestion or idea system to self-managing work teams. 
                                                      
      It is important to understand the opportunities and risks associated 
      with involvement programs. On the one hand, they can improve 
      productivity, quality and morale. However, as with any change effort, 
      people in the organization may not understand or support involvement, 
      and this may cause your work to fail.  When failure occurs, both 
      morale and work output suffer. In addition, people may be less 
      inclined to become involved in suggesting improvements when asked 
      again. 
                                             
      Employee Involvement is a first step in building a "World Class" 
      organization.  It happens in this way:
                                             
      1. Employees are empowered to take responsibility for 
      	 organizational success, up to and including managing 
      	 themselves.  Fewer levels of management are required to 
      	 run the organization.  Employees are motivated to find 
       	 and correct problems.  The motivation and empowerment 
         comes from management leadership and action.  This is 
         the basis of DELTA and where we want you, as managers, 
         to begin.
                                             
      2. Organizations that have fewer levels of management are 
         more responsive to customer needs.  Additionally, they 
         will have a reduced cost structure.
      
      3. Organizations that are more responsive and are less 
         bureaucratic incur less waste.  Responsive organizations 
         meet the challenges of unexpected change quickly and 
         efficiently.   
                                             
      4. Previously "solved" problems can reoccur.  This means 
         that problems must be fixed permanently at their root 
         cause by the people closest to the work. To analyze a 
         problem and identify the proper remedy requires a 
         greater level of commitment, expertise, and teamwork. 
      
      	 Most often, permanent improvements are made project by 
         project --- by the people who DO the work.
      
      5. Less time wasted allows more time for everyone to attain 
         higher levels of productivity and quality.
                                            
      6. Companies that have a low cost structure and a high 
         level of Quality/Customer Satisfaction are very 
         profitable. Higher profits drive investments in 
         technology and human resources, therefore increasing our 
         ability to compete. 
         
      The initial gains derived from employee involvement trigger the rest 
      of the stages.
                  
      That is why EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT is so important!
      
      
      Preparing Your People
                                             
      Preparation for involvement does not have to be lengthy. However, 
      there are several steps that will ensure payback. 
                                             
      Before starting DELTA, consider completing the following three steps.
      
      1. Awareness  
                                             
      	 Involvement should not be a stand-alone process. It is 
      	 and should be seen as an important strategic component 
      	 for achieving business goals. 
                                             
      	 In a staff meeting, list your goals and the changes 
         required to achieve them. Then, talk about involvement 
         activities and how they can help you make necessary 
         changes.  Discuss the 	opportunities and risks 
         associated with an involvement process.  Finally, agree 
         on the level of effort and commitment required to 
         successfully implement this strategy. 
                                             
      2. Readiness 
      
      	 Encourage people to make improvements in their own jobs 
         and in their own organizations first. Once people make 
         suggestions for improvements, there has to be 
         follow-through. Lack of support or implementation of 
         good ideas can damage morale. To increase your chances 
         for success, make sure the organization, including all 
         levels of management, is ready for involvement. 
      
      3. Selection of Appropriate Tools 
                                             
      	 There are a number of participative approaches that can 
         involve people in continuous improvement efforts. A 
         sample of these appears in the chart on the following 
         page. (See Exhibit A: Involvement Programs Continuum.)
      	 The chart shows involvement on a continuum. It may vary 
         from a suggestion or idea program to self-managing work 
         teams. 
                                             
      	 Many organizations that have successful employee 
         involvement processes consider implementation a journey 
         rather than a single event. On this journey, a group 
         starts with a simple program and steadily moves to more 
         advanced methods.
      
      	 If you are already using one of the higher employee  
         involvement payback tools, great!  Continue --- or 
         better yet --- incorporate DELTA to enhance it! However, 
         if your organization has little history with employee 
         involvement processes you can start with the DELTA 
      	 process and focus on making it successful.
                                             

Exhibit A

This chart illustrates how employee involvement techniques, listed across 
the bottom of the graph, can improve Quality (Improving all aspects of a 
corporation).  DELTA incorporates the first three techniques:

    	Suggestions    - The Ideas Form allow a Suggestion to be submitted.

    	Propose and Do - Make the change yourself or form a group to assist  
    	    	    	 you.  Use Ideas Form to submit your results so it  
    	    	    	 can be share and recognized.

    	Small Group    - When implementing an Idea by using a group or
    	Improvement      a team of people, you are utilizing a Quality 
    	Activity    	 technique, Quality Circle or SGIA.  An individual
    	    	    	 or DSC should establish these to implement Ideas.




                       INVOLVEMENT PROGRAMS CONTINUUM


    	^
    	|
    	|   	    	    	    	    	    	    	      x
    	    	    	    	    	    	    	    	x
        Q   	    	    	    	    	    	  x 
    	U   	    	    	    	    	    x
    	A   	    	    	    	      x	    	AMOUNT OF
    	L   	    	    	    	x
    	I   	    	    	  x 	    	       IMPROVEMENT  
    	T   	    	    x
    	Y   	      x	    	    	    	    	ACHIEVED
    	    	x
    	| x
    	|   LOW	    	    	    	    	    	    	 HIGH
    	 -------------------AMOUNT OF INVOLVEMENT---------------------->

TYPES	\   Suggestions	    	    	Quality Circles	    
of  	 >   Program	    Propose 	     or	    	    Self Managed
METHODS	/   	    	      and   	 Small Group	     Work Teams
    	    	    	      Do    	 Improvement
    	    	    	    	    	 Activities

      
      "Propose and Do"
                                             
      The concept of DELTA is to encourage, support, and recognize 
      employees who come forward with ideas in the form of proposals.  
      The focus is on, but not limited to, "Propose and Do".
                                             
      Focusing on "Propose and Do" is the correct initiating step for 
      DELTA.  It is consistent with the Digital philosophy.  It will enable 
      us to gain experience with Employee Improvement on a broad front, 
      while staying within the boundaries of control and simplification.
                                             
      Through "Propose and Do," individuals and groups of employees 
      discover opportunities for improvement.  They formulate a plan of 
      action and follow through to completion.  If additional 
      implementation support is needed, they should seek support from the 
      DELTA Support Council.  The DSC, in receipt of their proposal, may 
      assist the action plan by enlisting appropriate support resources.
      
      At successful completion of the project, they report to managers, and 
      document results in a DELTA common database of projects.  Management 
      certifies that gains have been made and gives appropriate 
      recognition.  The form to submit your Ideas or the Results of your
      implemented Ideas is attached at the end of this package.
                                             
      "Suggestions"
                                             
      In some instances, individuals will have a good idea---and little or 
      no ability to influence change.  DELTA encourages all kinds of 
      constructive ideas and will champion those ideas and suggestions so 
      that they will be considered by the appropriate function(s) or 
      organization(s).
                                             
      *See Section III for complete discussion of DELTA Support Council.
      
      
      The DELTA Model
      
      Overview
      
      Some employees and teams will hit roadblocks or encounter 
      difficulties implementing projects.  Here's where you come in.  
      By establishing a management team called a DELTA Support Council (DSC) 
      you can ensure that teams and individuals have the means to be successful. 
      
      The DELTA Support Council
      
      The DELTA Support Council is the permanent active group commissioned to 
      assist employees and teams in achieving their improvement objectives.
                                             
      It is important to recognize that certain contributor roles within this 
      council will emerge over time.  The DELTA Support Council should discuss 
      and decide who will fill these roles.  
                                             
      o  The Facilitator/Driver receives the Idea, distributes the 
         idea to the DELTA Support Council members and arranges
      	 a meeting to discuss the Idea.  The facilitator/driver will
      	 be trained to know how to run a small group, manage time, 
         manage personalities and use both agreement and conflict to 
         propel the group toward its goal. If someone like this does 
         not emerge within your organization, you might consider 
         using a consultant from outside your organization.
                                             
      o	 The Champion knows the power structure of your 
         organization, and can help lead you through the process of 
         getting your program up and running. 
                                           
      DELTA Support Councils (DSCs) are there to support individuals and 
      work teams.  DSCs measure their effectiveness on feedback from the 
      employees and work teams.
      
      A network of DSCs will exist in every District, Area and Headquarters 
      functional business unit,(see "U.S. DELTA Support Councils," Exhibit B).  
      
      The United States Management Committee (USMC) has established a DSC for 
      those proposals that address country- or corporate-wide opportunities 
      and require top management attention.
                                             
      Employees can submit an idea to the DELTA Support Council that is best 
      equipped to address and support the idea without preconditions.                                                                 

      
    Exhibit B
    
    

    DELTA is designed on a proven Quality Model based on the fact that 
    employees closest to their work with support of their management are 
    best able to create the Ideas which will most improve their jobs 
    performance.  DSCs set-up in each organization will provide management 
    support close to the employees and will facilitate the greatest chance 
    for success.
    
    
    
    
    			  US DELTA SUPPORT COUNCILS
    
    
    
    
			    +-------------------+
			    |			|
			    |     District 	|
	+-------------------|  DELTA Support   	|-----------------+
	|		    |     Councils    	|		  |
	|		    |                   |		  |
	|		    +-------------------+		  |
	|			      |			  	  |
	|			      |			  	  |
	|			      |			  	  |
	|			      |			  	  |
	|			      |			  	  |
+---------------+           +-------------------+	  +---------------+
|		|           |   All Employees   |	  |	  	  |  
| Area/Industry	|           |   and Groups of   |	  | HQ Functional |
| DELTA Support	|-----------|     Employees     |---------| DELTA Support |
|   Councils	|           |Ideas Central @OGO |	  |   Councils	  |
|		|           +-------------------+	  |	  	  |
+---------------+		      |			  +---------------+
	|			      |				  |
	|			      |				  |
	|			      |				  |
	|			      |				  |
	|		              |				  |
	|		    +-------------------+		  |
	|		    |			|		  |
	|		    |       USMC	|		  |
	+-------------------|   DELTA Support	|-----------------+
			    |      Council	|
			    |			|
			    +-------------------+


      Roles and Responsibilities
      
      DELTA Participants (Employees)
                                             
      o	 Discover areas that need improvement.
                                             
      o	 Formulate action plans.
                                             
      o	 Research improvement solutions.
                                             
      o	 Form work teams, when necessary.
                                             
      o	 Propose to Delta Support Council and Ideas Central @OGO, if needed.
                                             
      o	 Participate in problem-solving analysis.
      
      o	 Select appropriate course of action.
                                             
      o	 Launch project(s) and test the "fix."
                                             
      o	 Install the permanent "fix" in the system.
                                             
      o	 Measure and document outcomes and inform 			       
      	 Management/Delta Support Council.
                                             
      o	 Document in DELTA Database via the Idea Form
         (An Idea Form can be found at the end of this document)                                    
      
      
      Line Management
      
      o	 Support employees' active participation
      
      o	 Provide resources and training
      
      o	 Participate in recognition activities
                                             
      
      DELTA Support Council Work
      
      o	Condition environment for change.
                                             
      o	Provide leadership through ongoing, visible top management leadership.
                                             
      o	Recognize results.
                                             
      o	Provide Management Support.
      
       	- Ensure cross functional cooperation
      
      	- Ensure management attention
                                             
      	- Provide for needed training
                                             
      	- Provide for needed resources (time, money, equipment, etc.)
                                             
      o	Ensure cross-geographic communications and cooperation.
                                             
      o	Elevate endorsed proposals as needed.
                                             
      o	Provide Management Sponsorship.
                                             
      	- Facilitate and champion individuals, teams, and managers
                                             
      	- Provide for evaluation of proposals that have broad 		       
      	  organizational implications
      	
      	- Sponsor good ideas that come forward as suggestions to 	       
      	  operating units for implementation 				       
                                             
      Additional Work That Needs to Be Done
      
      1. Expert consulting in:
                                             
      	 - Employee involvement
                                                       
      	 - Quality improvement
                                             
      	 - Teamwork
                                             
      	 - The use of improvement tools and methodologies
                                             
      	 - Goals and measurements
                                             
      2. Drive DELTA implementation
                                             
      	 Provide for Information Systems and clerical support.
                                             
      	 Ensure all outcomes are properly documented in the DELTA
      	 database via the Ideas Central @OGO
                                             
      	 - Track and report on improvement results gained
                                             
      	 - Manage recognition program
                                             
      	 - Drive recognition events
                                             
      	 - Track participation of employees and devise strategies to 
           increase participation
                                             
      	 - Provide for feedback from employees to measure and improve 
           the process
                                             
      	 - Manage communications program
                                             
      	 - Publicize success
      
                                             
      3. DELTA Facilitation
                                             
      	 Assist in setting norms for team behavior.
                                             
      	 Help set meeting goals.
                                             
      	 Recommend and provide training for team members in areas 	   
      	 such as group dynamics.
                                             
      	 Provide objective evaluation of group dynamics and individual 
         performance within group.
                                             
      	 Recommend and manage group process.
                                             
      	 Act as a bridge between employee(s), work teams, the DSC, 
      	 and management.
                                             
      	 Insure the DELTA Program Office (Ideas Central @OGO) has 
      	 copies of Ideas submitted and the Results from Ideas implemented.                                        
         
      How-To Steps                                       
      
      1. Assign cross-functional members to the DELTA Support
      	 Council.
                                             
      2. Schedule your first meeting. Use an organizational
      	 development resource, if necessary.
                                             
      3. Write the DSC Standards. (See Appendix C for examples of 
      	 DELTA standards.) In this step, the Council creates the 
      	 foundation that will support the DELTA Program.  
                                             
      4. Write your Communication Plan.
                                             
      	 Plan employee gatherings to communicate DELTA and announce 
      	 the DELTA Support Council and process
                                             
      	 - How to submit proposals
      	 - Questions and answers
      	 - Demonstrate your commitment
                                             
      	 Establish communication links.
      	 Electronic Mail Account ideas:
                                             
      	 Examples: 
      
      	 IDEAS NED @MHO is the New England District DELTA mailbox
      
      	 IDEAS CENTRAL @OGO is the DELTA (Employee Involvement) mailbox
      
      	 IDEAS USMC @MRO is the USMC DELTA mailbox
                                             
      5. Establish a recognition program for DELTA participants according 
         to Corporate guidelines.

Exhibit C  This diagram shows the flow of Ideas and illustrates three ways            
	   of implementing Ideas.  

THE			     +------------------+
			     |			|
DELTA			     |     I D E A	|
			     |			|
PROCESS			     +------------------+
                                      |
                                      |
			     +------------------+
			     |     Chose an	|
			     |  Implementation  |
			     |      Method	|
			     |			|
			     +------------------+	
           		              |
            ------------------------------------------------------ 
            |	     	              |			         |
  +------------------+	     +------------------+	+------------------+
  |  Propose and Do  |	     | To participate	|	|		   |
  |		     |	     | Form a Proposal  |	|      Form a	   |
  |  Do it Yourself  |	     |    to a DSC	|	|    Suggestion	   |
  | or with a Group  |	     |  via Ideas Form	|	|  via Ideas Form  |
  +------------------+	     +------------------+	+------------------+             
            |	     	              |			         |
            |		              |			         |
            |		     +------------------+	         |
            |		     |   Submit to a	|	         |
     Assistance from	     |DSC for Support or|	         |
     Facilitator if	     |   Endorsement    |-----------------
     necessary		     |Ideas Central @OGO|
            |		     +------------------+
            |		              |
            |		              |
            |		     +------------------+
            |		     |			|
            |		     |  Implement the   |
            -----------------|       Idea	|
			     |			|
			     +------------------+	
			              |
			     +------------------+
			     |			|
			     |  Submit Results  |
			     |   to Data Base	|
			     |  Via Ideas Form	|
			     +------------------+	
			              |
                 +-----------------------------------------+
                 |	     			           |
                 |  R E C E I V E   R E C O G N I T I O N  |
                 |	     			           |
                 +-----------------------------------------+

Exhibit C continued

Propose and DO - DELTA feels the process will be most successful if the                  
                 Propose an Do is the primary choice.  If you can make the                  
                 change yourself or with a group you form, the benefits will                  
                 be immediately realized. Therefore creating a positive result                  
                 for yourself and Digital.

Proposal       - This method allows you to assist in the implementation of                  
                 your Idea with the DSC.  You can volunteer for any degree of                  
                 involvement, from leading, participating to consulting.

Suggestion     - This is when you submit an Idea but will be unable to                  
                 actively participate in its implementation.  The more                                   
                 comprehensive your Idea submission (via an Ideas Form) the                  
                 easier the implementation will be for other employees.

In order to complete the Ideas process and receive proper recognition, it's 
important that the Results of your implemented Ideas be submitted to the DELTA 
database (via an Ideas Form sent to Ideas Central @OGO).


      
      
      
      Further Help
                                             
      o	 Support from your Human Resources organization for help 
      	 with facilitation of the DSCs and work teams on high-impact 
      	 proposals.
                                             
      o	 Seek support from your Quality and Customer Relations 
      	 personnel in assisting work teams in the use of 
      	 problem-solving techniques.
                                             
      o	 Encourage managers and supervisors to take available training. 
      	 (See Appendix B, Education Resources)
                                             
      o	 Encourage teams to take training in Quality Teamwork.
                                             
      o	 Encourage individuals and teams to take training in Basic 
      	 Problem Solving Techniques.       
                                             
      o	 DELTA Program Office 	   Mailbox: Idea Central @OGO
      
      	 Ed Pasquarosa		   8-276-8240                                          
      	 Jim Pitts        	   8-223-5946
      	 Carolyn McMahon  	   8-264-5977
      
      	 We welcome your feedback about DELTA.                                       
      
                                           

      APPENDIX A:  INTER-DSC COMMUNICATIONS
                                             
      To share successes and minimize redundancies your Ideas and/or the 
      Results of your successfully implemented Ideas should be entered 
      into a common database.  This is done by filling out the Idea Form 
      at the end of this advice package and sending the completed form to 
      Ideas Central @OGO. 
      
      Documenting your projects in the common database will maximize the 
      contribution of every successful project to the DELTA effort. Access 
      to the DELTA data base will be provided in Q3.
      
      Additional Ideas Forms can be obtained by sending a request to Ideas 
      Central @OGO.
                                             
      Each DSC must have an ALL-IN-1 account by which communication can 
      take place with individuals, teams, and other DSCs.
                                             
      A VAXnotes file on DELTA will enable participants to share 
      experiences and document both general and specific feedback.
                                             
      
      
      APPENDIX B:  EDUCATION RESOURCES
                                             
      A number of education programs are currently available or under 
      development.  These programs support processes to implement the U.S. 
      DELTA Program.  These courses of study provide participants with the 
      information, tools, and methodologies for:
                                             
      o	 Fostering an environment for employee involvement and 		  
      	 the generation of new ideas
                                             
      o	 Promoting a team approach to systematic problem-solving 
      	 and prevention
                                             
      o	 Implementing quality improvement efforts which will result 
      	 in reduced costs, increased customer satisfaction, and 
      	 improved work environment.
                                             
      The following courses are currently available and will be valuable 
      as you implement your DELTA Program.  They are listed in the 
      recommended attendance sequence.
                                             
      These courses can be delivered several ways, including open 
      enrollment offerings, on-sites at an organizational location, 
      and through local certified trainers.  
      
      For more information and course schedules, contact your local Human 
      Resource Development Manager or Les May, Quality Education Manager, 
      Digital Management Education, @ DTN 249-4298 (617-276-4298), or 
      ALL-IN-1 @BUO.
                                             

      
      APPENDIX B:  EDUCATION RESOURCES
      
      Courses Targeted to Managers (DSC Members)
           
           Quality Leadership Seminar  		     1/2 - 1 day
           
           Creating Business Excellence
           Through Quality Improvement 		     2 days
           
           Overview of Problem Solving Techniques    1/2 day
           
           Continuous Process Improvement:
           A Managerial Approach to Breakthrough     2 days
           
           
           Courses Targeted to Supervisors
           (Frequent/Potential DELTA Team Members)
           
           Overview of Problem Solving Techniques    1/2 day
           
           Quality Teamwork	       		     2 days
                    
           Continuous Process Improvement: 
           A Managerial Approach to Breakthrough     2 days
           
           Basic Problem Solving Techniques	     4 days
           
           Building Customer Focus     		     2 days
           
           
           Courses Targeted to Individual Contributors
           (All)
           
           Basic Problem Solving Techniques	     4 days
           
           Quality Teamwork	       		     2 days
           
      
      The following courses are under consideration for Delta Support 
      Council Members.
      
      	 Delta Support Council Facilitator/Driver Training         
      
      	 Employee Involvement Systems Training                   
      
      	 Delta Program Overview and Managers' Role               
                                                                       
      Additional information on these programs will be distributed in Q3.
      

      APPENDIX C: EXAMPLES OF DELTA STANDARDS
                                             
      DELTA will address, in a timely manner, ideas with any of the following 
      ultimate objectives:
                                                     
      o	 Increase the likelihood of a specific sale.
                                                         
      o	 Reduce overhead without increasing risk to revenue and customer 
      	 satisfaction.
      
      o	 Improve Digital competitive capabilities in an existing 
      	 or prospective market within two years.
                                             
      o	 Increase productivity through improving our processes,
      	 morale, customer satisfaction, market awareness or 
      	 states-of-mind which contribute to success.
                                                         
      o	 Reduce costs of sale or doing business.
                                                         
      o	 Conserve non-monetary resources (time, corporate image, 
      	 etc.) without significantly increasing risk.
      
      All ideas should include:
       	 
      o	 Pertinent background information.
                                                         
      o	 Preferred solution with expected benefits. (quantified)
                                                         
      o	 Implementation schedule.
                                                         
      o	 Required resources and estimated budget requirements.     
                                                    
      Within 2 workdays, idea petitioners will receive acknowledgment.       
      
      DELTA will be unbiased. Ideas will be accepted from any Digital 
      employee. 
      
      No idea or proposal will receive preferential treatment because of the 
      petitioner's organizational rank, seniority or past accomplishments.  
                                             
      No treatment or disposition of a proposal shall be influenced by 
      personal relationships of DELTA Support Council members.
                                                     
      Having submitted a written idea, each petitioner will have the 
      option to address the DELTA Support Council.         
                                             
      Only those having DELTA as one of their top priorities and having their 
      manager's full cooperation will sit on the DELTA Support Council.  
                                                        
      All DELTA members will be fully prepared before DELTA meetings convene.  
      
      The Support Council's own behavior and output illustrates the 
      productivity and efficiency it encourages.
                                             

      
      APPENDIX D: INVOLVEMENT EXAMPLES 
                                             
      Cost Savings and Improved Service
      
      Last November, Susan began investigating charges from an existing 
      courier.  She found the charges inconsistent with the level of service 
      being provided.  On her own initiative, she located a new courier and 
      worked with them to establish the needed level of service at an 
      appropriate price.  Further investigation revealed that the new courier 
      had offices throughout the area.  
                                             
      There is now an effort to establish a contract to cover the entire 
      geography, with reduced costs in freight and improved service. 
                                             
      A win for Digital and the vendor!
                                             
      Quality of Work Life
                                             
      Joe is a Department Coordinator and has been with Digital for 9 years.  
      He is also a quadriplegic who has overcome many obstacles to achieve 
      success.
                                             
      On his own time and initiative, Joe assisted a discouraged quadriplegic 
      coworker.  He shared experiences, both challenges 
      and successes, to help inspire his co-worker, who has become more 
      productive and successful as a result of Joe's encouragement.
                                             
      Joe is an outstanding example and inspiration for all of his coworkers!
                                             
      Teamwork and Customer Satisfaction
                                             
      Kate and Jim of Customer Services Central Logging Desk and Ken 
      and Frank of the Benchmark Center have combined efforts to form a 
      Quality Improvement team. This team is dedicated to improving 
      cross-functional communication.  Their insight and dedication has
      led to the design of a communication mechanism based on the Customer 
      Services CHAMP escalation system. 
                                             
      This system alerts all members of the Account Team to failures or 
      service outages status in customer accounts, and prescribes the action 
      plans to repair those failures. The ALERT system, as it is now called, 
      was designed to improve cross-functional communications and provide an 
      in-depth overview of Customer Services policies and procedures.  
                                             
      A breakthrough in diagnostic service and a win for our customers!


     DELTA					       IDEAS INSTRUCTIONS
     You Make a Difference      	               IDEAS CENTRAL @OGO
     
     YOUR IDEAS ARE APPRECIATED
     
     Thank you for requesting an Ideas Form from DELTA.  Before filling in 
     this form, please read over this memo. It contains pointers which 
     will help your idea be more successful.  
     
     At this very moment, no one has a clearer picture of your idea or 
     knows more about it than you do.  Within Digital's new "You Make a 
     Difference" framework, you are empowered to make constructive change.
     
     TAKE ACTION YOURSELF
     
     First, please give strong and serious consideration to implementing 
     your idea yourself or within your own group - and then sharing your 
     results through the DELTA process.  The "Do It Yourself" method has a 
     number of advantages:
     
             -  Implementation takes the form you have in mind
             -  Rate of implementation is under your control
             -  You are the first to receive the benefits of your idea
     
     Please remember to share the results from doing it yourself so other 
     groups may benefit from your efforts.  Also, your efforts deserve 
     appropriate DELTA recognition.  If you "Do It Yourself," the Ideas 
     Form can then be used to submit your results to DELTA. 
      
     REQUEST SUPPORT IF NEEDED
     
     If your idea cannot be implemented locally, requires management 
     support, or needs other resources within Digital, then use the 
     attached Ideas Form to get your idea into the DELTA process.  
     
     WHERE TO SEND YOUR IDEA
     
     After you've completed the form, send it to IDEAS CENTRAL @OGO and it 
     will be forwarded to the appropriate organization. If you send your 
     completed Ideas Form directly to an organization, please copy Ideas 
     Central @OGO for corporate tracking and logging into a data base of 
     ideas.
     
     No matter where your completed Ideas Form is sent, you will receive 
     an acknowledgment of receipt.  You will be kept informed about the 
     status and disposition of your idea.  Should, for some reason, you 
     are not kept up-to-date, please contact IDEAS CENTRAL @OGO.
     
     The better the details you provide, the faster the process of review 
     and implementation.  If you have any questions, call Ed Pasquarosa at 
     DTN: 276-8240.  Digital is looking forward to hearing your 
     constructive ideas or the results from them.

     
     
     INSTRUCTIONS ON USING THE IDEAS FORM
     
     If using All-in-1, file this Ideas Form using the "FA" (File 
     Attachment) command - then edit to fill-in the form.  Keypad "Enter" 
     will move your cursor through the form; you can also use keypad 
     "Advance" and "Back-up" in conjunction with the "Enter" key.  All of 
     the All-in-1 editing functions are available (Spell Check, etc.)  If 
     you do not have All-in-1, you may use any other editor. 

                                IDEAS FORM
Rev 2.0                                               DELTA REG# >            

Your name>                                        DTN >	                      

Electronic Mailing Address:  All-in-1 or VAXmail >                            

1. Please select one ("X") of the following:

   >   PROPOSAL: an idea in which you want to participate in implementation. 
   >   SUGGESTION: a constructive idea which you want a Function to consider.
   >   RESULT: outcome of an idea you already implemented and want to share.

2. Please describe the following aspects of your idea or the results of your             
of your idea, that was implemented.  

Opportunity or issue your idea addresses >                                    
                                                                              
                                                                              

Describe proposed remedy and any support your idea needs in order to succeed. 
>                                                                             
                                                                              

Results you expect your idea to produce, or results your idea has already 
produced.  Please be as specific and quantitative as possible.>	              
                                                                              
                                                                              

3. The anticipated benefits or contributions you envision from your idea:
   Please select at least two and rank: 1=Primary, 2=Secondary, 3=...

   >   Customer Satisfaction              >   Cost Savings
   >   Employee Performance               >   Employee Morale
   >   Process Improvement                >   Market Share
   >   Product Improvement                >   Service Improvement
   >   Productivity Improvement           >   Time Savings
   >   Profit/revenue Improvement         >   Other 

       If "OTHER", please explain   >                               

4. Which Function (Delta Support Council) do you think should receive your idea:
   Please select two and rank: 1=Primary,  2=Secondary

   >   My Organization                    >   My Facility 
   >   Administration                     >   Customer Services
   >   Finance                            >   GIA or Europe
   >   EIS - Software Services            >   Engineering 
   >   Human Resources - Personnel        >   Educational Services
   >   Marketing                          >   Manufacturing 
   >   Purchasing                         >   Sales & Sale Support

       Other or explain if necessary >                              



 5. The initial implementation, where?  If expanded, where?  [select two]

   >   My Job    >   District    >   Region  >   U.S.    >   World-wide 
                  or Facility        or Dept.	  	     or Function

6. If Digital may make or save money from your idea, please estimate about how
   much you'd expect in the first year of your idea being fully implemented: 

      		    $  >             (in thousands of $ per year)

7. How much time do you think it will take to get your idea implemented once all
   the right resources are in place?

                 >   0-6 month      >   6-12 months      >   years   

8. If a PROPOSAL, what role could you perform during implementation.  

   ROLE:         >    Leader        >   Participant     >    Consultant
    

    Oh YES! I've heard about DELTA. It's a crack US anti-terrorist force.
    Right? :)

    After reading through all 20 pages of the presentation material a few
    replies back...  The goals and process for establishing DELTA are all
    well and good, but something's missing.
    
    Before coming to this company, I participated in a productivity
    improvement program at an electronics company in the Chicago area back
    in the early 80's.  The program had several facets.  One was to give
    bonuses to entire product groups (i.e. at least a few hundred people)
    based on accomplishments in profitability, productivity improvements,
    engineering accomplishments and what I would call improvements in
    "administrivia."  The quarterly goals were drawn up in part by upper
    management and in part by a committee representing a cross-section of
    employees.  Further detail is irrelevant here, but a key point is that
    the system combined specific tasks, specific rewards and a specific
    process.  The program was also mandated from the very top.  From the
    last several replies, I gather that DELTA is in a far more embryonic
    stage.  Perhaps a little less criticism is in order until DELTA
    programs develop into something more specific.
    
    As for suggestion programs, again the other company offers an
    instructive contrast.  Another part of the big program was a suggestion
    system implemented in the factory.  There were either zero or token
    payments given to suggesters, and fewer than one quarter of the
    suggestions were implemented.  The process worked this way:  each
    individual suggestion was reviewed by management, and a reply of yes,
    no or perhaps was given back to the suggester within one week.  The
    suggestions were posted on a bulletin board with the names of the
    suggester and reviewer there for everyone to see.  This tended to
    encourage specific and narrowly focused suggestions.
    
    After the initial flood of suggestions, wonder of all, the suggestions
    kept  coming in at the rate of a few a week from each group of one or
    two hundred people.  The key was, IMO, the specific and focused nature
    of the program.
    
    I think the current corporate suggestion program will succeed when 
    a) someone can explain all the specifics of the process end to end in a
    shorter space than this reply, b) suggesters know the results of their
    submissions with certainty within a deadline, and c) as someone
    suggested a while back, the corporate program can tell us the details
    of one suggestion that has been implemented.
    
    My $.04.
    
    Wes Plouff

    I was also a participant in last week's DELTA symposium and would like
    to share my impressions of the program & ideas submitted.  Like many of
    you who have responded in this conference, I had only heard brief,
    non-specific details regarding DELTA.  The purpose of this conference
    was to establish many of the details regarding implementation,
    proceedures for acknowledgement, recognition, & rewards, and to ensure
    that the DELTA program receives the marketing it needs through out the
    countrty.  An important aspect of this symposium was that these details
    and decisions were being decided upon by those that will carry the
    message and program forward.  Participants included a good mix of all
    functions at all levels, with many individual contributers as active
    participants.  The energy and support is there for this program to
    work, but every reader of this note and every individual who recognizes
    the benefits of such a program also has an important role and
    responsibility towards it's success. 
    
    1. First, find out who your DELTA symposium attendee was & who is on
       your DELTA Support Council.
    
    2. Ask them how YOU can help them with it's success.
    
    3. Participate in the process, and encourage others to do the same.
    
    One of the main principles of this program is employee involvement,
    particularly the concept of "Propose & Do".  When you see something
    that you can change regarding your job and it's the RIGHT thing to do, then
    DO IT!  I've never seen anyone in DEC get fired for doing what was
    right.  Remember, it much easier to ask for forgiveness than for
    permission.
    
    The program WILL work, but understand that there is not a magic switch
    that we can trow and instantly turn on this process.  Give the
    facilitators and drivers a few weeks to get the ball rolling and find
    out how you can help them.
    
    Frank Reams
    ALL-IN-1 = @WKO
    VAX Mail node AUNTB
     

    How does one find out who one's DELTA symposium attendee was?
        John Sauter

    Re: -1... You could ask you District Manager or you can find out
    through the DELTA Program office;  Vax mail - SONATA::IDEASCENTRAL ,
    ALL-IN-1 - Ideas Central @OGO
     

    re .144

    Latest issue of U.S. Field News: "Electronic mailboxes are being
    established for each district and the U.S. functional headquarters
    organization. Employees are encouraged to send ideas and proposals
    to the DELTA Support Council of their choice. A complete listing
    of DELTA mailboxes is available through LIVE WIRE."

    re: finding your DELTA rep
    
    If you have to go looking for your DELTA rep, the program is already
    failing.  How the heck are they going to solicit input from people if
    the coordinators are going to keep their own identities secret?
    
    DELTA sounds like it is an attempt to _make_ things happen.  The
    senario of "go find who to talk to and do it yourself" is the same way
    things get done (or _not_ done) now!  If this is the case, then DELTA is
    a huge, worthless waste of time!
    
    If DELTA coordinators are not concerned with promoting the program and
    making themselves known to the districts, then save us all the time and
    money by tubing the program and giving these people real work to do!
    
    DELTA will never be _really_ successful until EVERY PERSON IN EVERY
    DISTRICT knows what DELTA is and how to contact the appropriate warm
    body to get ideas considered.
    
    -- Russ

	The DELTA people ARE trying to get better known. People should not
	assume that just because they don't know who their DELTA contact is it
	doesn't mean that they aren't trying to get that information to you.
	It just means that the news isn't instantanious and not everyone hears
	everything on day one.

	They are not trying to hide. They are trying to make themselves
	known. They are concerned with making everyone aware of the program.

	This whole idea of employee involvement is still pretty new to Digital.
	It's going to take a while. Let's not be in such a hurry to kill it
	before it's had a fair test.

			Alfred

    Re: .146: There will be a massive marketing of DELTA in the near
    future.  My suggestion of finding out who your DELTA representative is
    was for the benefit of those who had immediate needs for proposing
    ideas or perhaps might like to add their support and assistance to the 
    success of the program.
    

    re: .147
    
    I reserve the privilege of jumping on DELTA if the scheme of things
    is implemented as it currently appears from this vantage point.
    
    I stand by my remarks:  if DELTA does not advertise completely and
    continually, then it's another black hole.
    
    Why am I so quick to jump on this?  Because every corporate "program"
    I've heard about since I've been here has been a black hole.  EVERY
    ONE!  I've seen programs announced.  Time passes and one of two things
    happen:  either the program is never heard of again, or someone
    circulates a memo declaring the program to be an overwhelming success
    when no one in the field can even tell you what the program function
    is!
    
    Sure, I could be nice and "give it time".  But experience dictates that
    nothing will be heard until the program is proclaimed a "success" --
    and then it is too late to introduce reality to the situation. 
    Besides, it was started a few months ago with zero tangible results --
    not even name recognition!  We should at LEAST have name recognition by
    now!
    
    DELTA matters to me -- BIG TIME!  If I weren't so fried with all the
    extra work I'm doing now, I'd probably see if there was some way for me
    to participate in the program at shorter range.  But, I can only do
    what I can do and I'm at my limit.  The last thing I need now is for
    DELTA to join the ranks of the other Corporate Black Holes and have to
    hear "what a wonderful success it was"!
    
    This notes conference apparently has some visibility to DELTA folks.  I
    know it has visibility to Digits across the world.  My message is this:
    
    	If DELTA doesn't come out swinging then kill it now!  We don't need
    	another Corporate program claiming successes over fictional giants.
    	It adds insult to injury to those of us who are busy fighting REAL
    	giants!
    
    I dare DELTA to prove that it can make a difference -- a REAL
    difference!  I want to see a REAL program where people can deal with
    REAL issues!  I will send suggestions to DELTA when DELTA proves that
    it has the guts to be something more than just another black hole!
    I am not about to take time away from my daily endeavor to "make a
    difference" to send information into a black hole!
    
    I am simply trying to clarify the score.  Lest anyone has any notions
    that DELTA is thriving here, the score reads:
    
    		DELTA : 0 points
    
    Now, let's go from there...
    
    -- Russ, who spends significant amounts of time trying to compensate
       for the fact that information rarely gets to those who "need to
       know" in the field

RE:        <<< Note 892.147 by CVG::THOMPSON "My friends call me Alfred" >>>

>	This whole idea of employee involvement is still pretty new to Digital.
>	It's going to take a while. Let's not be in such a hurry to kill it
>	before it's had a fair test.

Alfred, do we work for the same company?  My thought was I hope that 
an official program like DELTA wouldn't kill employee involvement!

dave

	RE: .150 I appear to have been misunderstood. What I was trying to
	say was let's not kill DELTA before it has a fair test. While DEC
	people have always been involved to some extent I don't believe we've
	had the high level (quantity or quality_) of involvement that we
	could have or that we need. Programs like DELTA are there to boost
	employee involvement. I think we have to give them a fair shot because
	there is a lot of inertia to get through. You can't start something 
	like this on a Monday and rule it a failure on Friday. IN fact I
	doubt that starting it in January means you can judge it in Feb. or
	even in August. WHo knows maybe next January will be too soon to
	say if it's failed or succeded?

				Alfred

    re: .150
    
    I heard the first DELTA trumpet blast in November, as I recall (not
    January).  Three months is more than ample time to begin the process of
    developing name recognition.
    
    Experience dictates that a normal corporate program will not be heard
    from again until next fall/winter, when it will then be pronounced a
    smashing success.
    
    If DELTA is going to succeed, then I will be happy to applaud it.  But
    I will not sit by and wait for the traditional "it's over and it's a
    success!" message to be sent out.  DELTA does not exist here.  It
    cannot possibly exist without name recognition as the very first, basic
    step.  Yet, if I remember correctly, some people have already indicated
    that DELTA is at work.  This is clearly incorrect.  It may be working
    in a few locations due to the energies of certain individuals, but the
    program itself cannot even begin to _REALLY_ work until well over 90%
    of the employees recognize the name of the program.  And that's just
    the beginning...
    
    I will give it time.  Certainly, plenty of time will be needed to
    affect real changes.  But I refuse to sit quietly.  DELTA says that it
    provides a way for voices to be heard.  I want it to live up to its
    charter.  But the effort hasn't REALLY begun yet...
    
    -- Russ

DELTA .... what an interesting name. I'm an interal manager that's only 
7 levels from Ken (but that is another note) and I haven't seen squat 
about DELTA. And if history is any indication we won't.

/jon

    The overall company program is call Employee Involvement Process, or
    EIP.  It is not, at least at present, a coordinated effort occurring in
    the same way in all organizations.  In fact, most organizations are
    involved in setting up some different but equivalent format/process for
    their participation in the overall EIP.
    
    DELTA is the U.S.Field Organization's cut at EIP.  If you aren't in
    that organization, its a good bet you might never have heard of DELTA.
    I would assume that somewhere in your own parent organization, a
    similar developement is proceeding.  But a lot of these developments are
    quite new, as Alfred says of the whole program, so there isn't anything
    specific to "advertize".  Here in our group, part of SWS/E, we just had
    our first EIP program committee meeting for organizational purposes and
    to start putting together our local approach and contribution and we're
    still struggling with how to "do it right" and I expect we will modify/
    change and enhance as we go along, probably for ever.
    
    Our approach may be widely successful; it may only be marginally
    useful.  How it fairs will be our responsibilty and success, and will
    only indirectly be influenced by other approaches such as DELTA.  In
    one sense, each program will have to fairly well match the personality
    and cultural biases of its members in order to attain high levels of
    success. so I would expect to see a range of approaches, directions,
    failures, reorganizations, retrenchments, and breakthrus.  Hopefully,
    we can all try to keep our eyes on the overarching goal of improving the
    company's results and fortunes, a goal that is long-range in thinking
    for once, and not one myopically leading us down narrow and confining
    journeys.
    
    Jack

    
    Re .130 or thereabouts: (how do we follow up on suggestions?)
    
    It's getting better.
    
    The response to my first Employee Involvement suggestion was
    
    	"Your ideas on [subject] will be forwarded to the appropriate
    	 groups for further evaluation."
    
    The response to my latest suggestion was
    	
        "We have received your suggestion regarding [subject]...
    	 Your ideas will be forwarded to [real person's name] for
    	 further evaluation. We will communicate their responses
    	 back to you." 
    

In my earlier reply (.156, now deleted), I had pointed out that the "United
States Management Committee" is a U.S. Field organization (Dave Grainger's
organization), and that it was not clear that the memo was really addressed
to all U.S. Employees.

So I called up the Ideas Central folks at OGO to find out what they consider
the scope of the DELTA program and what its relationship is to the Employee
Involvement program at CFO.

The Employee Involvement program is the Corporate Program set up as a result of
a directive from the Operations Committee.  In turn, the Employee Involvement
folks have directed other organizations to set up their own programs.

DELTA is the program set up by Dave Grainger's program.  What does this mean
for people (like John Sauter and me) who work for Jack Smith?  The Ideas
Central people decided not to ask whether a person contacting them works for
Dave Grainger, but rather to take any calls they get.  They didn't ask MEM
(Manager of Engineering and Manufacturing) for permission to do this, but hope
that MEM will listen to them.  Since DELTA _is_ empowered (indirectly) by the
executive committee, I suspect they are correct, and I applaud them for not
deciding to pass the buck!

/john

    REF: .158
    
    My impression was that the program for MEM was Six-Sigma.  However, if
    any MEM individual had an idea, suggestion or proposal affecting the
    field or Digital overall, I would certainly consider also copying the
    DELTA address along with the corporate employee involvement address.
    

    
    	The latest copy of DECWORLD, which I recieved by mail (Post Office)
    yesterday, has an article all about DELTA. And the way I read it was,
    that it applies to ALL of Digital Employees.

	For a minor chuckle, look at page 29 in DECWORLD, Feb 90.

	If you don't have a copy:

	It shows three Notes entitled "Employee Involvement", notes
	167.0 - 167.2.

	Very nice.

	The notes span 5 days.  It doesn't say which conference the 
	notes came from...

	Regards, Robert.

    re: .159
    
    What is six-sigma?  How does one send suggestions to it?
        John Sauter

    RE:  John Covert:
    
    I thought "MEM" was "Manufacturing-Engineering-Marketing"  (Jack
    Smith's world).
    
    -Don-

    
    So, Folks, how is Employee Involvement doing these days in your neck of
    the Digital DECland woods?
    
    Here's a blurb from Corporate:
    

                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M

                                        Date:     19-Jun-1990 08:27am EDT
                                        From:     ALL-IN-1 Manager
                                                  MANAGER AT A1 at SAHQ at ALF
                                        Dept:     SSR IM&T O/A Services
                                        Tel No:   (404) 772-2332

TO:  SUBSCRIBERS: @A1@ODIXIE@ATO
TO:  SUBSCRIBERS: @A1@MSDOA@ATO
TO:  SUBSCRIBERS: @A1@AUNTB@ATO
TO:  All ALL-IN-1 users on this node      ( SUBSCRIBERS: AT A1 at SAHQ at ALF )


Subject: Employee Involvement Briefing - No.2


           ********************  PLEASE NOTE  *********************
       THIS MEMO IS FROM JOHN SIMS, VICE PRESIDENT STRATEGIC RESOURCES.
           ********************************************************


    	   ********************************************************
    	   *							  *
    	   *            EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT BRIEFING		  *
    	   *                 15 JUNE 1990  (No. 2)		  *
    	   *   							  *
    	   *     Published By Corporate Employee Involvement	  *
    	   *           (CFO2-3/K78) INVOLVEMENT @CFO		  *
    	   *               or SOCIAL::INVOLVEMENT		  *
    	   *            Senior Editor, Alan Zimmerle		  *
    	   *							  *
    	   ********************************************************
    
    CONCORD, MA 15 June 1990  Welcome to the second edition of the E.I. 
    Briefing.  In this issue, we've asked Jack Smith, Senior V.P. of 
    Operations, to share comments he made to graduating seniors at Boston's 
    Wentworth Institute's commencement last year.  You'll find they apply very 
    clearly to Digital's journey toward involvement.
    
    By the way, more than a dozen new ideas have come in as a result of the 
    first Briefing.  Involvement is working:  we get reports of successes 
    across the geographies.  From suggesting ideas for others to implement, to 
    solving problems in teams.  From changing the design of work and 
    organizational structure to entire groups working to increase quality and 
    morale.
    
    Future editions of E.I. Briefing will relate some of those stories and try 
    to get more of you interested in sharing your ideas.  After Jack Smith's 
    story, you can read about a 'mindset' idea that should save Digital 
    millions.
    
    Jack Smith has been with Digital since the earliest days.  In speech 
    excerpts which follow, he calls for the kind of creativity and the belief 
    in your ability to make a difference that has always made Digital 
    different and better:
    
         "In the computer industry, I have seen the lifetime of new 
         products change from years to months, start up companies 
         emerge overnight to become billion dollar players, and billion 
         dollar players disappear seemingly overnight, their markets 
         vanished, their products too slow, their technology obsolete.  
         Now, all of this change has been labeled as Industrial 
         Turmoil.
         
         Out of turmoil, traditionally, comes opportunity.  The 
         companies that not only survive, but thrive, will be those 
         whose employees are the most productive, innovative, and 
         motivated.  I would go as far as saying that, in the future, 
         ONLY companies that encourage employees to be CREATIVE and 
         make a difference will ultimately succeed.
         
         Making a difference many times involves risk and risk in turn 
         can result in failure.  Today, too much corporate focus is 
         concentrated on averting failure, rather than creating 
         success; success that can only come from making a difference 
         and taking the necessary risk.
         
         Unfortunately, our financial and investment institutions have 
         nurtured this riskless environment.  They want to minimize 
         risk - they desire consistency and, most of all, 
         predictability...  What I see all too often in business, 
         particularly at the entry level, is coaching of our young 
         people to conform and to passively accept things as they are - 
         the emphasis is on fitting in.  Making a difference involves 
         too much risk.
         
         In other words, it is our IMAGINATION, our VISION, our ability 
         to be CREATIVE that distinguishes us as humans. Too many young 
         people are being coached to simply conform.  THIS IS NOT THE 
         WAY TO SUCCEED.
         
         Digital Equipment Corporation recently jumped into the 
         forefront of the expanding workstation market with the 
         introduction of our RISC- based DECstation 3100.  The 
         technology for this product was acquired outside Digital from 
         a small innovative chipmaker called MIPS.  This acquisition 
         represented a major turnaround in the way Digital introduces 
         its technology.  And what made it happen was not the great 
         foresight of senior management, not the superiority of our 
         long range planning, but the dedication of two individuals.  
         They took the initiative and decided this is the way we had to 
         go.  They had creative ideas about technological innovation 
         within Digital and were determined to make a difference ... 
         And they did. 
         
         Don't let anything stand in your way.  It is your RIGHT to 
         share your ideas and have them heard.  And any organization 
         that doesn't allow that to happen is not going to survive in 
         the long run and it's not where you want to be."
    
           * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    
                                 A MINDSET IDEA
    
    Creative ideas can come in small packages.  The Distribution Purchasing 
    people have come up with a small, creative idea that promises to save 
    Digital tens of thousands of dollars per day in the U.S. by getting each 
    of us to think before using premium mail and packaging services we may 
    not really need.  It's a mindset idea, because we're challenged to think 
    and then ask ourselves:
    
         o  When does this package REALLY need to get there?  
         o  What are my choices?  
         o  Will there be a person there to receive this package?
    
    Distribution Purchasing's campaign centers on a handy desk top decision 
    aid that allows you to diagnose the services you're interested in 
    (electronic mail, FAX, courier and domestic/international) - and then 
    gives you a decision table for each category that helps you make the 
    best choice for your needs and requirements.  The creators of "The Mail 
    and Shipping Guide" say that 10,000 people are making a $10 mistake each 
    day because they make the premium choice (such as a courier when U.S. 
    Postal Services would have done fine).  To order your copy of the GUIDE, 
    send mail to NEST::ORDER or Order @NRO.  Include Name, Badge, Cost 
    Center, Mailstop, Quantity and Part Number EF-B1720-50,
    
           * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
    
    In this issue, we're inviting still more ideas.  SEND YOUR'S IN.  If you 
    know the address of your organization's idea/suggestion system, sent it 
    there.  If not, check with your manager for the right address.  If your 
    organization doesn't have its own system yet, simply send your idea 
    electronically to:
    
                   Ideas Central @OGO or SONATA::IDEASCENTRAL
    
    Ideas Central assures you that your idea will go to the right people ... 
    and that you'll get a quick acknowledgment and follow-through.
    

    Next Unssen
    

    Actually, I'm glad you asked. My part of the CUP organization (that's
    Corporate User Publications) seems to have no interest in promoting the
    Employee Inovlvemnt program. A couple of months ago, I asked my CC
    manager about it and she knew absolutely nothing about it (she claimed
    that "employee involvement" was what happened when our supervisors
    reported our issues at an extended staff meeting).
    
    A couple of weeks ago, my manager sent out some message about the DELTA
    program. But, there's be no encouragement from my management levels for
    participation. I find it all fairly odd.
    
    Joan G.
    

    
    ** This reply posted by me on behalf of another Digital employee **
    
    Here in Storage Systems there has been a sudden out-of-the-graveyard
    resurgence of Six Sigma and Employee Involvement. Someone came down
    from upstairs and wanted to know what became of these programs he
    sponored.  Of coarse, they (Six Sigma/Employee Involvement) were
    early-on choked to death by Middle Management.  The employees know this
    and are now hardened in cynicism or stupified with apathy.  I being
    one.  I was the only  person to stand up at that meeting and challange
    managements supposed sincerity in backing fully these two programs. 
    The Six/Sigma sponsors insisted that they were empowered to make it
    work.  That made it manditory that all present (205 people) WILL make a
    suggestion via these programs that would improve our work and enhance
    the workability of SS/EI.  I told them they did not want my ideas. They
    in turn demanded it and said that  any idea of merit they would "carry
    to the top".

    You may appreciate my "suggestion" [below].  You have my permission to
    us it as  you will.

                 Suggestion for SIMG/Employee Involvement

    Admittedly, Digital Equipment is in troubled waters.  Management states
    that this is due to bad decisions and forecasts on it's own part. The
    company recognizes that "we must change the way we work", and "do the
    right thing".  One significant change in our method of work is the
    attempted implementation of the Six Sigma and Employee Involvement
    programs. The corporation extols the employees, by way of these
    programs, to work more efficiently in order that DEC becomes a first
    class Global Competitor once again.  We are told that this must be done
    if we are to  survive as a company. 

    The company is imperiled, morale is at an all-time low and cynicism at
    an all time high.  But it was not the employees of the DEC who placed
    the company in this situation.  It was faulty leadership, no less, no
    more. I feel that in order for these programs to be successfully
    enacted, the trust and confidence of the employees must be restored. 
    We need a  "carthesis of emotion".

    I suggest this:   That the management of this corporation, from Ken
    Olsen down, personally and formally apologize to the employees of this 
    company.  By doing so the faith of the employees shall be regained, the 
    finger-pointing will end, and management's integrity restored.

    Then we shall truly be a World Class company.
    

    Re: .167
    
    I don't believe the suggestion in .167 will accomplish anything
    at all.

re: .167

>    I suggest this:   That the management of this corporation, from Ken
>    Olsen down, personally and formally apologize to the employees of this 
>    company.  By doing so the faith of the employees shall be regained, the 
>    finger-pointing will end, and management's integrity restored.
>
>    Then we shall truly be a World Class company.
    
I assume this is one person's protest against being coerced into submitting
an employee involvement suggestion?  It doesn't make much sense (to me) as
anything other than a symbolic upright middle finger.

This "management" vs. "the employees" dichotomy is totally bogus.  There is
no monolithic management entity.  Some of the employees who are adversely
affected by mismanagement are themselves managers, supervisors, project
leaders or similar folk who are held responsible for other people's work.
There are good, bad and indifferent managers at all levels, just as there
are good, bad and indifferent individual contributors.  There are probably
also good, bad and indifferent business decisions made even by the better
managers.  Pointing out actual bad decisions and actual bad managers will
hopefully bring about corrections, but using stereotypes and biases to
stigmatize whole classes of people is just demagoguery.  IMHO.
								paul

    "apologize" for what?
    "faith" in what.
    
    We're running a business here.  Customers can buy what we sell from
    anyone, therefore we are in business to offer more quality, value, and
    service than that of our competition.
    
    If we can't do that then let's end this farce.��

    I agree with Tom Eggers, .167 acheives nothing of any value.
    
    I'm beiginning to think a little maturity in attitudes would help...
    
    
    						- andy

    re .167 et al

    Look, I think the folks who "run" this company have already said what
    went wrong (forecasting, business decisions, etc.). I, for one, have
    no problem with K.O.'s forthrightness or sincerity, nor that of others at
    top management positions at DEC. I don't need a "I'm sorry, we f___ed up"
    from K.O.

    I agree with Pat [.169?], if you want to compete, just do what's right,
    focus on basics. If we really focus on serving our customers, then we
    will fix a lot of the things that stand in our way of doing just that.

    I'm glad to hear all the stuff about changing values, but we need to
    skip the rhetoric and start *making* changes. If the "new" Digital makes
    numbers for the sake of numbers less important, let's start doing something
    tangible that proves it.

    /petes

    From the start I shall identify myself as the author of the 
"suggestion" posted in .167.  I have seen the responses and will not
 repeat them as is common in NOTES$FILES practice.

    Let me offer an explanation as to why I feel my idea should be 
enacted.
  
    We, supposedly, have just come out of a long pay/promotion/hiring
freeze.  This was done because of the downturn in profitability of DEC.
Digital has problems that it shares with many other corporations.
How it is going to compete long-term in a Global Market where in our
business (Computer/Electronics) the U.S. market share has fallen 40%
in the last 12 years is of paramount concern.  I have not sat on the
Corporate Board, nor have I been asked to sit in on any meeting regarding
the "state of the company" or been included in any decision-making
what-so-ever.  But I do care deeply that I should always strive for
excellence in my work.  This is not a game.  I likewise concern myself
very much with the health of the company, for that said health correlates
directly with the well-being of the society in which that company resides
AND is responsible to. 

    So I am doing the best I am able for myself and the company.  I exhort
my fellow workers to do the same.  But now the company is in trouble.
Why?  Is it our products?  Inaccurate business forecasts?  Lack of 
Leadership?  Too much bureaucracy?  Management indecision?  Too much
management?  All of these?  Probably so.  

    I see it this way:  In order to make a **PROFIT** one has to make a
**PRODUCT**.  Pretty simple.  I am involved in making product for this
company. What product does management make?  But our profitability and
competitiveness are way down.  Did I contribute to these problems?  Management
does not say this, but just recently it has come to the workers and told us
that we (the workers) must whole-heartedly embrace these new programs of
Six Sigma and Employee Involvement.  If not, our (the workers) future
with DEC is in jeopardy.

    Wait one darn minute!  For years I and fellow workers have been 
completely ignored for our skills, contributions, and achievements.
Our suggestions and ideas to improve our work and products were shelved
and never given any consideration.  Yet still we give it our best.  It's
called pride in craftsmanship.  A concept totally unrealized in my 
management chain. We give damn good work, in spite of all, to make a great
product.   And hence, profit.  We  watched in awe as the management
layers got fatter and more unapproachable.  And now "we" are in trouble?
"We", the workers, have to work "smarter" and more "efficiently" to
increase the competitiveness ( read profitability) of DEC?  We have been!
Management has not noticed!  The profit of our labor is evermore sucked-up
by a bulging management structure.  "We" have to tighten our belt by 
suffering a pay freeze.  But during the pay freeze the executive levels
still issued themselves "stock allocations".

     We, the workers, did not cause this decline in competitiveness.  We
did not steer this company into the mud.  The people *PAID* to make the 
decisions did, though.  Can we, the workers, get us out?  Damn right,
we can!  But I'll not be motivated by fear. Management must come down
from the Ivory Tower.  The company needs systematic change.  It needs
ethical leadership.

     Yes, I believe that management should apologize to the employees
of this company.  It must be the first step on the road to Excellence. 

      

         

    
    How about getting ALL PROBLEMS in Digital out on the table?  Here's my
    idea suggestion just sent to Corporate.
    
                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M

                                        Date:     25-Jun-1990 03:12pm EDT
                                        From:     David Carnell @ALF
                                                  CARNELL.DAVID
                                        Dept:     Proposal Designers
                                        Tel No:   385-2901 404772-2901

TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( IDEAS CENTRAL @OGO )

CC:  Remote Addressee                     ( ALAN ZIMMERLE @CFO )

Subject: Idea Sug: Get ALL problems identified, tabled & addressed

    I would like to suggest the idea that the Employee Involvement 
    program for encouraging idea suggestions and building employee 
    involvement be EXPANDED to encourage identifying, getting on the 
    table, and addressing literally ALL PROBLEMS impeding building a 
    better and more succcesful Digital, even if no ideas are known by 
    a given employee submitting a problem for addressing said problem.

    In the book "QUALITY IS FREE" by Philip B. Crosby, having ALL 
    PROBLEMS CONTINUOUSLY IDENTIFIED is part of Crosby's 14 point plan 
    for attaining desired quality and zero defects.  He uses the term 
    Error-Cause Removal (ECR) for such problems.  To quote:

    "One of the most difficult problems employees face is their 
    inability to communicate problems to management.  Sometimes they 
    just put up with problems because they do not consider them 
    important enough to bother the supervisor.  Sometimes supervisors 
    [managers] just don't want to listen anyway.  Suggestion programs 
    are some help, but in a suggestion program the worker is required 
    to know the problem and also propose a solution.  Error-cause 
    removal (ECR) is set up on the basis that the worker need only 
    recognize the problem.  When the worker has stated the problem, 
    the proper department in the plant [organization] can look into 
    it.  Studies of ECR programs show that over 90 percent of the 
    items submitted are acted upon, and fullly 75 percent can be 
    handled at the first level of supervision.  The number of ECRs 
    that save money is extremely high, since the worker generates 
    savings every time the job is done better or quicker."

    I suggest that EVERY employee be encouraged to submit on a 
    continuous basis an ECR on ANY conceivable problem -- as each 
    employee defines it -- that is impeding, ANYWHERE IN DIGITAL, 
    quality, zero defects in any activity in Digital, real employee 
    involvement in building a more successful Digital, efficiency, 
    effectiveness, cutting waste, creating new and better products and 
    services, getting and keeping customers, satisfying customer wants 
    better than anyone, and generating greater return on assets as 
    measured by revenue, margin and profit.

    Then, I suggest changing the metrics of all managers to include 
    leadership with each manager measured on incurring continuous 
    qualitative IMPROVEMENT in ALL processes under his or her control 
    via proactively and SERIOUSLY considering and acting on ALL input 
    coming in weekly to a manager's given group: both customer and 
    employee ideas for change PLUS all ECRs that point out problems as 
    pertaining to that group's activities and where that group has the 
    responsibility for the problem area.

    At every level in Digital, every manager as a leader with his or 
    her entire group should be held accountable and be measured using 
    metrics relating to change; namely, the continuous IMPROVEMENT on 
    ALL processes, achieved by listening to and acting on all input 
    coming into the group on ideas or identified problems as either 
    pertain to the control and responsibility of the group.  
    
    Naturally, for all this to work, employee involvement as a 
    practicing philosophy should cease being "voluntary" by any given 
    manager, and should be mandatory on the part of EVERY manager as 
    part of changing the rules in Digital that affect the discipline 
    that drives "how" the Digital organization works.

    Regards,
    David

    I have just decided to implement my own employee suggestion
    of typing "N U" to all further notes in this topic.

    REF: <<< Note 892.175 by SSDEVO::EGGERS >>

    >><<I have just decided to implement my own employee suggestion of
    typing "N U" to all further notes in this topic.>>
    
    You're editorial and judgemental intolerance is no doubt appreciated,
    by some.  Now why don't you add some additional REAL value to the
    conversation.
    
    What specifically do you NOT LIKE about having all problems identified
    in this corporation so that they can be addressed, rather than being
    ignored?
    
    What are YOUR ideas for enhancing employee involvement, creativity and
    change in this corporation?
    
    If you feel that managers should run their groups like their personal
    fiefdoms, telling their employees what to do and how to think, totally
    ignoring corporate's employee involvement program, tell us precisely why
    you think this approach is so superior.
    
    Explain why, with declining margins for the past five years, why
    existing management practices are so right that they must be defended
    with subtle put downs rather than intelligent debate on the pros and
    cons of both existing practices as well as suggested new practices.
    
    Tell us.
    

    re .173

    I still think K.O. has apologized by not covering up the role of
    management decisions which have contributed to our current state. But,
    focusing on who gave you the "suggest or you're in trouble" message,
    they should receive a major-league clock-cleaning.

    re .176

    Perhaps it's not so much editorial comment on content as "How many letters
    a day does this guy send to Delta/cc:K.O. a day, anyway?" [I've sent one,
    total.]


    If we're as overmanaged as we think we are, perhaps instead of coming up
    with all sorts of things we need to do, we should focus on things we
    *don't* need to do, and focus on things that *directly* impact our bottom
    line.

    /Peters

    Perhaps he's getting on with it instead of making a fuss in a Notes
    conference?

    
    re:
    
>    Now why don't you add some additional REAL value to the
>    conversation.
    
    I'm sure that Tom won't be adding real value to the conversation
    by NUing. I suspect he'll be using the saved time to add real value to
    the corporation.
    
    Re:
    
>    What are YOUR ideas for enhancing employee involvement, creativity and
>    change in this corporation?
    
    My ideas are pretty basic:
    
    	If you're in SALES then sell
    	If you're in ENGINEERING then design and build
    	If you're in MANUFACTURING then manufacture
	If you're in SUPPORT then support
    	If you don't fall into any of the above categories then take the
        buyout plan.
    
    Basically if you don't design it, make it or support it then just what
    value do you add?
    
    Please I don't want a million people nit picking the above. I know it
    is somewhat simplistic., But in my view there are far too many people
    worrying about how to deal with process and how to invent more
    processes to streamline existing processes rather than working on how to
    contribute to the bottom line.
    
    If you can't directly state how your job contributes to the bottom
    line and how if you were to leave the bottom line would suffer then
    please leave, DEC will even pay you to do so.
    
    Just my 2 cents worth,
    
    Dave
    

    re .176
    
    As someone who has continually, in notes and replies, brought up the
    issue of 'tolerance' for opinions and ideas, your response shows just
    the attitude and behavior you are complaining about.
    
    Not everyone wishes to 'debate' and discuss every issue and the
    definition of "REAL value" of a topic or discussion is one of personal
    choice.  Each person has priorities of what they want to do or
    participate in.
    
    To accuse someone of not wanting to 'contribute to a better Digital'
    because they do not want to debate socio-psychological issues or
    philosophies of management style with you is name calling and/or
    baiting of the worst kind and certainly not the respect or behavior you
    so openly encourage.
    
    As one involved in the generation of proposals to customers, I am sure
    that you understand the position of the evaluator - when faced with a
    number of responses to an RFP that have to be compared and 'graded' in
    a limited amount of time, if the requested information [and the
    'selling points] is not available quickly and succinctly (ie. clear and
    simple), a low 'score' is given and the next vendors response is
    reviewed.
    
    	-Barry-
    

RE: .174

I would make one small change to your suggestion.  Every submitted ECR should
be accompanied by a proposed solution to the problem.  Reason:  it is extremely
easy to find fault and criticize.  It is much more difficult to find a better
way to do things.  In the process of investigating the solution to a problem,
the submitter of a potential ECR often will find that:

o what at first seemed to be a problem really was the submitter's incomplete
  understanding of the situation, or

o the problem is well known and a solution is being implemented, or

o the problem is due to circumstances beyond our control, or

o the current situation involves a trade-off or compromise that, will recognized
  as an imperfect solution to the problem, is the best that can be done at
  the present time

Doing that extra little bit to come up with a solution will eliminate many
spurious or redundant ECRs and increase the effectiveness of the whole approach,
by insuring that what gets reported via ECRs is real, solvable problems.

--PSW

I think requiring a proposed solution in all cases might be a bit restrictive.
Identifying a problem can, by itself, be a major contribution.  I think it 
might be sufficient to require evidence that a serious attempt was made to
find a solution. 

Many field personnel, especially, have insufficient knowledge of the structure 
and oranization of the groups they interface with.  For instance, I could see
what I feel is a managemenet problem in unit X, but since I'm in N.Y. and 
they're in California and, moreover, my manager has somewhat restrictive ideas
about what constitutes productive use of my time (like "billable"), I really
can't make highly pointed suggestions on how they might fix the problem. I 
simply haven't the time and resources to do the necessary research.

-dave  

                    Posted with permission from author
    
   <<< CAPNET::CAPVAX$PAGE:[NOTES$LIBRARY]PARTICIPATIVE_MANAGEMENT.NOTE;1 >>>
                         -< PARTICIPATIVE_MANAGEMENT >-
================================================================================
Note 3.2                 Other Sources of EI Information                  2 of 2
HDLITE::SCOTT                                        18 lines   7-AUG-1990 14:20
                                -< EI Article >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employee Involvement article excerpt from Fortune Mag. 3/26/90

"All varieties of participative management will spread rapidly during the 90's"
per Prof. Ed Lawler of USC.  

The reason:  Only employee involvement can give managers what they need to 
compete in a global marketplace - better quality, a greater focus on the
customer, and faster response time.

Up to 60% of large U.S. Co's now use quality circles, but the radical jump
coming in employee involvement will be giving workers responsibility for the
TOTAL business process.  At Volvo, work teams take customer orders, communicate
with dealers, and evaluate quality and maintenance data on the cars they build.

Whether the above kind of EI takes root will depend on the kind of support
it receives from senior management.  "We can rant all we want that we're going
to die if we don't change, but it's up to management to restructure itself and
utilize the work force," said Lawler.
    

                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M

                                        Date:     11-Sep-1990 03:24pm EDT
                                        From:     David Carnell @ALF
                                                  CARNELL.DAVID
                                        Dept:     Proposal Designers
                                        Tel No:   385-2901 404772-2901

TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( KEN OLSEN @CORE )
TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( JACK SMITH @CORE )
TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( JOHN SIMS @CORE )
TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( ALAN ZIMMERLE @CFO )
TO:  Remote Addressee                     ( JIM PITTS @MLO )


Subject: Optimum Employee Involvement = $18 billion in cash reserves

    Enclosed is an article that just appeared today in USA Today 
    regarding Toyota, which I am sending to you as another 
    follow-up relating to my earlier suggestions revolving around 
    ideas for fundamental changes that could help Digital 
    significantly cut costs and build more customers and revenue 
    via the route of optimum employee involvement & empowerment.

    Toyota has a reputation of having one of the most empowered 
    workforces in the world.  Each year, over one million 
    employee suggestions are generated and tracked, with nearly 
    all implemented, with the focus of all employees on total 
    customer satisfaction through constant improvement in all 
    processes, which of course, means constant change that is 
    owned and driven by all employees.  As you will read in the 
    article, Toyota has done very well via this approach, now 
    about to own the Number 3 position in automobiles in the 
    United States, with a cash reserve of $18 Billion dollars.

    Regards,
    David

    Reprinted without permission:

            "Overtaking the Big Three on Their Turf"
             by Micheline Maynard, USA Today 9/11/90

    By the end of this year, the Big Three auto giants in the USA 
    likely will be General Motors, Ford - and Toyota Motor Co. of 
    Japan.

    Japan's leading automaker probably will surpass struggling 
    Chrysler Corp. in sales sometime this fall.  That landmark 
    development paves the way for Toyota to continue its slow and 
    steady bid to someday challenge GM as the world's No. 1 
    automotive power.

    Toyota is conquering the U.S. market with the help of cars 
    built at North American operations but strictly governed by 
    the Japanese concepts of "teamwork", total quality control 
    and a near fanatical dedication to pleasing the company's 
    customers.  Last year, one-third of the Totes sold to U.S. 
    customers were built at plants in Kentucky, California and 
    Ontario, Canada.  By 1995, Toyota wants half the cars and 
    trucks it sells here to be "Made in the USA".  By then, the 
    auto giant expects to sell 1.5 million vehicles a hear 
    here - a substantial 36% jump from this year's projections.

    With those lofty goals in mind, Toyota announced Monday that 
    it will pick - within two months - a site for its second 
    fully owned U.S. auto plant.  Experts predict that the 
    factory will be located at Toyota's sprawling Georgetown, 
    Ky., complex, where Toyota makes the midsize Camry.

    The betting for a long time was that Japan's Honda, not 
    Toyota, would be the first to surpass Chrysler and make a 
    serious run at U.S. automakers.  Honda grabbed the spotlight, 
    because it was the first Japanese company to build cars in 
    the USA, and its reputation was that of an adventurous 
    maverick far different from Toyota, a conservative and 
    deliberate Japanese giant.  But Honda has held off on plans 
    to build trucks, which make up about one-third of U.S. 
    vehicle sales.  Toyota is moving aggressively ahead.  Most 
    experts agree that Toyota is now the company to beat.  
    "They've got the financial resources, the product, the 
    quality, the dealer network," say independent analyst Michael 
    Luckey.

    What makes Toyota tick?

    >TEAMWORK.  From the plant floor to the showroom, Toyota 
    stresses cooperation.  Its lean corporate organization - only 
    five layers from factory worker to top management 
    jobs - virtually requires involvement from all corners of the 
    company.  "Teamwork is really what makes this place run like 
    a finely tuned watch", say Mike Dodge, plant manager at 
    Toyota's Georgetown factory.

    Even dealers are consumed by Toyota's approach.  Former 
    Detroit Lion Mel Farr, a Ford dealer and owner of Mel Farr 
    Toyota in Bloomfield Hills, Mich., says, "They (Toyota) make 
    you feel that you're part of the team.  It's a 'we' deal."

    >QUALITY PRODUCTS.  When it comes to quality, Toyota has set 
    a standard that U.S. rivals have yet to meet.  Toyota's 
    entire model line, almost without exception, receives "much 
    better than average: ratings by Consumer Reports magazine.  
    Toyota's Lexus luxury line, introduced last year at a top 
    price of $38,000, landed No. 4 on the J.D. Power and 
    Associates trouble-free car index, and the Kentucky-built 
    Camry placed third in satisfaction among buyers polled within 
    three months of purchase.  Toyota constantly upgrades and 
    updates its models.  This year, it restyled four 
    vehicles - the MR2 two-seater, Celica sporty car, Land 
    Cruiser sport utility vehicle and Previa minivan - and saw 
    sales double.  This fall it introduces a new version of the 
    Tercel subcompact and next year will launch a restyled, 
    bigger Camry sedan.

    >A STRONG DEALER NETWORK.  Both Chrylser and Toyota's sales 
    this year will be just above 1 million units.  But Chrysler 
    has about 11,000 U.S. dealers; Toyota has only 1,200.

    Toyota dealers say they talk regularly with Toyota officials 
    from California and Japan.  David Wilson, who has three 
    Toyota dealerships in California including a Lexus franchise, 
    was a Lincoln-Mercury dealer for five years before opening 
    his first Toyota "store" in 1983, and he sees a demonstrative 
    difference.

    "No one ever came around from the Ford Motor Co., and wanted 
    to know what we though about our product.  The Japanese are 
    here on at least a monthly basis", he says.

    Wilson says he's constantly quizzed on issues such as 
    quality, options, sales figures and car colors.  They take 
    his advice seriously.

    He recalls his horror when a red pickup truck arrived from 
    Japan with gold-washed wheels.  "I called them up and said, 
    'This is a mistake.  Gold wheels do not go with a silver 
    stripe on a red truck.' ... (Toyota) never shipped another 
    one to the United States."

    >LISTENING TO THE CUSTOMER.  When glitches were found in 
    Lexus LS400 models last fall Toyota turned what could have 
    been a nightmare into a textbook customer customer-service 
    response.  Based on just two customer complaints, Toyota 
    recalled all 8,000 cars that had been sold.  Dealers picked 
    up, repaired and returned the autos.  To serve Grand Rapids, 
    Mich., customers 150 miles away, Detroit-area dealer Ken 
    Meade flew in technicians, rented a repair station, washed 
    the cars and returned the models to their owners.

    Supporting Toyota's U.S. operation is a company with some of 
    the deepest pockets in the world, and one of the most 
    painstaking approaches to new investment.

    Toyota has $18 billion in cash - more than Ford and Chrysler 
    combined - and generally finances its own deals rather than 
    borrow.  That has insulated it from rising interest costs 
    that are the bane of U.S. automakers.  An example of Toyota's 
    caution: the decision to build cars in the USA. In the early 
    '80s, Toyota officials heeded growing political pressure on 
    Japanese to open U.S. plants.  Instead of taking the plunge 
    on its own, Toyota launched a widely heralded joint venture 
    with GM dubbed New United Motor Manufacturing Inc., or NUMMI.  
    While a former GM plant was used and United Auto Workers 
    members hired, Toyota insisted on handpicking the workforce 
    and putting many workers through months of training here and 
    in Japan.  Toyota built cars at NUMMI for four years before 
    opening its own non-union U.S. plant.

    Because of cost-saving operating methods, such as a 
    just-in-time inventory control system and a philosophy of 
    continual improvement - called keizen in Japanese - both  
    Toyota plants enjoy significant cost advantages over their 
    U.S. counterparts.  A car manufactured at NUMMI cost $800 
    less - at Georgetown, $600 less - to build than a comparable 
    model manufactured in Detroit.

    In the early '80s, Toyota and other Japanese automakers 
    opened U.S. plants primarily to get around the import limits 
    that Japan imposed on its carmakers to ward off congressional 
    cries for even stricter import restraints.

    But the investments have paid off even more handsomely than 
    the Japanese expected - primarily with gains in market share.  
    Japanese-branded cars, including their U.S. "transplants", 
    built here, took a record 33.3% share of the U.S. market in 
    August.  By 1995, analysts estimate Japanese firms will be 
    able to produce 3 million cars a year in the USA, at a time 
    when U.S. companies are closing plants and laying off 
    thousands of workers.

    Toyota will be spending billions of dollars in the next few 
    years to meet its aggressive sales goals.  Next year Toyota 
    will start building trucks at NUMMI.  It's widely believed 
    that Toyota will take over the NUMMI plant when the joint 
    venture expires in 1996.  Within three years, Toyota is 
    expected to begin building full-size pickup trucks in the 
    USA - the last, lucrative market dominated by U.S. auto 
    companies.  Adding big trucks to its model lineup will make 
    Toyota a "full line producer" - breaking down the last 
    bastion that GM, Ford and Chrysler historically have had to 
    themselves.

    Analyst Joseph Phillippi at Shearson Lehman Bros., says 
    Toyota's rise has jolted the industry into realizing the 
    market has changed for good.  "In 1990, a lot of people woke 
    up and said, 'We're at the turning point.'  Well, they should 
    have woken up 10 years ago."

    Contributing: Martha T. Moore

    End of Article
    

    
       Though very a late note in the string, I must enter this epilogue
    to the Employee Involvement note:
    
       Last week at site Shrewsbury (SHR) the Employee Involvement
    Facilitator was given the "package" and the E.I. group was disbanded.
    This action speaks well of the so-called committment at the Executive
    levels.