Conference 7.286::digital

	A simple and obvious first step in optimizing the use of our people's
	experience and skills would be to set up a database to record them.
	(This isn't another "rocket science" suggestion, the database could
	be paper or electronic).

	Recording people's aptitudes, skills, experience, and capabilities
	is a very challenging task (like most other taks that have a large
	payoff). But we can make a simple, easy, obvious start.

	We'll take the record of training courses that each employee has
	attended since joining Digital, and use that to make a start.

	"Eh? What do you mean 'we don't keep that information anywhere'?
	We're always being told how costly and scarce training is, how we
	can only afford a few weeks every year despite the desperate need
	for new knowledge - of course we keep a record of that investment!"

	Can anyone tell me where we keep it?

	/Tom

	... SBS that does what you describe.  In fact, I just finished updating
my skills inventory profile the other day.  I should say this is an EIS system,
for tracking US EIS business and resources, not a "corporate" database.

	Now, please, no flames about SBS's quality, management competence, etc.
Tom only brought an idea to the table, and I said there is one.  :>)

	Tom, if you want to know more about SBS, I can probably dig up a US
EIS SBS project manager's name for you.

The 12-page mindless survey mentioned in .o sounds an awful lot like SBS.  We 
need more than just a database, we need a muuch better understanding of how to
describe and quantify technical expertise.  Rating yourself from 1 to 5 on 800
keywords produces an impressive quantity of information when enough people do it,
but it offers no guarantee of quality.

-dave

    Tom,
    
    Courses taken should be listed in your personnel file.  (Mine are,
    & *I* didn't put 'em there.)
    
    On the other hand, I feel it is each person's responsibility to
    look out for oneself; you should periodically check your file to
    ensure the information is correct & up-to-date.   (Someone once
    told me it is also important to ensure it doesn't contain "extra"
    information, also.)  
    
    							Don

 re - .2

I'd be interested in knowing more about SBS, if the info is handy.

Thanks,

Terry

    re. .0,.1
    
    In Europe, Resource Planner is the application that allows the skill
    profiles of Digital EIS resources to be planned for (according to the 
    business plans) and tracked, at all levels, from unit to country.
    It is implemented in many countries in EIS, and CS will probably use
    it in the near future.
    
    If you would like any more information about it, contact the project
    manager who is: Jacques Albouze @EVO
    
    
    PS. I'm surprised that it's apparently unknown to part of the U.K.
        E.I.S. organization.  Should I bring this to the attention
        of the I.M for the U.K. ?
    
    Regards,
    
    David Goldblatt - Europe I.M.
       

	re .6:

	David, I have seen you mention "Resource Planner" before. I have
	no idea what it is. But then again, there is no reason why I
	should. I'm a resource myself, and this system was no doubt
	written to managers' specifications for the use of managers
	"controlling" "resources" like me.

	As a matter of fact, the mission of my ACT involves performing
	"knowledge transfer" in order to "develop capability" for new
	technologies in the field.

	Over the last few years, it has been my observation that there
	are grotesque mismatches between our products and strategies,
	and the "field capability" (knowledgeable people available to
	tell customers about them and support them). My own direct
	experience is limited to CASE (software development tools) and
	Ada in particular. I am gradually coming to the conclusion that
	the greatest single choke point in the revenue from CASE products
	is the lack of understanding of these products by Digital's
	managers (sales, EIS, and marketing).

	Even if the managers have a "resource planner" database to consult,
	the old saw "GIGO" still applies. The very same people who cry
	"I'm not technical" will be quite happy to prescribe what categories
	of expertise should be held in the database. Furthermore, the
	collection of data is likely to be haphazard. If I am filling in a
	form with 283 different categories of expertise, and I know that
	this form will dictate how management sees me, I will be careful
	to declare certain kinds of knowledge, and perhaps to hold back
	others.

	Btw, what is an "I.M."? And what does he/it do?

	Re .7:


>>>	UK EIS is well aware of Resource Planner.

	Here we go again. I think what Angus means is that HE is aware
	of Resource Planner. I'm not. Whether UK EIS is a metaphysical
	term or not is a metaphysical question, but I bet that 50% of
	the people who work for it share my ignorance. I'd also bet on
	99%.

    The Skills Inventory section of SBS and I assume the "Resource
    Planner" are not designed to be in depth career planning and
    skills inventory tools, but rather general quick look up vehicles to
    locate resources to address opportunities. The kind of detail skill and
    knowledge tracking asked for in .0 is done (or not done) by managers
    without benefit of database tools.

re:.8

Tom:  

Please don't be put off by the length of this note.  I've tried to be 
succinct, but you raised a lot of valid points.

>	no idea what it is. But then again, there is no reason why I
>	should. I'm a resource myself, and this system was no doubt
>	written to managers' specifications for the use of managers
>	"controlling" "resources" like me.

RP is, as you correctly assume, principaly for the use of resource and
project managers, for whom consultants like you and me work.  On the
other hand, it was not written with only their "specs" in mind, and
without considering the needs of human resources.  The skills and skill
profile of individuals, except in Germany, are "filled in" by the person
and his/her career manager (in the case of multiple reporting lines).
The main benefit to the resource for this is similar to that of a job
plan ie.  a statement of the current profile and the base upon which to
found a career plan.  It makes it much easier for the career manager and
the resource to plan and track his/her skill development accurately.  

Personaly, I don't view a lack of clarity in my skill assessment and career
plan as an advantage.  Would you ?  I could admit that the degree of clarity
here desired by the resource depends, to some extent on their relationship with
their manager, but any issues about that should be resolved directly with
the manager and not indirectly by clouding the business issues.

>	Over the last few years, it has been my observation that there
>	are grotesque mismatches between our products and strategies,
>	and the "field capability" (knowledgeable people available to
>	tell customers about them and support them). My own direct

RP is designed to address this problem as well, since it allows business
management to plan the numbers and kinds of resource profiles that they
will need to support their business plans, at all business unit levels ie.
from the unit up to the country level.  This capability is necessary
when Synergy Planning is done, since the Sales, EIS and Marketing business
plans can only be implemented by the "grunts", those whose skill profiles
are managed.  Again, inaccuracies in business planning should be addressed
directly and RP makes this possible.  Imagine the value of the accurate
feedback from resource management to business management about the 
applicability of planned resources to planned business objectives, in light
of current business results.  It puts the burden of correct business planning
right where it should be, on the shoulders of Sales, EIS and Marketing business
management and eliminates some current possibilities of buck-passing.

>	Even if the managers have a "resource planner" database to consult,
>	the old saw "GIGO" still applies. The very same people who cry
>	"I'm not technical" will be quite happy to prescribe what categories
>	of expertise should be held in the database. Furthermore, the
>	collection of data is likely to be haphazard. If I am filling in a
>	form with 283 different categories of expertise, and I know that
>	this form will dictate how management sees me, I will be careful
>	to declare certain kinds of knowledge, and perhaps to hold back
>	others.

It's well known that computer systems, by themselves, cannot succeed in 
producing business changes.  The existance of RP makes it possible for the
desired change in business planning to take place, and RP will support correct
business planning.  Perhaps you could ask some of those who have used it 
whether it has had the benficial effect that I've described.  You could
contact Daniel Macr� @EVO.  He's EIS Operations Manager for France, and
RP has been implemented in most of the units there for some time.  For many
years the U.K. has had problems planning and allocating its technical SWAS
resources.  Ken Dougall @RES, the Capability Development Manager for EIS
in the U.K. could tell you more about this.  I could too, but offline (if
you're interested).

>	Btw, what is an "I.M."? And what does he/it do?

I.M. means Information Manager.  Such a person for the U.K., for example,
manages the existance of information systems to support Digital U.K.  There
is such a person for each region, according to the new structure.  At Area,
where I work, there are I.M.s for each of the business areas viz. Sales,
EIS, Marketing, Decus, A&L, Finance and Manafacturing.  The Area I.M.s 
manage the strategic systems ie. those that support Digital's overall
business strategy.  They also manage those systems that are implemented
accross Europe.

David

re:.9

>    The Skills Inventory section of SBS and I assume the "Resource
>    Planner" are not designed to be in depth career planning and
>    skills inventory tools, but rather general quick look up vehicles to
>    locate resources to address opportunities. The kind of detail skill and
>    knowledge tracking asked for in .0 is done (or not done) by managers
>    without benefit of database tools.

I'm not able to answer for SBS, but my remarks to Tom in the previous reply
should show the above assumptions about RP to be false.

David

    Re .1:
    
    Your local internal training registrar should be able to pull your DEC
    training transcript from the corporate database.
    
    -Lynn T.

    
    Just a comment on the thrust of this topic. Heading talks of skills
    inventory, many replies talk of training records.
    
    Not necessarily related. Can be, but not always.
    
    I've seen people with very high skill levels who have never attended
    a DEC training course -- skills include project management, selling,
    leadership, motivation, business planning etc, public speaking,
    customer support etc.
    
    Also know some who have been on technical training courses &, even on 
    the subject taught, I would be very uncomfortable putting in front of 
    a knowledgeable customer. 
    
    Logging attendance on a course measures just that. It need not measure
    skill or aptitude (unless that was the specific purpose of the course,
    or part of the syllabus) -- skill analysis is itself a specialised
    skill, & not much taught as a pre-requisite of managing in Digital.
    
    Colin