Conference 7.286::digital

    
    The potential power of VAXnotes computer conferencing has yet to be
    fully realized.  While engineers have used it for years, the majority
    of employees who are not engineers, especially field personnel, have
    yet to even access.  Worse, it is perceived that the majority of
    managers have no interest in accessing, and certainly not in being
    active participants.
    
    The power in interactive distributive computing lies not in generating
    reports, crunching numbers or fast exchange of memos.  It lies in
    networking the minds sitting behind the terminals, fingers on a
    keyboard.  Digital preaches that employees are its most important
    assets; utilizing the creative intelligence within the minds of those
    employees through fast interactive linkage via VAXnotes has not
    materialized with full management participation, nurturing real
    teamwork, harmony and creative cooperation where all have ownership in
    brainstorming and solving problems to build a better and more
    successful Digital.
    
    Other than technical conferences addressing technical problems,
    conferences like this one that "could" significantly lead to
    improvement in all Digital "processes" in how all of us work are
    seemingly ignored, with said conference being nothing more than a
    global electronic water cooler that a bunch of us (5,000 - 40,000?)
    hand around, some talking, many just listening.
    
    Look at how the conferences dealing with employee involvement and
    change (DELTA, CHANGE_MANAGEMENT, PARTICIPATIVE MANAGEMENT, and even
    MARKETING) have relatively little activity compared to the potential of
    90,000 employees on the net, most of whom have the ability to access
    and participate in.
    
    Why the apathy?

    My congratulations to the author of the base note. It represents one of
    the most 'business-mature' approaches to many of the issues and
    problems raised in this conference that I have seen. No problem - in
    Digital or in world relations - is ever as simple as it seems. Each
    problem has its own set of dynamics, trade-offs, issues, and
    compromises. To look beyond the surface issue requires insight and
    perspicacity. To blame 'management' for the problem, and plead 'If only
    Ken could get his way', is naive. Congrats again.

    
    I don't see the major problem as "apathy."  Digital employees generally
    care deeply about the company and evidence of that can be seen here in
    notes as well as in offices across the country:  If employees truly
    didn't care they wouldn't bother complaining.  
    
    The base note is right.  If you really want to see change you had
    better be willing to carry the ball yourself. You'll get results if you
    choose your battles carefully and present specific, succinct proposals to
    the right people. Working at Digital and getting things done (sometimes
    in spite of the system) _is_ a game.  You've got to follow the rules.  
    And while there are compelling reasons to change the rules, it takes a
    long time.  
    
    I think Notes are a great way to kick around ideas and gain new
    perspectives.  I don't think--and I suspect nobody else does,
    either--that effective change is going to start here.   
    
    Mike

    
    
    >I don't think effective change is going to start here...
    
      While I agree with you, I can't help but wonder whether the 
    Latest Jack Smith memo on travel (No more business class etc.) 
    wasn't inspired at least in part by a recent discussion here...
    
    
    							-al

    Good grief,
    
    Of course .0 is as naive as "letting Ken get his way".
    
    This is the 100th iteration in this conference of "Process is the
    solution".
    
    Process is not the solution.  There is no alchemy, no "let's be nice"
    or "let's do the right thing" solution.
    
    It's so hard to grapple with the real problems of customer
    satisfaction, competition, and fundamental changes in the computer
    industry that we're turning inward and fine tuning the way we shuffle
    paper from one manager's desk to another.

    J. Maksin has made a good point.  I see a lot of what looks like
    shallow thinking in the most popular general notes files.  Maybe
    its my age or educational bias showing, but I prefer the
    self-questioning approach to the easy assumption that I have all
    the facts.
    
    Perhaps the most productive use of NOTES is for electronic
    brainstorming.  If we agree on that, then we can also agree (perhaps),
    that the rules which apply to face-to-face brainstorming should
    also apply here (in addition to normal noting etiquette).
    
    Define a four phase process: (from brainstorming to implementation)
    
    a.  Initialization - Propose a generally accepted goal (probably the
    hardest step) and invite noters to participate in the brainstorming
    process.  There should be little argument about either the desirabilty
    of the goal or how to recognize it has been achieved. Within the NOTES
    context, this would be a BASE NOTE. 
    
    b.  Generation - no negative feedback to others ideas. (No censure of
    those who provide negative feedback, just ignore them.)  Focus on
    positive, even outlandish, proposals to achieve the desired results.
    During this phase, anyone is invited to put in their two cents worth in
    replies to the base note. 
    
    c.  Evaluation - Base note author declares brainstorming over.  (S)he
    selects the approach which seems most productive.  Invite contributors
    to participate in the detailed planning and implementation of the
    approach.  Create a MEMBERS ONLY conference for this activity.
    
    d.  Feedback - Report plans and results as replies to the base note
    in the original conference.
    

    I think that this is the model that several noted noters are using
    implicitly (at least thru step b).  Perhaps we can indeed capitalize
    on the competitive advantage that the network gives us.
    
    Regards,
    
    Dick Beldin
    Senior Systems Consultant
    Caribbean Operations Manufacturing
        

    re:  .0
    
    Let us not change history; it was Julius Caesar and the 10th Legion
    who crossed the Rubicon, not Cicero.

    re. .7
    
    It was Cicero who saved the republic from the Lucretine
    revolt and Caesar who started the republic on the road to
    dictatorship.
    

    Re: .7
    
    Yes, Caesar did cross the Rubicon and he knew what that meant to
    Imperial Rome.
    
    Cicero (nee Tully) used the foot-in-Rubicon metaphor to make a
    point about change -- that is after the immersion neither the
    foot nor the Rubicon were the same.  Change is a funny thing.
    
    Joe

    re: .5
    
    You know I have to agree, process is not the solution to the problem. 
    Any more approaches of this type can be classified as tail-chasing,
    meanwhile Mr./Ms. Customers sits out there grumbling.
    
    --David 

    re .9
    
    The Rome Julius Caesar was involved with was the Republic--it wasn't
    Imperial until much later.
    
    The aphorism about the river is due to Heraclitus (a pre-Socratic
    philosopher, also know for "all is change").  It was a line several
    centuries old by the time of Cicero.
    
    re .0
    
    Nice motherhood, but where's the beef?  I would much prefer seeing
    a real suggestion, such as "Give SDT twice the budget and headcount
    and tell them to do a real integrated CASE system".
    
    			-John Bishop