[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference 7.286::digital

Title:The Digital way of working
Moderator:QUARK::LIONELON
Created:Fri Feb 14 1986
Last Modified:Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:5321
Total number of notes:139771

1306.0. "Dec. 17 DVN Broadcast" by SMOOT::ROTH (Iraq needs lawyers... send some NOW!!) Fri Dec 07 1990 16:17

Just received a mail about this upcoming DVN broadcast... seems to
promise announcements about reorganization, corporate directions, etc.
Figured it deserved a topic of its own.

Lee


Attached is a content abstract for the State of the Company broadcast which
will air on DECEMBER 17.  As noted in the program schedule revised on
11/28/90, this broadcast will not air on December 10 and 12 as originally
announced .... DECEMBER 17 IS THE ONLY DATE!

DIGITAL VIDEO NETWORK TO BROADCAST
STATE OF THE COMPANY .... DECEMBER 17, 1990
-------------------------------------------


The Digital Video Network (DVN) will broadcast the STATE OF THE COMPANY on
DECEMBER 17 from 12:30 - 3 PM (EST).  

Sponsored by Corporate Employee Communication, this program will include 
presentations on Digital's new business unit structure and management 
reporting system, total quality management, Digital as the open systems 
company, as well as information on Digital's production systems and banking 
markets.

All employees are welcome to view this program. 
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
1306.1LESLIE::LESLIEAndy LeslieSat Dec 08 1990 03:389
>All employees are welcome to view this program. 
    
    But some lack the access - I'd ask that someone please enter a summary
    here after the event.
    
    Thanks
    
    
    /andy/
1306.2A summary pleaseAUSSIE::BAKEREverything is mutable,in its own waySun Dec 09 1990 17:206
>All employees are welcome to view this program. 
    
    Ditto another request for edited highlights, please. Most employees
    in the rest of the free world have yet to see a DVN broadcast.
    
    Thanks
1306.3WSJDELREY::MEUSE_DAWed Dec 12 1990 18:047
    Is this the same stuff covered by the article on page A2 of the WSJ,
    dated 12/12/90? 
    
    Interesting, but not enjoyable reading.
    
    Dave
    
1306.4what did the WSJ say?CVG::THOMPSONDoes your manager know you read Notes?Wed Dec 12 1990 23:418
>    Is this the same stuff covered by the article on page A2 of the WSJ,
>    dated 12/12/90? 
    
    For those of us who do not get the Wall Street Journal you'll have
    to tell us what was in it before we can tell you if it's what
    we see next week.
    
    			Alfred
1306.5LESLIE::LESLIEAndy LeslieThu Dec 13 1990 03:163
    It's quoted elsewhere in this conferences (about 2 NEXT/UNSEEN's ago).
    
    	- andy
1306.6Timing is everythingCVG::THOMPSONDoes your manager know you read Notes?Thu Dec 13 1990 10:129
>    It's quoted elsewhere in this conferences (about 2 NEXT/UNSEEN's ago).

	Actually for me it was about 2 NEXT/UNSEEN's later. None the less
	I think that people should summarize things that they want compared
	as not everyone has the same access to sources.

			Alfred

	The article is located in 1313.3 BTW.
1306.7one perspective on DVNPRIMES::ZIMMERMANN@DCO, Landover MD, 341-2898Wed Dec 19 1990 23:31171
I just had the opportunity to view a tape of the Dec 17 DVN broadcast.
Now, this will be difficult for several reasons:

	This was the first 'state of the company' broadcast I saw
	I am NOT a manager
	the first part of the meeting was missed
	after the first hour, the taper switched the speed to super slow,
		and my playback machine does not play super slow, so I
		saw the rest of the tape at 150% normal speed

The structure of the meeting was Ken talking about business and changes that
are taking place.  Then several speakers about:
		Mgmt reporting system
		Total Quality mgmt
		Open Systems
		VMS
		fault tolerant systems
		mainframes
		and other product stuff that I can't recall right now
Then Ken came back out, and answered some written questions.  I will now 
relate my 'understanding' of what Ken discussed.  I do not claim to speak
for Ken, Digital, or anyone, but since no-one else has posted anything, I
figured my thoughts were better then nothing.  Enough of a disclaimer...

The tape started with Ken discussing what we do poorly.  That was 
communication.  Engineers develop/test a product, give it to sales, then
complain that sales messed up.

A PLAN was discussed, and Ken discussed New York City with 8 million 
people.  An outsider would think NY must have a plan to feed all those 
people, but a plan doesn't exist.  And if a plan did exist, the people 
would starve (like in Moscow).  Every organization wants to control 'by 
committee'.  In NY, waste would be pointed to, but with control, people 
would starve.  The Corporation can't control, that's been proven.

Digital has faith in technology.  People ask why Digital continues to invest
while at the same time introduce faster/cheaper products.  We have faith that
those faster/cheaper products will feed demand.  When we lose money, we
might say we didn't 'plan to make less, we planned to more' make money.  We
won't make more every year.  Success is measured in growth, and profit.  It 
costs to grow.

A weakness is that we put all our resources into technology.  We need to
put more energy/money into telling our customers what we have.  We need to
sell what we have.  We have all the products we dreamed of 2 years ago, and
the products we'll have in 2 years will be marvelous.

Digital is breaking up into Business Units.  That process is well under way.
Each Business Unit (BU) will have a business plan.  The 30-40 BUs will
submit the plan to the Board of Directors, Executive Committee, and they will
be accepted, rejected, or told to be re-done.  This is to encourage an
entrepreneur spirit.  Ken listed 5 principles:

	1 no one without responsibility tells others what to do ('a radical
		switch').  Everyone will have more responsibility then
		they have authority, but that's the way it is.
	2. everyone will work for a business unit
	3. those that propose, do
	4. Budgets are sacred/stable
	5. every BU reports to a person, not a committee

There are basically 3 groups:

	1. those that generate products
	2. those that integrate/market
	3. those that sell

In theory, each group makes a profit on THEIR cost.  Each group has a cost.
Account Managers will have responsibility, and there will be 2 layers above
them.

Ken outlines a problem in the field.

We sell an account in Munich.  The Acct. Mgr goes to the District Manager
in Munich, for support of the account.  While the DM is a good guy, he
has no incentive to provide the support.  The DM has his own problems to
worry about.  NOW, the budgets of the DM are gone, the Acct. Mgr has
authority and budget.

(NOTE, I will attempt to explain the way I interpret Ken's explanation.

Acct. Mgrs have responsibility for accounts.  Others have responsibility
to support the acct mgr.  Business Units will incur a cost for their
services, and will base pricing on that service.  Apparently, the Acct.
Mgr will contract with the DM in Munich.  The DM will incur a cost to provide
the service, set price based on that cost, make a profit, and now has 
incentive to cooperate.

Done, back to Ken.)

The plan is, every cost makes a profit.  Their will be a business plan
for every application.

We used to do pricing by committee.  Sales controls discounts.  A hard sell,
where time frame is long, will not produce a discount.  An easy sell will
produce a discount, because the sell cost less to produce.

If the customer won't pay, we don't do it.

(the rest of the broadcast)

Questions, answered by Ken, (remember, this part was at 150% normal speed)

1. Should I stay in sales, it seems Field Service is where all the high
	level promotions come from.

	In Field Service, they've had a business plan for a long time.  Every
	one in Field Service gets 2 weeks of training a year, and now it's
	up to 14 days.  Once in a persons career, they get 6 months of training.
	That's why Field Service gets ahead.  There should be a message there.

2. Something about OEM sales, and credit being given and reflected in the
	Profit and Lose.

	If sales invests heavily, then gives the sale to a third party, no,
	you won't get credit, [you have negative credit, this was stated
	but I didn't interpret it to be a real negative credit].  The 
	corporation lost money.  If you didn't incur any cost in the sale, 
	you don't get credit.  Measurement will be based on return on 
	investment.

3. ( I can't do this question justice, but it was about market growth at 120%
	and if growth at that rate doesn't happen, someone will get hurt)

	(The shake out of the industry, and there are only a hand full in
	PC's, MAINFRAME, etc left.  Digital wants to be one of the remaining
	players in the market.)

4. If networks are vital, why isn't there training in the field.

	Ken discussed ether-net, and that we, to a large part developed
	it.  I missed most of this discussion too, but it revolved around
	cheap/simple Thinwire, and Ether-NET products.

5. We measure Equipment and Assets, but where is the measurement of profit.

	We need to measure growth and profit.  0 profit - high growth
	and high profit - 0 growth are similar.  It costs money to grow.
	If we grow more then we planned, we are considered to be profitable,
	if we grow less, we are considered to lose money.

6. Business price setting, how will it be done.

	We are to make profit only once, only on the cost we incurred
	to provide the product.  Sales will not make a profit on what 
	the product is (engineering made that profit), sales will make
	a profit on the costs associated with the sale.

7. Will BU's share Profit and Lose.

	The system will be flexible.  We can't go from measuring nothing,
	to being stringent.  Sometimes a BU will make money, some times 
	they will lose money.  BU's need to make more then they lose.

6. Stock price, and considering AT&T and NCR, are we in danger.

	Ken joked that AT&T is now less likely to target us
		       no one has any money
		       the junk bond people are going to jail

	But, then he stated that we are Gentle men and women, but we
	would 'fight tough' any attempt.  Ken wanted to be modest, but
	he sincerely felt Digital was important to this country.

The final words I heard were 'I wouldn't worry about it.'


Again, this is my recollection/interpretation.  Any other comments would
be helpful to me, and others.  I will attempt to answer any questions
on the content if I can.  I realize this is not real clear, but I gave it
a shot.
1306.8LESLIE::LESLIEAndy Leslie - *RE02 F/C3, 830 6723*Thu Dec 20 1990 05:054
    >Budgets are sacred/stable
    
    
    WHAT budgets?
1306.9budgets: and good neighborsPRIMES::ZIMMERMANN@DCO, Landover MD, 341-2898Thu Dec 20 1990 07:0913
    re .08
    
    Ken was saying that once a budget is approved, the owner of the budget
    does not need to worry about the monry being taken away.  "Good fences
    do make good neighbors", and we shouldn't be affradi of our neighbors.
    
    Your question sounded like there are no budgets to be sacred/stable,
    but I'm just trying to relate what Ken said.
    
    
    Opinion:  It seems as though We/Digital want to create entreperneurs. 
    I wonder if that is possible, though it is nice to feel that if I
    thought I had a good idea, I might be able to propose it and do it.
1306.10Budgets are like Post-Its (TM) - There aren't anySCAACT::AINSLEYLess than 150 kts. is TOO slowThu Dec 20 1990 09:5026
re: .9

>    Your question sounded like there are no budgets to be sacred/stable,
>    but I'm just trying to relate what Ken said.

.8 wasn't flaming you.  He is correct that there are no budgets to be
scared/stable.  I work in an ACT and keep having the following conversation
with sales/sales support folks:

Sales:	I want to demo mumble_fratz on the new framis.

Me:	I wish you could, but we don't have any framises.

Sales:	You don't???? When are you getting one?  It was announced last week.

Me:	We probably won't get one.

Sales:	Why not?  You are supposed to have all the new stuff.

Me:	Sigh.  Yep, but without a budget, we can't buy anything.

BTW, thanks for entering your recollection of the DVN.  I heard Ken at the
beginning and after suffering through the next 2 speakers, I gave up and
went back to work.  I wish I could have seen Ken at the end.

Bob
1306.11LESLIE::LESLIEAndy Leslie - *RE02 F/C3, 830 6723*Thu Dec 20 1990 10:322
    Yes, thanks for the report, my previous reply was more in sadness than
    anger.
1306.12just trying to be accuratePRIMES::ZIMMERMANN@DCO, Landover MD, 341-2898Thu Dec 20 1990 11:4611
I didn't take any offense what-so-ever reg. .8.

It's just that I don't want to mis-represent anything from the DVN.  I guess
in these times of fellow-employees going to court to keep from being fired
for not taking a drug test, fellow-employees being harrassed for expressing 
their views, I'm a little nervous about para-phrasing what others said/meant.

But I plan to discuss some of this in a future note.  FWIW, maybe it's time
we as employees start MAKING the system work.  Maybe that's Ken's message.
Don't complain, do something.  Anyway, that's how I see it, and I want to do 
something.  But more leter.