Conference 7.286::digital

    I think the new DEC logo should read; "DON"T DO AS I DO.....DO AS
    I SAY"!!!!!!I'm sure someone in another reply will "JUSTIFY" this
    spending(they always do). Digital has too many people at the top,just
    like congress when it comes time for pay raises ...They vote on
    how much they will receive...well when your a big Mgr. and your
    going to a big party, your willing to spend the Co. $$$$$ .
    
    
            ole DEC was something like this :
                              ^   (K.O)
                             ^^^
                            ^^^^^
                           ^^^^^^^
                          ^^^^^^^^^
                         ^^^^^^^^^^^
                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^  (the workers)
    
    DEC now;
                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ (everyone and their mothers)
                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^
                       ^^^^^^^^^^
                        ^^^^^^^^
                         ^^^^^^
                          ^^^^
                           ^^    (the worker)
    
    
    
        how long till we topple over?????
    
    
                                                         Bob's 2cents
                            
    
                         
                         
                     

    re. 0 Maybe its Dutch treat !
    
    phew wait until they find that out !
    
    ljo

    Speaking of bloated management ranks. I have a Key Contacts list, which
    list senior management at DEC dated 12-21-90. Just for the halibut, I
    counted the number of these "KEY PEOPLE" with V.P. in their title. I
    counted 60, SIXTY VICE PRESIDENTS. I guess all these folks must be 1
    and 2 performers, because I have not heard of any V.P.'s put in
    transition. Has anybody out there heard of a single VP or Senior
    management person put in transition??????? Probably not, after all it's
    us worker bees who have ran this corporation aground, not management.
    Sorry for the digression. 

    
    
    re .0
    
    The same week our EIS district was hit by this round of layoffs, 3/4
    of the District Sales force flew to Chicago for ONE days worth of
    training (aka SALES PLANE).
    
    Talk about a morale booster for the EIS ranks.
    
    Brent

 It seems to me that the issue here is a incongruity between the "we must cut
 costs and be savvy business people" partyline and the "let's live high on the
 hog, it's necessary for morale" reality.
    
 Of course, I am assuming that might be a possible justification for such an
 expenditure.  I certainly can not think of a valid business reason.  To say
 nothing of the impact on morale of such (as someone put it very well) "do as I
 say do, not as I do do" actions.
    
 It would seem to me, that if cost cutting is of such high priority, that a
 less expensive means of feeding people could be found.  I mean, regardless of
 being able to claim it as a business expense for tax purposes, should Digital
 be expending such amounts for meals for a business meeting?
    
 Aren't the guidelines for proper business meal expenses in the PP&P manual
 reasonably priced at around $35-60/day, depending on the city, more or less?
    
 There is reference to "senior Digital management" participation in this event. 
 Does that mean that KO would/does condone such behavior?
 
 					My $.02 worth,
 					Steve

While .0 raises an interesting point it is so vauge that we cannot be
sure that the event is totally outragous.  I wish there were someone to
present the other side.  For example are there customers at this event?
If so then such an extravaganza may be justified.

John

I worked at a large company that spent over $500,000 (That's FIVE
HUNDRED THOUSAND) to redecorate the president's office [A main office,
an adjoining conference room, and a bathroom] in the midst of a large
layoff.

re: .9

From .0

>    Note that this is an INTERNAL Digital meeting, not a customer event.


Bob    
 

... when you have to spend your budget or lose it :^/

But then, some people get off by throwing money around...

On the other hand, why couldn't the $$$ have been spent on stuff like
workstations and laptops for the sales force? There are *lots* of other
notes in this conference complaining about the lack of equipment in the
field; maybe 2 birds could have been killed with 1 stone here :^)

sigh,
/harley

    So exactly what do we have here?  Someone who we don't know is trying
    to tell us that some Digital management, who they won't name, is having
    a meeting, the purpose of which they won't share with us, in an expensive
    venue, which they won't reveal, in the process spending boodles of money 
    (because our anonymous source thinks it?) and that is wrong, folks, 
    because this person says so.
    
    This may or may not be true, and I would certainly be outraged if it
    is, but all we have is an anonymous opinion about an unidentifiable
    event to go on.  I call that bullshit and a waste of time.
    
    re: .7
    
    If the EIS districts spent 1/100th of the energy they expended thinking of
    ways to disinvest in their people and promise less to customers on 
    building a better product, MAYBE there wouldn't have been any layoffs.  
    In the meanwhile, I don't think other organizations would be well
    served by following the EIS going out of business plan.
    
    Al
    

    re: .12
    
�    If the EIS districts spent 1/100th of the energy they expended thinking of
�    ways to disinvest in their people and promise less to customers on 
�    building a better product, MAYBE there wouldn't have been any layoffs.  
�    In the meanwhile, I don't think other organizations would be well
�    served by following the EIS going out of business plan.
    
    Well said! The supposed flagship organization (EIS) of Digital's
    supposed major business thrust (IS) is having its bow plates sold for
    scrap, as far as I can tell.
    
    Is it just Al and I, or is this situation endemic (to the US, at
    least)? Perhaps we ought to fire up a new topic to discuss this.
    
    - Larry.

re: .12

Here in Dallas, there is an event that sounds suspiciously like what .0 is
describing.  If it isn't, then it's even worse, because that means there are
two of these things on the loose.

The event is the Retail/Wholesale Sales Training.  It is for Digital employees
only.

Bob

Nero (sales) fiddles while Rome (DEC) burns.

    If we are truly talking about Sales Training, perhaps we should take 
    the money saved by cancelling these events and buy the noters in .0, 
    .14 and .15 a clue.
    
    Al
    

    It does not matter whether we save money on Post-its (TM), or travel
    expenses, or big parties for the Sales folks, unless we have gotten
    much faster and more accurate at running the essential business cycle.
    
    The Corporation must recover it's peak abilities to:
    
      (1)  Understand what the customers want and need.
      (2)  Build reliable products with features the customers want, for
           a price they are willing to pay.
      (3)  Sell products to the customer.
      (4)  Deliver products and collect the money.
      (5)  Repeat from step (1)
    
    Organizations which can contribute should stay, those which cannot should
    go.  That cold assesment must be made before any other cost cutting
    measures will mean anything.  Managers are supposed to understand how
    to do this - it's what they get paid the big bucks for.
    
    It is far more important to remove layers of bureaucracy, than to
    reduce any specific activity cost.  Lots of people's jobs will be
    much easier (and safer) if they do not have to spend so much effort
    overcoming various Activity Prevention Departments.
    

re:.16

O.K. Al, as I am the author of .14, give me a clue.

Bob

Maybe if you're selling to Neiman-Marcus, you need to have
classy training events.

    I don't really want to waste a whole lot of time arguing about whatever
    this is, since the information presented by .0 thus far is content-free, 
    but I guess I will take issue with the implied criticism of sales training
    events.
    
    It boils down to two points of view:
    
    One, you believe that we should not be training the sales force, or
    just as bad, that these events are simply excuses for parties.  This
    view is so moronic that it's not worth arguing.  I can't believe anyone 
    could be stupid enough to hold that opinion.  Have I made my point? :^)
    
    Or two, you believe that the venues chosen are too ostentatious and that
    it would be cheaper to hold them elsewhere.  My own experience tells me
    that these events are SUPRISINGLY inexpensive.  Before people go blabbing 
    off about how much money Digital is spending (wasting), it would probably 
    be a marginally intelligent thing to actually KNOW how much money Digital 
    is spending on these events. Appearances can be very deceiving.  Also, 
    don't underestimate the logistics required to provide training for 200 or 
    so people at a clip.
    
    Al
    

    re: .20
    
    There is a third point of view, which I believe is the point of view
    intended by the 1460.0.  It is that the appearance of an ostentatious
    event is harmful to morale when people are being laid off and are under
    pressure to eliminate even very mundane expenses, such as post-its (tm).
        John Sauter

    One thought immediatly comes to mind with a reply like the last
    reply.... hug that tree.  
    
    Now I am not saying that the sales people are bad or that they
    shouldn't have training, but if the dinner and entertainment plans
    are as .0 says then it is obvious that there is some heavy overspending
    for this particular event.
    
    I wish I had a dime for each time someone says "you don't understand"
    followed by all kinds of reasons and excuses why something is done
    this way or that, instead of listening to what is being said and 
    giving the feedback some honest thought.
    

    .22 was a reply to .20.  Someone else replied before me.
    

re: .20

I don't think anyone is criticizing sales training or saying that they are
excuses for parties.

As for whether the venues chosen are too ostentatious, well, I'm inclined
to believe that.  There is nothing wrong with Dallas as the location.  It
represents a good compromise for travel costs vs. everyone going to Boston.
However, when I go to training, no one takes me to McDonalds for dinner, let
alone the most expensive restaurant in town, nor do they pay for other forms
of entertainment.  And no one should!

Am I jealous?  No.  I was invited to the evening entertainment event that I
mentioned in my earlier reply.  However, I could not in good conscience
attend such an event when my co-workers are forced to buy their own office
supplies to do their job.

Bob

Re: <<< Note 1460.20 by ALOSWS::KOZAKIEWICZ "Shoes for industry" >>>

.20>    It boils down to two points of view:
.20>    
.20>    One, you believe that we should not be training the sales force,

What note offered that opinion?

.20> or just as bad, that these events are simply excuses for parties.  This
.20> view is so moronic that it's not worth arguing.  I can't believe anyone 
.20> could be stupid enough to hold that opinion. Have I made my point? :^)

It is worth arguing. Most of us are hearing up and down the line that
Digital is having problems. Ask anyone who has got the 'tap' and that is
the message they are getting/have gotten. For a specific organization to
ignore the facts and continue as if everything is normal is just plain
poor judgement. If glitz and glamour is a necessary motivator then let's
spread it around to the rest of the field organizations and engineeering
and mfg. too. Everyone elses' motivator these days is 'work hard so maybe
I can keep my job'. Events as outlined in .0 are rubbing salt in the
wounds of the rest of us.

.20> Or two, you believe that the venues chosen are too ostentatious and that
.20> it would be cheaper to hold them elsewhere.  My own experience tells me
.20> that these events are SUPRISINGLY inexpensive.  Before people go blabbing 
.20> off about how much money Digital is spending (wasting), it would probably 
.20> be a marginally intelligent thing to actually KNOW how much money Digital 
.20> is spending on these events. Appearances can be very deceiving.  Also, 
.20> don't underestimate the logistics required to provide training for 200 or 
.20> so people at a clip.

Okay Al, you've convinced us. From now on field training events for EIS
(software) and CS (Field Service) should be done as outlined in .0 as
well. These events are SURPRISINGLY inexpensive and will be a big
hit! Let's make the switch and quit trying to save money with post-its
and water coolers...

Lee

    re: .25 and others
    
    No, it's not worth arguing.  If you want each and every one of our
    several thousand sales people to have the ability to sell each
    and every one of the hundreds of products we make to any one of our
    thousands of customers, you are going to need to train them.  Period.
    End of discussion.  That training will have to be frequent and timely.
    You'll have to train large numbers of them at the same time due to the 
    nature and urgency of the material.  This is NOT a problem that EIS or 
    CS faces on a regular basis!
    
    As far as glitz and glamour go, back off!  Don't keep trying to tie my
    comments back to .0.  I've already made my view on that perfectly
    clear.  We have no idea what .0 is talking about.  It is an opinion
    about an event he or she has not seen fit to disclose. No one else here 
    has been given the opportunity to arive at the same opinion by a
    personal review of the known facts (there aren't any!).  This is
    typical trial-by-notes bullshit.  MAYBE THERE IS SOME CREDENCE TO THE
    ALLEGATIONS, BUT I PREFER TO ARRIVE AT MY OWN CONCLUSIONS, NOT HAVE
    THEM SPOON FED TO ME BY SOME ANONYMOUS NOTER, THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
    
    The bottom line is this: No one knows what .0 is talking about.  Call
    me a tree-hugger if you wish (those that know me would probably laugh
    at the incongruety of that label), but I cannot stand by and have
    the entire concept of sales training denigrated by a kangaroo court of
    noters who are all too willing to tie it together with .0's opinion and
    thereby, to quote Steve Martin, 'criticise things they don't know about'.
    
    Al
    

re .26:

>                                           I cannot stand by and have
>    the entire concept of sales training denigrated by a kangaroo court of
>    noters who are all too willing to tie it together with .0's opinion    

I've read the entire string, and I've yet to see a note that did this.
Could you point out a specific reply that you think says that sales
training is bad, or that all (or even most) sales training is conducted
like the event in .0?  

This is NOT meant to be an attack on the sales force.  They need training as
much as the rest of us.

re: .26

>    No, it's not worth arguing.  If you want each and every one of our
>    several thousand sales people to have the ability to sell each
>    and every one of the hundreds of products we make to any one of our
>    thousands of customers, you are going to need to train them.  Period.
>    End of discussion.  That training will have to be frequent and timely.
>    You'll have to train large numbers of them at the same time due to the 
>    nature and urgency of the material.  This is NOT a problem that EIS or 
>    CS faces on a regular basis!

What does this have to do with this discussion?  I have not seen a single
reply to this topic where anyone even remotely suggested that the sales people
do NOT need training.

>    As far as glitz and glamour go, back off!  Don't keep trying to tie my
>    comments back to .0.  I've already made my view on that perfectly
>     ...
>     The bottom line is this: No one knows what .0 is talking about.  Call

Fine.  Since you seem to be having such a hard time believing that the event,
as described by .0, existed, let's talk about the event I described in .14.
It happened.  I and several others spent a week fulltime getting the Dallas
ACT ready for a 3 hour demo for this event.  Please note that the Dallas ACT
did NOT sponsor or pay for this event, other than the cost of our time
preparing and supporting the demo.  If you must, ignore the fact that it sounds
amazingly like the event described by .0.

In the event I described in .14, about 150 people ate dinner at The Mansion on
Turtle Creek in Dallas.  It is probably the most expensive restaurant in Dallas.
My wife and a friend ate dinner there once and the bill, including tip was $160.
They each had 1 glass of wine with dinner.

Al, I did some checking.  You are right.  The dinner was amazingly inexpensive.
It only cost per person, the approximate amount I spend on food for an entire
day while I'm at training.

The entertainment I referred to in .14 was an evening at the Circle <mumble>
Ranch. <mumble> is a letter like J, K, M, etc.  I've forgotten the exact name.
Wait a minute.  Someone brought me a souvenir from the event... It was at the
Circle R Ranch.  I don't have any numbers for the cost of the event, but let's
assume that there is a similar reduction in price as there was for the dinner
event.  In that case, it was inexpensive entertainment.

Lest you think I'm being all negative, let me mention 2 positive things done
for this event:

    1) The event was NOT held in Boston.

    2)  Instead of giving out 150 rental cars, buses were rented to transport
	the people between the hotel and the ACT, the ranch, and I assume, the
	Mansion On Turtle Creek.

Number 2 above does raise the question of why the people couldn't have stayed
at the Hilton next door to the ACT like most visitors from out of town do.
I'm going to assume that there was some justified business reason this couldn't
be done.  For example, the hotel was already booked for some other event, or
they didn't have enough meeting rooms of the appropriate size available, etc.

So let's summarize.  When I go to training, I eat like the money was coming
out of my own pocket.  About the fanciest place I go to is Bennigans or T.G.I.
Fridays.  I pay for my own entertainment and souvenirs.

For this particular event, the company paid for dinner at the most expensive
restaurant in town, an evening of entertainment, and gave the participants
a souvenir.

If this is cost cutting, I'd hate to think what it was like BEFORE the cost
cutting began.

Bob

Re:           <<< Note 1460.21 by SAUTER::SAUTER "John Sauter" >>>

>						...such as post-its (tm).

If your going to bother to use the (tm) designation, then at least get the 
trade-marked name correct  :-)

Should be "Post-it"

-  David

    Is there some reason events like this could not be done using DVN,
    and eliminate all the hotel and transportation charges?

    re: .29---Sorry.  Should have been Post-it (tm) Notes, I suppose.
        John Sauter

    There ar a number of good reasons for not doing this sort of thing via
    DVN.
    
    The DVN format may permit limited Q&A, but the need to get on the
    phone to ask certainly suppresses a certain number of questions.  DVN
    most certainly doesn't allow the trainees to share experiences or
    discuss strategies.
    
    It's also much easier to get and keep a sales rep's attention if you
    can get him/her away from telephone's secretaries and managers.  If
    you're in the field, check out the next sales-oriented DVN broadcast. 
    Even if 100% of the local sales team attends, the everage number of
    people in the room at any given time is about half that.
    
    Remember also that you're running the training event to motivate
    the sales force to get out there and do (whatever).  There is a natural
    tendency on the part of the event planner to do things that will send
    the sales team home with a favorable impression of your porduct or
    program.  
    
    A product manager at my wife's former company was famous (or infamous)
    for two things:
    	
    -	The cheapness of his sales training sessions (Motel 6, 3 hours from	
    	the airport, transportation via rented school bus,meals at Wendy's),
    
    and
    
    -	The rotten sales his product traditionally generated.
    
    A few people saw a connection between the two.
    
    -dave

    	Having been a salesperson at several points in my career in fields
    such as newspapers, advertising, cookware, furniture, books, computers,
    clothing, food, etc., I am well aware of the power and control that a
    salesperson potentially holds over the rest of the corporation they work
    for.  In short, salespeople have everyone else by the collective balls.

    	Or, at least this has traditionally been the case in the past.
    It is conceivable that this may change through advancements in
    technology and the subsequent evolution of the marketplace from that
    of being primarily conducted by the elite few on the golf courses and
    in the yaght clubs, to that of being conducted by the many in an open
    electronic marketplace of the future.  The fact is that salespeople
    may eventually find themselves replaced by computers in many cases.

    	For the time being however, we must continue to put up with such
    things as bloated sales expense accounts, sparsely packed DVN broadcast
    audiences, and general pampering of the existing sales force as it is
    a normal feature in the existing business world.

				    -davo

I don't have the temperament for sales.  Maybe that's why I can't understand
the assertion in the last couple of replies that salespeople are motivated
mainly by perqs.  I'd think they'd be more motivated by money.  Isn't the
lack of commissions always raised as the cause of low productivity of the
sales force?

    re: .34
    
    To play amateur psychologist for a minute, the key characteristic of
    sales people is insecurity and the driving need for acceptance and
    recognition.  All else flows from that.  Money is just another (and, to
    some extent, interchangeable) form of recognition.
    
    re: a few back
    
    The mistake people keep making is assuming that classy venue automatically 
    maens high price.  Just because you pay $160 bucks for a private dinner 
    for two does not automatically mean Digital pays $80 a plate.  Doesn't 
    mean I'm right, either, but it's worth checking into before you draw the 
    conclusion.
    
    The last Industry training I attended (in Dallas) had something which 
    could probably be termed entertainment associated with it.  The cost of 
    the training, lodging, meals, local travel, entertainment, conference 
    facility, in short, EVERYTHING except the salaries of the presenters and 
    travel costs was $103/day/attendee.  I contrast that with the cost to 
    send one of my people to an Ed Services course in Bedford.  That generally 
    costs me almost $250/day just for the course, PLUS $70 for lodging and 
    another $30 or so for meals.  Venues, especially underutilized ones,  will 
    provide an enourmous amount of value for the opportunity to service
    several hundred people at a clip.
    
    I do know from personal knowledge that the 9 US Sales VP's have been 
    actively involved in ensuring that costs for training are kept as low as 
    possible.  Given this knowledge, I have a difficult time attributing
    the tale of scandalous behavior alleged by .0 to anything but acute
    hypersensitivity.
    
    I anxiously await some real facts on the content of the meeting and the
    amount of money spent.
    
    re: some others
    
    Speaking of hypersensitivity, yah, maybe I overreacted.  I tend to do
    that when I read crap like 'sales fiddles while DEC burns'.  One of my
    personal hot buttons are the 'trial-by-notes' topics like this where
    all sorts of scandalous episodes are related and a kangaroo court joins
    in to universally convict and execute the guilty, almost always without
    even a remote bit of interest in utilizing a process to establish the
    truth.  There are a lot of checks and balances in Digital and my
    experience is that it is exceedingly rare that truly egregious behavior
    is condoned or permitted to continue once discovered. 
    
    I mean, seriously, given the atmosphere currently in the company (Sales
    has NOT been immune from the hardship - ask your local DM how many
    times his expense budget has been cut this year.  Ask Bob Hughes how
    many people he expects to be cut from the sales force next year.) doesn't 
    anyone besides me think that it streches the bounds of plausibility just 
    a bit to assume that truly outrageous and highly visible spending abuses 
    are being perpetrated?  No matter how stupid you think senior management
    is, what makes anyone presume they would be so incredibly stupid as to 
    approve a highly visible spending orgy?
    
    No, until someone puts forth someting other than anecdotes or hysteria,
    I'm more inclined to assume that the costs of this training event (or
    whatever it is) are reasonable and that the opinions put forth by .0
    and others are a result of drawing conclusions without command of a
    critical mass of facts.
    
    Al
    

    Re .-1
    
    Good points. What disgusts me is that .0 is anonymous.
    
    To the author of .0 (assuming that you are reading this). If you have a
    valid point to make then at least put your name to it. I find tittle
    tattle from behind the face of anomymity to be contemptible.
    
    	- Name names
    	- Name places
    	- Give facts
    	- Tell us what should be changed
    
    Dave

re: .35

Al, i think your main point that Trial-by-NOTES is usually unfair, one-sided
and comparable to Trial-by-Gossip is right on.  I wish i also shared your
optimism that abuses will be detected and corrected by the system--but i don't.
As in "real life" (and in Dashiel Hammett/Raymond Chandler novels), crime does
sometimes pay (or go unpunished other than with the proverbial wrist-slap) for
those with the right political connections.  Not always, but enough of the time
to engender cynicism in a lot of people.

re: .36

Maybe we need something like a Special Prosecutor that people who legitimately
fear reprisal can anonymously submit detailed complaints to--although the
danger of that is that a "witchhunt" mentality will be spawned that causes a
lot of lost time and money as people are forced to defend themselves against
unnamed informants.  I don't see any really good solutions to this sort of
problem--the ODP is Digital's attempt, and it's an idealistic one in the good
senses of that term.

What this whole string of notes indicates to me is an increasing sense of
powerlessness among the rank-and-file about their lot.  That in itself should
be a concern to uppermost management.  I'd hope that they're aware of it and
are trying to do something to mitigate it, even if it's "only a perception".

									paul

    Unrelated to the allegedly extravagant sales training event in .0...
    
    On 8-May, there was a dermatologist (skin doctor) in our office doing a
    seminar on skin care in the summer months.  This seminar was held in
    the middle of the workday!
    
    Obviously, whoever had the time to attend this seminar doesn't have
    enough to do. 
    
    	Stu

    	re .38
    
>    Obviously, whoever had the time to attend this seminar doesn't have
>    enough to do. 
    
    	Perhaps only obvious to you.  Another example of trial-by-notes.
    
    	I have to agree with Al.  
    
    	Maybe it would also follow that "whoever [has] the time to
    	[participate in] this [notes conference] doesn't have enough
    	to do..."
    
    	Yes, I *DID* notice the time stamp of your entry in .38.  While
    	it is not OBVIOUS, it would be easy to conclude that you entered
    	.38 on your own time.  Why can't we give the benefit of the doubt
    	to the folks that visited the onsite doctor, and conclude that
    	they visited him (her?) on their break time or stayed an extra
    	half-hour after work to make up for the time?
    
    	You don't happen to work a midnight shift, do you?  (Rhetorical
    	question.)
    
    	Joe Oppelt

    	re .28

    	Why do we have to mince words?  Why can't you be direct?

    >Al, I did some checking.  You are right.  The dinner was amazingly inexpensive.
    >It only cost per person, the approximate amount I spend on food for an entire
    >day while I'm at training.

    	Are you being serious or sarcastic?  If you are being sarcastic,
    	you failed to make your point, because if that is all they spent
    	per head at such a fancy establishment, DEC did a great job in
    	keeping the expenses down.  I can get away with $20/day when I
    	go on training.  $5 for breakfast and lunch, and $10 for dinner.
    	Maybe $30 tops.  IF I WANT TO KEEP EXPENSES DOWN.

    	If you are serious in stating that they did a great job in keeping
    	expenses down, then what's your beef about this training trip?

    	BTW, you later go on to state that you keep your meal expenses
    	down, so I find your statement hard to interpret:

>So let's summarize.  When I go to training, I eat like the money was coming
>out of my own pocket.  About the fanciest place I go to is Bennigans or T.G.I.
>Fridays.  I pay for my own entertainment and souvenirs.

    	Yet later on you go on again to harp on the expenses of this
    	trip:

>For this particular event, the company paid for dinner at the most expensive
>restaurant in town, an evening of entertainment, and gave the participants
>a souvenir.

    	Where's the substance to your message, Bob?  Sounds more like
    	b�t�hin' for the sake of it than anything else...  Classic
    	symptoms of trial-by-notes.

    	Joe Oppelt

    re: .40
    
    >	Why do we have to mince words?  Why can't you be direct?
    
    Joe, I'm not sure what you mean here.  If you mean why haven't I
    mentioned the price of the meal, it's because I don't know if the
    expenses for the training are supposed to be public knowledge.  All the
    information I have entered in previous replies have been with my
    manager's knowledge.  Since it is 22:01 on Sunday night, I will have to
    check with my manager tomorrow before I reveal the amount.
    
    >	Are you being serious or sarcastic?
    >   ...
    >	If you are serious in stating that they did a great job in keeping
    >	expenses down, then what's your beef about this training trip?
    
    I'm serious.  If they can get such a large discount on an expensive
    meal, why not try for the same discount on a moderately priced meal and
    save the company more money.  When my co-workers have to buy their own
    pieces of paper with glue on the back and hanging folders, to do their
    job, why shouldn't we expect everyone to cut their expenses as much as
    possible without making it impossible to do their job?  After all, (I'm
    trying to come up with an analogy without it sounding like I'm picking
    on some organization), suppose we could get  Rolls Royce cars for $50K
    (U.S. dollars) per unit, should we issue those to our Customer Service
    Engineers rather than the Lumina van (or whatever is standard issue
    these days), just because we got a good price?
    
    Training away from home is hard on everybody, whether they be sales,
    sales support, EIS, CS, etc, and I don't expect them to stay at a Motel
    6 and eat at Wendys.
    
    re: the people attacking .0 for wanting to remain anonymous, did you
    ever stop to think that this person may have had his/her hand slapped
    for saying things in conferences?  As we are all aware, no ones job is
    safe these days.  After my replies in this note, I've received
    friendly mail messages (not threats), indicating that I could be making
    a CLM (Career-limiting move), by saying more.
    
>    	Where's the substance to your message, Bob?  Sounds more like
>    	b�t�hin' for the sake of it than anything else...  Classic
>    	symptoms of trial-by-notes.
    
    I wasn't planning on saying anything in this topic, until people
    started attacking .0, so I gave the topic a concrete event to discuss.
    I've learned some things.
    
    Bob
    
    

    There must be something in the water at all the DEC facilities
    each reply in this (1460.*) set reeks with psychosis
    

re: .41
    
>    re: the people attacking .0 for wanting to remain anonymous, did you
>    ever stop to think that this person may have had his/her hand slapped
>    for saying things in conferences?

But what is "saying things in conferences" supposed to buy you?  If i was
unhappy with my management and wrote a scathing attack on them in a NOTES
conference without first trying to address my concerns directly to them,
wouldn't i deserve to have my hand slapped?  The desire to vent some spleen
in a public forum does not deserve uncritical applause.  It is NOT the
expression of a concern (as in .0) that bothers me: it's the tendency of
some folks to automatically accept everything written in NOTES as gospel
and immediately take sides in favor of the only side that has been presented.
    
>    I wasn't planning on saying anything in this topic, until people
>    started attacking .0, so I gave the topic a concrete event to discuss.
>    I've learned some things.
    
Bob, i don't have any problem with your concrete example--that's what is
needed, not anonymous expressions of angst.  But i haven't learned what
would seem to be the lesson we're trying to draw from this discussion--how
does one rightly fix what seems to be a problem (or verify that it really
isn't the problem that it initially appears to be)?    
    
								paul

.38 Hit one of my Hot buttons. Some of you have heard this from me before, but
once again for the Slow ones.

We work for Digital Equipment Corporation. It is a fortune 50 company. It
sells over 10 Billion dollars worth of products and services annually.

This corporation decided to downsize. Unfortunately Senior Management, not
having had to undertake such an exercise, did it at the "wrong" time in the
Economic cycle. That aside, Digital is in that class of Corporation that can
afford to say, "lets put $500M aside to the downsizing, to make sure that
those leaving do get a fiar deal, and those being re-deployed are best used."

Unfortunately, a massive percentage of middle management and the direct
contributors in this corporation tend to take any directive literally. It is
my opinion that sufficient Downsizing has now been performed. Any further
should either be through natural attrition, or to trim down a particular
organization that still show itself to be inefficient. Given the "Chicken
Little" Sydrome that pervades this network, a statement to that effect should
come from on high, to ease the minds of those that still think the sky is
falling.

Now, as a Multibillion dollar corporation, a leader in the industry, etc etc,
we are not (repeat *NOT*) going to expand our market share, or retain our
customer base over the long term, or retain the more talented of our
employees, or attract talented new people to work for us in the future, by
trying to pretend that we are a Back Room, Mom and Pop, computer Shop, and
pinching every penny we see.

We are going to do all of these things by agressively putting our smaller
competitors out of business, by hiring some of the best people in the
industry, and giving them every incentive to stay on.

The author of .38 bemoans the fact that Digital has show sufficient concern
for it's employees, that it feels that a short intermission in their work day
to learn about the Dangers of Skin Cancer, through overexposure in the summer
months, is of benefit to both the employee, and to the corporation (which may
see a reduction in Sick time as a miminum return from the small investment in
training the employees).

Here at Spitbrook Road, (and I'll thank you to refrain from engineering vs
field comparisions - I have worked in both) we see similar sessions on Weight
Control, Exercise, CPR, Diet, and even Skiing techniques in the winter months. 

These serve to keep the employees educated and aware, and fit to provide the
best available effort to their jobs. It's a win-win situation.

The same applies to the .0 scenario. Sure we can cost cut, Make sure that
every one stay in a Howard Johnsons when travelling coach, and eats in
MacDonalds, but I can guarantee that the overall quality of our employee base
will deteriorate as a result. As will the perception of us by our existing
customers and those customers we hope to woo into our fold.

Peter Q.

    re .44
    
    So, you are saying that a prereq to success is the willingness to waste
    money?  sounds like a pretty dammed spoiled atitude to me.
    
    I guess I will never be successful.  I can also think of a couple of
    BILLION dollar companies I have worked for are also not successful.

    re: last few

    As is usual in debates over what is required and not required, extreme
    cases are used to example certain points of view. I for one will relish
    the day when the accountable P/L is spread throughout the company. I
    believe you will still see disparity in "perks" at different locations.
    (Small US field offices [<200 employees] don't have cafeterias let
    alone subsidized cafeterias or Weight control classes or other beneficial
    like services) However, at least someone will have to explain ALL
    expenses and their effect on the bottom line. Sure at first you'll
    see many mistakes made, but over time we will get down to how most
    profitable business operates - managing to profit and loss at a
    reasonable level to control.
    
    -Terry

re .45

No, I did not say that the willingness to waste money was a prereq to success.
I said that in an organization of our magnitude and diversity, an aversion to
spending money that verges on the paranoid, is a prereq to failure.

I recall reading years ago, the memoirs of JP Getty, one of the world's
richest men, who said that the only way to get rich, is to pay other people to
do those things they they can do better than you. It worked for him, but if we
follow the attitude whereby we end up avoiding business because it may cost us
money to win, then we are doomed.

Me, I think that we can make it, but without the factional bickering about who
gets what perk and when, and without the nickel and dime attitude that will
destroy this fortune 50 company, that has made it fairly obvious that it's
target market is big corporate accounts, who get real nervous about penny
pinching when it comes to their requirements...

q

    This is all horse cookies.  There are to rules here, the golden rule
    and the law of diminishing returns.
    
    He who has the gold makes the rules, and
    the further you are from the cash registar the less you get!
    
    

    I think the issue at hand is simply "are we, as Digital employees and
    managers, taking consistent and thorough measures to control
    unnecessary costs in all areas of the company?"

    If we are still paying for $50, $80, or $100 dinners for people (not
    customers, which is DIFFERENT), then IMHO we are not being consistent.  

    Yeah, I tend to 'eat cheap' when I travel, so cutting costs isn't hard
    for me.  I don't insist that everyone else 'eat cheap'.  However, you
    can get a nice meal ANYWHERE in the country for $30, or perhaps $40. 
    Paying twice as much (or more presumably) is probably hard to swallow
    (no pun intended).

    FWIW, from LiveWire, a description of the event Bob mentioned earlier
    (note that I'm not claiming this IS or IS NOT the event mentioned in
    .0; only the author of .0 knows, and for personal reasons, she or he
    isn't identifying it):


      Retail, Wholesale Business Unit holds worldwide sales conference

 On May 6-9, the Retail, Wholesale Integrated Business Unit will host 
 the first worldwide sales conference and training session in Dallas, Tex.
 to target Digital sales representatives, support staff and management who 
 work with or are focusing on Retail, Wholesale Distribution accounts, 
 highlighting the opportunities in these industries for future Digital sales.  
    
 The conference has two major objectives: 1) to train account managers and 
 sales support personnel to better understand the challenges which face 
 industry executives, while including examples of how to capitalize on these 
 challenges with Digital solutions; and 2) to motivate the sales teams to 
 become the best in class at understanding their customer's needs and build 
 on past successes.  The goal is to energize the sales teams for success in 
 FY'92.
    
 Experts from Digital and from partners and customers will discuss the latest 
 in applications, products and services as well as trends in the Retail and 
 Wholesale Distribution marketplace.  The meeting will also target more than 
 100 sales, sales support and sales unit managers from around the world, and 
 include marketing and CSOs and senior Digital management.      

 Over 20 guest speakers will focus on technology, hardware, software, customer 
 service and industry issues and trends.  More than 14 break-out sessions 
 will be held on market-specific Retail, Wholesale Distribution technologies 
 and solutions, including changes in the industry that are creating great 
 opportunities for Digital and how the company can uncover and close major 
 opportunities.  In particular, speakers will address how well positioned we 
 are to respond to customer requirements in these markets.  The most 
 productive result of the four-day meeting will be identifying hot 
 opportunities and developing winning strategies to close business in FY'92 
 and beyond.

 "This conference is another step in building a marketing, sales and 
 engineering team," said Abbott Weiss, Group Manager of the Retail, Wholesale 
 Business Unit.  "We want to further strengthen our position and move ahead to 
 build on our successes.  We want the team to help solidify our plans and 
 create winning strategies and tactics to go after new business."

 For more information, contact:  <NAME DELETED>, <TITLE DELETED>, DTN <DELETED>

    	re .49

    	Nowhere in this topic was it stated FACTUALLY that "$50, $80, or
    	$100" was spent for any dinner.  Nowhere was it stated that we
    	were "paying twice as much (or more presumably)" than $30 or
    	$40 for dinner.

    	This is just another example of TRIAL BY NOTES.  Kangaroo
    	court.  About the only person participating in this topic
    	who has concrete facts on the price of the dinners won't say
    	what it was for reasons of propriety.  But he DID say that it
    	cost about what he spends for a day's worth of meals on a 
    	training trip, and he DID say that he doesn't spend a whole
    	lot on such trips because he is frugal.

    	Rumors are dangerous because the weak of mind accept them as
    	fact.

    	Joe Oppelt

         Well, as the author of 1460.0, I'd like to update the story
         and provide more accurate information which has since become
         available.

         It turns out that the dinner at the expensive restaurant was
         negotiated at a very impressive price, given the going rate
         there, of well under $30 per person.  Given the world-class
         stature of the establishment, this was a very good piece of
         negotiating.  And it proves that appearances can be
         deceiving.  Given a large city, that is probably not an
         unreasonable amount for a really good meal.  I'll let others
         argue the appropriateness of it, in the context of the
         current corporate financial situation.

         I could have kept quiet here, but in the interests of
         fairness, felt it was proper to update my original posting.

         So, yeah, I jumped to the wrong conclusion.  I guess folks
         were making an effort to control costs.  However, when you
         are watching people being escorted out the door, it makes you
         wonder if all efforts are being made to control costs that
         could be.  Am I convinced all efforts are being made now? 
         No.  I know of some very wasteful practices still going on,
         even in my own organization.  I fully expect flaming
         commentaries that this should never have been posted to start
         with.  But, I think it's better to err on the side of
         watchfulness than to let some boondoggles pass by
         unchallenged.

         I will recount one true life story, which happened to an
         acquaintance of mine two years ago, which I think illustrates
         a point about perceptions.  My friend was involved in the
         planning of a major sales training event, here in our fair
         city by the lakes.  As part of the planning for the event,
         they arranged for the attendees to have an evening of food
         and entertainment at a "local interest" location at a very
         attractive price.  When they submitted the plans for the
         event to corporate, they were shot down by a VP.  When they
         pointed out the very attractive pricing they'd arranged,
         corporate sales told them, "your costs are not at all out of
         line, but what you've planned has the appearance of costing
         too much!"  Remember, this was in 1989, long before the
         present recession, war, and financial woes and lay-offs.  So,
         back then, someone was sensitive to the "appearance" of
         excessive expenditures.

Re: .51          -< Reply from anonymous author of base note >-

>         corporate sales told them, "your costs are not at all out of
>         line, but what you've planned has the appearance of costing
>         too much!"  Remember, this was in 1989, long before the
>         present recession, war, and financial woes and lay-offs.  So,
>         back then, someone was sensitive to the "appearance" of
>         excessive expenditures.

I agree with you that it's the *appearance* of excessive expenditures which 
causes dissent in the ranks.  And heaven knows there are many examples of such 
*apparent* excesses.

-  David

    re:.52
    
    set sarcasm:on
    
    Oh certainly,the *appearance* of wasteful spending is the problem. Like
    last year (or the year  before) when DEC rented an entire ocean liner
    to take the DECATHLON winners and significant others on a cruise to
    Mexico,*that* only *appeared* lavish. 
    
    Ken

    re: .53
    
    I believe the point is that the appearance of waste is bad, even in the
    absence of actual waste.  Nobody has said that actual waste is not bad.
        John Sauter

Re:           <<< Note 1460.54 by SAUTER::SAUTER "John Sauter" >>>

>    I believe the point is that the appearance of waste is bad, even in the
>    absence of actual waste.  Nobody has said that actual waste is not bad.

Thank you, John.  I didn't make myself clear on that...

-  David

    	One thing about being extravagant in your business expenditures,
    is that at some point in time the company will have to pay the price
    for all of the luxuries, it provides its employees. Paying for off
    site meetings at fancy hotels, charging up expensive dinners, and 
    providing expensive perks to a minority of the employees, is what 
    has apple in the positin it is in today. They are going to layoff 2,000
    employees, and all during the past few years I know their sales staff
    and their families got trips to Hawaii, Bonuses lilke VCR's & TV's.
    	I am not saying that employees don't deserve, or shouldn't get
    these types of bonus, but I do think there are two things wrong with 
    this method.
    	1. The bonus don't trickle down to the line operator or the 
    manufacturing end. They typically end up in the sales and finances
    offices.
    
    	2.  When things get tight and sales are slow, you have to put these
     bonuses on hold. Otherwise you are giving out bonuses at the cost of
    someone elses job down the line.
    
    	The recent notes file and news articles about the disparity between
    salaries of CEO's and the line operator is a good example of how we
    save money at the expense of the working stioff, while the upper
    management doesn't need to loose out on their lifestyles.
    
    just my 2 cents worth
    
    Brian 

    Re: 53 - DECathalon
    
    I won't bore anyone with details but, having been a passenger of the
    cruise, I sincerely felt that I (and my spouse) had EARNED this. I
    worked until after 11PM with a customer to swing a deal that grossed us
    $12M with only a $7 calculator watch to do P&L on while we were
    "locked" in a conference room. 
    
    My wife and I clearly are thankful for the token of appreciation that
    Digital had bestowed upon us for the sacrifices that myself and my
    family had to endure in bringing this business to Digital.
    
    Don't knock the system because one group offers the potential of
    capitalizing perks such as DECathlon. A lot of our Sales people
    (worldwide) worked for and EARNED that "reward". True, some of us may
    have had experience with some real "jerks" in Sales but we are not ALL
    that way.

    r.e .57
    not to start a war story note:
    
    I had arrived at work at 6.30am that day and it was now 11.30pm, the
    pizza was just delivered, we ate it standing up. This was the 4th day in 
    a row that I had done 18hrs straight and one 24hr the friday before. 
    We had great team synergy and the reward was doing it well.
    
    We brought the job in on time, on budget despite small things like
    system management and establishment of the cluster not being included in 
    the schedules, downtime, network troubleshooting... 
    
    Our CC manager refused to pay for the pizza. 
    
    

Whew! And I thought I had seen some bad managers around DEC.

Yours sounds like the kind we _really_ ought to pay to leave.

K.

    re: sales perks
    
    Something confuses me here.  The folks who make significant personal
    sacrifice designing, building and delivering the product are not
    typically rewarded with cruises and such.  Their families endure the 
    same sacrifices.  WC4 do not even receive overtime pay.  Stock options 
    are siphoned off by upper management. 
    
    Why is it necessary to motivate sales folks with big $$$ prizes, when 
    the rest of the "team" clearly is not privy to that reward structure? 
    Where's the parity and fairness here?
    
    Can someone enlighten me?
    
    D.

    	re: sales perks
    
    	I agree. My war story is working a 3 day 6pm-6am workweek
    supporting manufacturing here at DEC. Prior to December to meet our 
    goals they had production working 7 days a week, instead of 6. That 
    meant that every other week the engineering staff was working 4 12
    hour days, not including covering someone else who had vacation during
    that period. I am salary and do not collect OT. I don't see any cruises
    being offered me for my services.
    
    	If you signed on to be working a sales position, then you know the
    responsibliites and committmentts that come with the job. I have
    worked the sales end of a business, and it is long hours with usually 
    little time for family and friends. Sorry, but those hours and
    situations come with the job that you signed on to do. That is your
    assignment. I don't get paid extra for fixing a manufacturing problem,
    even if it does improve yields. That's my job.  If someone feels they
    deserve perks, it probably is because they don't feel they are being
    paid enough. If that's true then that person should examine why they 
    are doing that kind of job, and what the market price of that job is 
    in other companies. I don't know if DIGITAL underpays their saled force
    or not, but that should have been worked out when you signed on here
    
    Brian
    

Re:             <<< Note 1460.59 by A1VAX::BARTH "Special K" >>>

>Whew! And I thought I had seen some bad managers around DEC.
>
>Yours sounds like the kind we _really_ ought to pay to leave.

I must disagree with you.  If he/she's really that bad, he/she should not be 
*paid* to leave, but should be *made* to leave  :-)

-  David

    re: .61
    
    When you signed on to be working a sales position, you not only know
    the responsibilities and commitments that come with the job, but also
    the perks.  You take all of that into account when deciding to do the
    job.  
    
    Even when perks are unfairly distributed, you increase the
    dissatisfaction when you remove perks that had previously been
    considered part of the job.  For example, in our group we can no longer
    have "release parties" as a reward for shipping a product.  To ease the
    transition unhappyness the project leader will sometimes invite
    everyone who contributed to the project to his home to socialize. 
    Although food is served this isn't considered a "party".
    
    I did this last Monday for DECforms V1.3.
        John Sauter

    re: .61
    
    Your analysis ignores the fact that sales perks are a standard
    part of the compensation picture for this industry.  The expectation
    of sales perks is being set by the competition as well as by Digital.
    
    Please note as well that an excellent sales rep is likely to get paid
    much more by many other companies even with the cost of the perk added
    to compensation.
    
    If Digital dropped the sales perks and increased compensation, then the
    next cry would be "Why are sales people paid so much???".  Dropping the
    perks and NOT increasing compensation would silence the internal
    critics -- and increase the likelyhood that the "best and brightest" in
    sales will simply go to work for the competition!  
    
    I don't wish to be cold about this, but your own argument can be turned
    on itself:  if _you_ expect perks, then compare your job with offers
    elsewhere.  
    
    Fairness in compensation doesn't mandate the need for identical forms
    of compensation, IMHO.
    
    This topic was explored ad nauseum sometime ago.  Where's that
    "Boondoggle" note?
    
    -- Russ
       who_isn't_in_Sales

    Ok, maybe I pushed us into the sales perks argument with my pizza
    experience. I do believe that sales people should receive the requisite
    awards for their profession and if this means rewarding them this way
    so be it. The point I was making is that we do have people that view
    every expenditure as a cost rather than an investment. Also, when those
    rewards are given to one member of a team, sale typically includes
    the combined efforts of :
    		The Sales Person
    		The Account Manager
    		Numerous Sales Support, Consulting and other technical people.
    		Clerical People
    		Engineering, who built the solution, often late at night.
    		MArketing, who have enhanced the reputation of the product
    
    Any sales person who believes they are single-handedly responsible for a
    sale should look again. A lot of people sacrifice a lot of sweat to
    make them look good. Yes, they work hard too, but many others are
    partly responsible for the timeliness of their responses, the quality
    of their solutions, the reputation that gets them in the door.... 		
    
    Perhaps we should look at the mentality that stops our managers from
    seeing small rewards and personal encouragement as motivating factors,
    and suitable investments at the coalface in the well-being of employees
    and yet allows monolithic reward schemes to make a small cotery feel
    valued. Who has not seen people trundle off to these functions who have
    dropped you in doo-doo on something yet picked up a reward for
    performance on something else, or worse still for the project that you
    bailed them out of? This is what grates hard cheese when you are a
    support person, engineer... On the other hand, sales people do also save
    situations when others have dropped the ball. The result is
    constructive for the person receiving the reward and destructive for
    the people who have worked with the mess-up. Other things that grate
    are when you see someone getting all the accolade for a sale, talking
    about "I had this All-in-1 problem and I did this to solve it and this
    RDB issue came up but I deftly handled that and this comms matter was
    an obstacle"...then:"also thanks to person X, person Y and person Z"
    and they are the All-in-1, RDB and comms support people who you know
    worked the obstacles.
    
    I have great respect for our sales force. I wish people would have a
    little more respect and encouragement for each other, instead of
    looking at others as people who get in the way of their individual
    success. I do not make a product a success, I contribute to the team
    that makes it successful. That team includes the engineers, sales
    people, support people. Ok, pizzas arnt an acknowledged perk of
    software engineering, but I expect that team motivation reward at the
    coalface is, unfortunately its not happening, people are working out
    of fear of losing their jobs, and this is motivation enough to work
    but is unhealthy for people and the long term quality of the work you
    produce. People will decide to be a leaf on the vine when they perceive
    that their efforts are not being noticed, when they feel they are
    not being listened to and the people who decide their futures are not
    even caring or seeing their efforts.
    
    Get the reward structures to the people, make them feel valued and make
    managers actively understand what their staff are going through. You
    will have a better company with better people who understand the
    meaning of pay/reward for performance. This is an investment in your
    prime resource, the entire body of your workforce, not a cost. 

RE:        <<< Note 1460.58 by AUSSIE::BAKER "first jellyfish in space" >>>
    
>    I had arrived at work at 6.30am that day and it was now 11.30pm, the
>    pizza was just delivered, we ate it standing up. This was the 4th day in 
>    a row that I had done 18hrs straight and one 24hr the friday before. 
>    We had great team synergy and the reward was doing it well.
     ....
>    Our CC manager refused to pay for the pizza. 
    
If I remember correctly the little book you get on Digital policies the
you get when you are hired says that Digital pays for a meal if you
work more than, I believe, 12 hours.

RE: .56 Toaster etc.

DIGITAL'S SALES FORCE IS NOT OVERPAID.

Let me repeat that

DIGITAL'S SALES FORCE IS NOT OVERPAID.

While it is true that Digital's BAD sales reps are overpaid the good
ones are grossly underpaid.  

I don't know where people get the idea that all is merry and gay for
sales reps.

    reply .63,.64
    
    	I am not saying that some perks are deservin gof the staff at
    DIGITAL, but that perks such as the DECATHALON cruise are "excessive",
    especially in these tough times. It is obvious that only certain job 
    categroies are going to be up for the DECATHALON award. It is not only
    this way at DIGITAL, but at most other companies that give these kind
    of perks out.
    	I agree that employees should be allowed celebrations for working 
    extra hard or for the shipping out of a new product. But these
    celebrations should include everyone involved, as one of the previous
    notes pointed out. We all are part of the DIGITAL team, everyone from
    the line operator, who makes sure that the part is made to spec, to the
    sales rep who signed the multimillion dollar contract for the final 
    product. AS a team we all deserve to share in the reward system.
    
    Brian 

    There might be a good point in some of these replies, some of them more
    valid with the "new" Digital than the old. It used to be that the sales
    team was kept in the mushroom fields whereby that's beginning to
    change.
    
    In today's digital where there seems to be much more desire by product
    engineering, manufacturing (I can't name them all), to make a
    particular opportunity successful, perhaps the sales rep that get the
    "win" should be allowed to "nominate" others that have made the
    business in question successful. I see soooo much more desire from
    product people thins year than last to want success at the sales level
    that maybe we should change the rewards. I don't have a problem with
    giving credit where credit's due.
    
    As to cruises, etc, that horse has been buried. We're a different
    DIgital now. Doesn't make sense to me for us to complain about the
    past. It's the future we all want to change (to make us a sucessful
    company).

>                                               It used to be that the sales
>    team was kept in the mushroom fields whereby that's beginning to
>    change.

    re: 1460.67 by WLDWST::BRODRIGUES "Fiat Lux" 
        
>       I am not saying that some perks are deservin gof the staff at
>    DIGITAL, but that perks such as the DECATHALON cruise are "excessive",
>    especially in these tough times. It is obvious that only certain job 
>    categroies are going to be up for the DECATHALON award. It is not only
>    this way at DIGITAL, but at most other companies that give these kind
>    of perks out.
    
    This amounts to a pay cut for top sales reps.  This perk ISN'T
    excessive, it's merely part of their compensation; it's an incentive to
    succeed.
    
    If you drop this, then you are left with a base salary which a good
    sales rep can probably double or triple (or more) by working at other
    companies.
    
    Top sales reps make A LOT of money in this industry.  Spending money
    on the top 10% to take a cruise or whatever is A LOT cheaper than
    trying to raise their pay to compete with their top peers in the
    industry (if Digital did hike their pay, I KNOW we'd get moans of
    "Sales reps make too much money").
    
    Face it: Good sales reps make BIG bucks and get BIG perks.  It's not
    Digital's rule, it's the industry's rule.  If we're going to compete,
    we're going to have to live with the rule (in one way or another).
    An annual trip is CHICKEN FEED by comparison to the way many other
    companies play this game!
    
    re: beating a dead horse
    
    Agreed.  Concerned individuals should review 1272.* in this conference.
    I think all of this comes out there already.
    
    -- Russ
       who_works_with_sales_reps_but_isn't_one_himself

    re.69  The Mushroom Management Theory
    
    1).  Keep 'em in the dark
    2).  Feed 'em sh*t
    3).  Hope they grow
    4).  Cut 'em off at the knees when they mature
    
    Or so I remember
    Mark
    

    re: Al
    
    Yes,we should not beat a dead horse and no,this is definitely not a
    thing of the past but rather an ongoing thing. 
    
    Ken

	How do we keep our field employees happy:

	1)  Give them 4% raises after a two year pay freeze when the 
	    average billing rate has gone up 4% a year.  Annual Raise
	    2% a year.

	2)  Send the top sales performers to DECCathalon [sic] and 
	    2 or 3 software types.  Of course no EIS specialists 
	    get the trip.

	3)  Increase the loaded costs of field employees because it's
	    cheaper to set metrics than cancel boondoggle research 
	    projects and fire manufacturing managers who won't be
	    flexible to customer desires.

	re .66 (John Miano):

>	If I remember correctly the little book you get on Digital policies the
>	you get when you are hired says that Digital pays for a meal if you
>	work more than, I believe, 12 hours.

	Yes, John, it reads similarly where I work. But I found out a few
	years ago that there's a small catch-22 operating with "policies
	and procedures" like that.

	The way my local HRO rep explained it to me, P&Ps are there "as
	guidelines" and are "subject to managers' discretion". What this
	meant was that a manager can quote the P&P when refusing to pay
	expenses if less than 12 hours were worked. But it doesn't force
	him to give you the expenses if more than 12 hours were worked.
	That's up to his discretion.

	In engineering terms, this is called a "valve". I will not reveal
	what I call it.

	/Tom

          <<< Note 1460.74 by COUNT0::WELSH "What are the FACTS???" >>>
                           -< Expenses valve effect >-

	re .66 (John Miano):

>>	If I remember correctly the little book you get on Digital policies the
>>	you get when you are hired says that Digital pays for a meal if you
>>	work more than, I believe, 12 hours.
>
>	Yes, John, it reads similarly where I work. But I found out a few
>	years ago that there's a small catch-22 operating with "policies
>	and procedures" like that.
    
    What little book? The only little books I know for P&P are the large
    ones that sit in manager's offices. I've consulted them on occasions
    but dont make a point of professionally being able to quote them
    verbatim. I'll take a look at what that says but I guess its really 
    irrelevent to the point I was trying to make.
    
    <time passes...a miracle occurs>
    
    I checked it just then - for this subsidiary only people who are
    eligible for overtime get meal allowances, so no go. The rules for this
    seem markedly different from the rules that you seem to go under.
    
    Anyway, this is a sidetrack to the central issue that reward structures
    should fit the profession you are in.
    
    
    John
    

My experience echos that of .74.

On the other hand, the _good_ managers I've had would arrange for pizza or
sandwiches to magically be delivered.  

K.

    The Policies and Procedures book is on VTX now. You do not have
    to rely and your supervisor for information. You can access it 
    by typing VTX ORANGEBOOK . 
    
    I think you are entitled to $5.00 dinner money if you work 11 hours
    on any day.
             
    
    
    
             

     
    	From personal experience in 1985, I found out that a large
    percentage of that book is US ONLY.
    
    	You have to read the header for each section to find out where it
    actually applies.
    
    							Mel

 Policy Philosophy                                    Effective: 01-DEC-90  
                                                      Section: 1.01         
...

 | Digital policies are management guidelines for the implementation of
 | Digital's Employee Relations philosophy.  These policies are subject
 | to change without notice as they reflect our values and changing
 | business needs.  AS SUCH, DIGITAL'S PERSONNEL POLICIES ARE NOT
 | CONTRACTS OR GUARANTEES OF ANY PARTICULAR KIND OF TREATMENT OR
 | MANAGEMENT PROCESS.  Only the Executive Committee and members of the
 | Board of Directors are authorized to enter into such contracts.
 | The meaning, application, and interpretation of these policies are
 | reserved to Digital senior managers and the Personnel professionals,
 | and not to courts of law.  The Executive Committee and the Personnel
 | Management Committee believe that appropriate use of Company policy is
 | critical to the success of the Company, and encourage employees to use
 | the Open Door process (Personnel Policy 6.02) to address issues of
 | concern.

re .79:

I wonder if the disclaimer applies to the ODP.

    I probably wouldn't have quite as much heart burn about the sales trips
    (which I oppose), if I had not personally observed the manipulation of
    sales credits, trading between managers, outright fraud, and general
    shucking-and-jiving that went on as part of choosing participants in
    the one cruise I was personally involved with.  I don't know if this
    still goes on, but it was bad.
    
    BTW, save the key strokes.  I will not provide details, names, dates,
    etc.  I was there, I heard the managers laughing about it, I
    experienced it.  That's enough.
    
    If our sales folks can make so much more money somewhere else, why the
    hell don't they go?  I don't understand this.

    	I agree. If your doing your job for the money, then I can show
    you clothing and stereo salespeople who are bringing in 100k+. So 
    please don't use your salary as an excuse for getting bonuses. I deal
    with millions of dollars worth of equipment in the fab everday, and
    the parts we make are probable worth from 2k-10k ea, just in my area.
    	A major mistake can cost us, DIGITAL, 160K+ every time it occurs.
    And I gladly admit that there are a whole team of production operators,
    supervisors, fellow engineers, managers, etc. to help ensure
    productivity. Sales people who think they deserve those kind of perks
     forget the countless people in the company who are also putting in
    long hours for little pay and no pats on the back.
    
    	Just one more note. Just two weeks before the layoff they gave 
    everyone here coffee cups with gold layering on them. I wonder how much
    that cost us. I also heard that we are going to redecorate and
    refurniush one of our buildings as soon as the layoff is over. I sure
    someone who is getting laid off will be glad to know that their salary
    just wentfor new carpeting. 
    
    another 2� worth
    Brian

>Just two weeks before the layoff they gave everyone here coffee cups
>with gold layering on them.  I wonder how much that cost us.

Coffee cups cost a dollar or two, right?  The gold layering probably added
somewhere between five and twenty-five cents to the cost, if that.

    	I don't know how acurate your cost is for coffee cups, never having 
    bought them in bulk with logos attached, but now multiply that number
    by 700 people at this site, and you get at leasty $1400. A rather silly
    expense, in times when they tell us to control our stationary supply
    usage.
    
    Brian

    
    Two years ago, the cost for a decent ceramic mug with a logo and fancy
    trim was in the $4-5 range, maybe $.50 less in the quantity mentioned.
    
    Certainly a lot of Post-It's.
    

I wonder under what kind of financial situation would have to occur
for the sales organization to accept a reduction of the
{benefits/perks/rewards/bonuses/compensation/etc.} that they are
accustomed to?

I conclude from the tone of many replies posted here that it is not
really an option that can be considered. Yet for other functions within
the company it appears to be an accepted practice.

I suppose that I can buy off on the argument that sales needs to keep
the 'status quo' in order to stay motivated but what about the other
functions?

A while back I asked a sales person how they were holding up under the
current financial conditions (cost cutting, layoffs, etc.) and their
reply was, in essence, "What conditions? Everything is business as usual
here in Sales."

Lee

    Don't worry, Lee - Sales will feel the heat soon. They'll feel it
    harder, hotter and more suddenly. And without the comfy packages that
    were handed out to the headquarters and manufacturing folks, I'll
    wager.
    
    You see, in Sales, it's not a case of smaller raises. If you fail (in
    the true binary sense of the word), you're simply gone. No nine weeks.
    No n-weeks per year. No free health bennies for a year. Just gone.
    
    I'm not sure that I can get excited about the "equity" of this. I think
    I'll try to concentrate on what I'm doing, rather than making sure that
    everyone gets treated at least as badly as I do.
    
    - Larry.

>for the sales organization to accept a reduction of the
>{benefits/perks/rewards/bonuses/compensation/etc.} that they are
>accustomed to?
    
    Just out of interest, what exactly are all these benfits/perks
    etc etc that people here perceive that sales get?
    
    Genuinely curious.
    
    >I suppose that I can buy off on the argument that sales needs to keep
>the 'status quo' in order to stay motivated but what about the other
>functions?
    
    EVERYONE needs to stay motivated.
    I believe that the "undervaluing" of the contribution of non-sales
    functions is one of the key reasons that we're in such a downhearted
    mess.
    
    What would motivate you?
    Money?
    Some of the perks/benfits etc that you believe sales get?
    
    'gail
    

    re:-1
    
    About the benies and perks that sales gets: We've beaten *that* dead
    horse into the ground. See previous notes.
    
    Ken