Conference 7.286::digital

    I feel the biggest hurdle you are going to find is that you will indeed
    come across some of the greatest network types bar none but, local
    management and managers will not let their people go. Period. People
    will respond and willing to relocate to MN or where ever else, but
    management will drag out the process for 6mos. to a year, regardless
    of what is right for the company or the employee. You will interview
    people get employee agreements then you will hit the stone wall dealing
    with local managers. I don't mean to be harsh but I have been down this
    road before. If this project does happen and does take off then the
    request for a viable work force better come for KO's office or Don Z's
    office if not then DEC will blow another one.. This is not fiction but
    hard fact.
    	Anyhow good luck whatever course you pursue
    	regards
    	John

    reply -1
    
    Yeah, I know. That's why we are getting the 'Z and Bob Hughes involved
    as we speak. Please assume executive endorsement of this project. 
    Executives of the customer and DEC (at very high levels) will meet
    and discuss committments later this month. We cannot afford a 3 month,
    6 month wait for talent. We went through that with a project last year.
    It was painful and we failed. We have learned. I expect the the program
    manager for this project will have reporting responsibility to the 
    sponsoring Digital Exec. We're workin on it.
    
    Gene.

    I forgot.
    
    Please fell free to extract base note and forward at your discretion.

    Let people know how long the project will last. If they come, assure
    them that there is a future after the project. Impress upon them that
    whomever comes onto the project has a long time future in this
    location. I know that this is hard to do in the NEW Digital. Here one
    day, gone the next. We are here only temporary.
    
    There are a lot of things that you can do to show people that it is worth
    their investment to work for you up there. Send me mail if you want to
    talk about this in more detail.
    
    Dave
    

To expand a bit on .-1:

We've all heard the horror stories of people who've moved to the Field, and 
then been "right-sized".  Some of them are friends of mine.

You should consider offering an employment contract.  This is common at the 
executive levels (I'll bet that "Z" has one).  Possible points that could
be included: 

1.  A "right-sizing" penalty clause(a.k.a. "golden parachute").  In the
    event of termination *for any reason*(to avoid the "weasel" factor),
    the "package" would include, say, 5 years salary.  (This would really
    be in there to make #2 look like a better alternative, though.) 

2.  Allow a generous (1 year) amount of time to find a new job, and pay the 
    relocation costs to wherever that job might be.  To cut down on the 
    time required to find a new job, offer executive-level dispensation to 
    allow the consideration of *any* job, even those that might otherwise 
    require internal-to-organization candidates.  You could even allow this
    to apply to a job external to Digital.

Another idea, not related to job security, would be to consider offering a
combination (I hesitate to say "package") deal.  A friend of mine wanted to
accept a position offered to him by Digital on the west coast.  He was
unable to, because his wife could not also find a job there.  This was
doubly unfortunate, since she also worked for Digital, and had skills they
needed.  But since the recruiters/local management dropped the ball, they
lost both of them.

Ray

    Yo Ray,
    
    Long time no see or hear.
    
    Points well taken. One of the things I have discussed with the current
    project and account managers is building in relocation monies to get 
    people here and to transfer them to their next job. In other words,
    make the relocation monies a non-issue coming and going. Also, the
    project will be long term. The customer is committed to doing this,
    though I have seen us fail before.
    
    You are right about one thing that I will think hard on. If we bring
    people out here we must ensure they don't get zapped in a numbers game
    of some sort or another. I will attempt to ensure that some kind of a
    "no cut" clause is initiated. Funny ain't it? There was a time in our
    past when people would jump at the opportunity to get involved with the
    kinds of technology this project is going to demand - and not worry
    about losing their job - even if they performed superbly. I will work
    to make sure the issues around this topic are clear and well
    understood.
    
    Rgds,
    
    Gene. 

Do you plan on providing for international relocation or does not knowing 
where MN is automatically disqualify you from applying? :-)

Cheers,

David
(PCI specialist with lots of nice letters from customers in his file)

    MN is Minnesota, as you'd have seen if you read .0
    
    	- andy

    Actually MN or MNO is a obsolete site code for "Manhattan".
    
    MPO is the site code for Minneapolis, Minnesota.  MN is the US Postal
    Service abbreviation for Minnesota.
    
    Roughly 20 years ago "NY", or the New York District Office was located
    in Englewood, New Jersey.  A small office was located in a few hundred
    square feet on West 52nd Street.  This was the Manhattan Branch or
    "MN".  Quite often mail was mis-directed between Manhattan and
    Minneapolis.  The Manhattan branch got bigger, especially so as some of
    the managers no longer lived in Englewood.  The "NY" office closed, and
    a few years later, when Digital moved to West 34th Street, the site
    code for that new office became "NY".  West 52nd Street closed and "MN"
    has been unassigned since.

    
    
        Gene,
    
     How is the local economy out there? 
    
    
     Is there much to fall back on?
    
     How is the cost of living, housing ect....
    
     Thanks
     Bill 

    You might want to consider offering people what is called a "U.S.
    Temporary Domestic Assignment".  It's in Section 5.06 of the PP&P.
    
    The cost is about the same, but at least people are guaranteed a
    return relocation to the site they came from.  Doesn't say anything
    about a guaranteed job though.

What would it take to attract people?

I can't speak for others, but speaking for myself:

1) To have a fairly consistent (day to day) set of objectives.
2) An employer who would want to emphasise my strengths
3) An employer who would appreciate my work and reward me for it.
4) Interesting work
5) Reasonable assurance that the customer is really interested in what I'm
doing.
6) Reasonable assurance that my employer thinks my project is worthwhile.
7) Attention to getting the job done instead of obsessing over process.

Get those out of the way, and I'd find the job security and relocation
issues to be secondary.

    I'd consider going wherever there's challanging work. Assuming that
    this project met that goal, one of the things that would keep me back
    is (surprise!) money.
    
    Like many others, I presume, I've lost money on my house. The COD
    programs of a few years ago offered a "loss on sale" provision, which
    basically made up the difference between the original purchase price of
    your home and the price the relo company would pay you for it. This
    made it possible for a lot of people to consider relocation who would
    otherwise not have been able to afford to move. If the customer pays
    the consultants' relo, this might even get billed to the customer...?
    
    In terms of job security, no matter how much the people promising it
    mean it, I'd assume that if things got bad enough, promises would be
    broken. Actually, I think that the risk involved in signing on for a
    customer project ("Where will I go when this contract runs out?") tends
    to act as a filter, attracting can-do people who want the challanging
    work and aren't afraid of finding another job when it's over, but 
    repelling some of the more complacent folks. I'd probably be
    turned off by an environment where everyone knew they'd have a job for
    the next N years. This could encourage all sorts of inefficient
    behavior.
    
    Cathy

    To elaborate on a couple of things that are attracting a lot of
    questions:
    
    1. MN Economy
       Like all parts of the country MN is feeling the recession the US is
       currently in. However, MN has an extremely diversified economy with
       the defense industry about the area really hurting. Just about all
       20+ people taht were transitioned out of this office in July had 
       found new and better paying jobs within 30 days.
    
    2. MN Quality of Life
       Pluses
         MN enjoys excellent housing costs (average $108,000 for a 3
         year old, 3BR, 2 Bath slit in new suburbs 2 miles from the
         DEC office)
       
         Educational system for grade school through post graduate
         degrees is very good. MN kids traditionally rate very high 
         on national tests.
    
         Health care system is arguably one of the best in the world.
    
         Performing arts rank only behind NY and LA.
    
      Minuses
         Weather. Can get down to -30(f) in January though those kind of
         days are rare (It's dropped below -30 only 3 days in the 14 years
         I have been here). DEC, JAN, and FEB are coldest. In the summer
         the temp can reach 100. Summers are short, but muggy and hot.
    
         Taxes. MN if always in the top 5 in terms of total state and
         local taxes one pays.
    
    3. Relocation. International or Within the US.
    
       I don't know what this will be. My goal would be to have as wide a
       base of applicants at possible. That's my goal. My guess is that 
       will be finalized in early Jan.
    
    If we win.
    
    Rgds,
    
    Gene.

    
    Please folks, keep in mind that this is not the Jobs conference.
    
    Discussion surrounding how to get and keep good people on Digital
    projects is perfectly acceptable for discussion in this conference.
    Discussion surrounding specific jobs or jobs-to-be should be taken to the 
    JOBS conference.
    
    Thank you for your cooperation in this matter,
    
    -Joe
    co-Moderator Digital
    

There's probably nothing you can do to assure people of their long-term
security in a situation like this.
Unfortunately, the facts are that when the project is over, you will have
more talent than you can keep busy in the area (unless you land another
similar project).  Those folks will then be faced with either finding another
job with relo attached (a more and more difficult proposition these days),
or leaving the company (possibly) without the aid of any package, whether
they want to or not.

I went for a similar project, and was even promised return relo.  That promise
was subsequently reniged on. (The situation has changed, and besides, we
already spent those funds...)

So, have some thought for what you want to do with these folks (or what you
expect them to do) after the project is over.  

Kevin

    In the spirit of this conference let's keep the discussion limited to
    those items stated in -.2. I will be publishing period updates and much
    more detail on the project, customer, and technoliges/people we may
    need. If you want to get on that distribution list please send me mail
    at:
    
      HAAG::HAAG
      Gene Haag @MPO
    
    Re. -1
    
    I know that's a serious problem and concern many people will have. And
    I don't have a solution for it today. I can assure you only that we are
    aware of it and will address it clearly and prior to posting any
    positions. I will push hard for some kind of situation so that people
    don't get caught in that kind of a situation. I can't gaurantee
    anything - I'm just Joe network slug. But bleieve me, I WILL bring up
    the issue.
    
    

    Well, if this was the EIS organization in my neck of the woods (I do
    not work for them), they would probably look to staff the critical
    elements of the project staff internally, such as the program/project
    management and a few key senior technical distributors.  They would
    relocate, perhaps only temporarily, the 2 or 3 additional people they
    might need for the duration of the project. The balance of the project
    staff would be filled by local individual contributors as they become
    available, but the bulk would be sourced from outside consulting shops.
    I can hear the cries of shock already but, quite frankly, they cost
    less than internal people, you can send them packing if they don't pan
    out, and there is no mess to deal with when the project is over.
    
    Al
    

re .8 (Leslie)

It was a JOKE, son!  A JOKE!  A little joke with a little smiley face so even 
you could get it.  Not that there's anything in .0 which explicitly links MN 
to Minnesota, but I know enough about American state abbreviations to work it 
out.  Get a grip...

    re. -2
    
    I understand. If we try that here again (we did a couple of years ago)
    we will fail again. The project is much much to complex to approach it
    like we have in the past. Send me mail and I will send you more info on
    the technical requirements.
    
    My hope is that we can build a team of people (from wherever in the 
    coorporation) that has a solid set of skills and experience in a lot 
    of areas and augment that team with local people. Some people may be
    slighted by that approach. However, That's position I will push hard
    for. I have seen us fail at this too many times because someones ego
    got in the way of common sense.
    
    I may not be successful with this approach. However, I have been in this
    industry a long time, and run some big projects. And I feel quite
    strongly that this is the ONLY approach we can take to make this thing
    happen. There has been a great reluctance on the part of the sales 
    selling these kind of projects simply because of the problems you have
    referenced. We have to ovrecome those problems. These kinds of projects
    are big slice of our future. 

Gene.

    	Gene --
    
    	Can any of this be done from remote sites, or does it all have
    	to be done onsite?  This may be a good way to handle "what to
    	do with the extras when the project finishes."
    
    	Joe Oppelt

    Joe,
    
    I wouldn't rule it out. I have run projects like that before and left
    people in remote areas (though not at DEC) and things worked out OK.
    And we didn't have anywhere near the network DEC has. It will depend
    but could be possible. To early to tell. If it was my decision and my
    decision alone I would say yes - definitely some aspects of the project
    could be done remotely. But I'm just one of the "grunts". I think it
    will depend a great deal on the Project's management and how they set
    their business up. I am keeping all options open.
    
    Rgds,
    
    Gene.

    Hi Gene,
    There's several groups within DEC that may be able to help. TME has
    resources that specialize in many different areas of expertise,
    including both hardware and software development, program management,
    consulting and mechanical engineering. We'll usually obtain training in
    areas we're not experienced with if we have the resources free to do
    so. Many people sign up for temporary assignments when the need arises.
    TME's charter in the past generally focused on work that the various
    manufacturing plants around the corporation needed done. I'm sure we'd
    be interested in looking at the possibility of forming ties with other
    groups within DEC that could utilize our services. If you'd like more
    details please feel free to contact me.
                   
    Regards,
    Marty Wood   TME, Systems Process Engineering Group (currently on a
    temporary assignment in Albuquerque NM!)
    ELMAGO::MWOOD
    dtn 552-2633
              

    re. -.1
    
    Marty,
    
    I am collecting the names of groups that could supply help. I will add 
    yours to the list. Should things proceed favorably I will contact you.
    
    Also,
    
    Someone from Canada sent me a mail message and I accidentally deleted
    it before recording the address. Please resend your message to me. I
    had about 6-7 windows up on my workstation and got my DIRs mixed up
    with my DELs when I was in window 4 which I thought was window 5...
    or was it window 3? Anyway, I zapped it. Please resend.
    
    Rgds,
    
    Gene.

I have recieved over 250 mail messages as a result of .0. I just wanted to 
share some results of that mail with you. I am extremely impressed with the
talent I've always knownt his company to posses. But getting you to take on 
the challenges of a project like .0 seems to have changed radically in
recent years. I am not surprised. I have created a small notesfile to put
information in about the ongoing efforts and potential opportunities with 
the project in .0 (to get that discussion out of this notesfile). If you 
are interested send me mail. We will know whether we win in early Jan. '92.

This is what I will take back to the account team and project team as this
thing unfolds.

  1. There are a lot of very talented people who would be an enormous asset
     to the project (indeed I hope many of you end being my neighbors - that
     is living in MN in the near future) who would love to join the team
     but;

  2. People are extremely concerned that by leaving a realtively safe job
     to participate in the project, they might get "caught" at its 
     conclusion in a numbers game and lose their job with the company.
     This is sad, understandable, but sad. DEC has long done this - let
     people fend for themselves after the project is over. "You" find a
     job somewhere and "I" will support you. That attitude is no longer
     acceptable and, in my opinion, is and alway was a management cop out. 
     Maybe this is a message for those in this corporation who want us to 
     be even bigger in SI. It's a horrible way to treat people. I will 
     push it hard locally but the "big boys" have to get this straightened 
     out for the company.
     And;

  3. Why does everyone have to live in MN to be part of the project? I
     personnally beleive they do not and if I ran the project (not a
     chance for a lot of reasons) it wouldn't be necessary. I have run
     projects like that, though not at DEC. I think it's a maturity 
     issue and I don't mean that in a deragatory manner. People who
     lead (NOT manage; but LEAD) projects have to be aware of the 
     methodologies and technologies (at least a basic understanding) so
     as to take advantage of both. A rare duck. But they do exist. Where
     I did it in the past never even dreamed of a network like ours; and
     we were successful.
     And;

  4. People want to participate in projects where they can contribute
     based on their current expertise and also learn new and exciting
     technologies and procedures. It seems many people have been placed
     in meat grinder positions where they learned very little while
     busting their behinds for many hours each week to meet unrealistic
     schedules. I don't see this as a problem with the project in .0. You 
     could always end up in a situation like that (again an example of
     bad bad leadership) but this one will stress our technological
     capabilites beyond anything I have seen to date. Boring it
     defintely won't be.

That's of course, 

IF we win.

Gene.

    
    	Gene, I believe everything is coming together in the new
    	Digital Services organization to provide the framework to 
    	overcome all the problems you mentioned.
    
    	It is impossible for a local office to fully staff to do a
    	project of this magnitude and have all the skills on "stand-by"
    	waiting for it to start...two things typically happen if the
    	local organization tries to build that level of talent:
    
    	   1.  You wind up with poor utilization of resources between
               projects where you can't find a use for that skill set
    	       in the local area.
    	       (thats the problem that a lot of people are worried about)
    
    
    	   2.  In order to keep resources busy and generate revenue, the
    	       local office is forced to take some highly specialized
    	       people (like database consultants for example) and send
    	       them out to do Allin1 installations or whatever needs to
    	       be done to keep them busy, and very soon you have completely
    	       diluted that person's specialized knowledge and/or he/she
    	       has gotten frustrated and quit.
    
    	To use resources effectively and to be able to respond to large
    	project opportunities like this, we need a balance of local
    	decentralized resources and centralized capabilities.  The focus
    	of the new Digital Services Engineering organization is to provide
    	a centralized base of resources that local groups like your own
    	can draw on for customer project opportunities.
    
    	The advantage of centralizing some of these resources is that you
    	can build more of a critical mass of capabilities and provide
    	career continuity to those people that would be very difficult
    	to do at a local level.  It also builds credibility and avoids
    	the startup delays of having to go out and hire and relocate
    	(and possibly train) a bunch of people everytime a big project
    	comes along.
    
    	If it becomes necessary, we can temporarily relocate people
    	from the Digital Services Engineering organization to the field
    	for the duration of a project and provide them the protection
    	that they have a home to come back to at the end.
    
    	I'm not saying you shouldn't hire people locally for this type
    	of requirement, but I just want to point out that there are 
    	other options that you have to choose from.  You (or whoever
    	winds up managing the project) can make a good business decision
    	of what's the right mix of local and centralized resources to
    	do the job.
    
    	We as a company have to learn how to do that successfully.  The
    	big-8 companies do it very well...you don't typically see huge
    	Anderson Consulting project teams spread all over the country,
    	but they are able to put together large project teams with a
    	wide range of skills from bo local and centralized resources.
    	Some of these people may live out of a suitcase for the duration
    	of the project or get relocated frequently for larger projects
    	but that's probably what's necessary to be in this business.
    
    	I think the new Digital Services organization is building the
    	framework that will allow us to do that much more effectively.
    	I have to admit that we haven't done that very well in the
    	past....One of the challenges that we have to make that work
    	is to break down the tendency people have to want to "own" all
    	these resources locally.  That's probably the primary reason
    	we've gotten in the position we're in now of having to lay-off
    	a lot of very talented people in the field.
    
    	This is an extremely important issue for the company.  I'd be
    	interested in hearing other people's point of view on it.
    
    	Regards
    
    	Chuck

    re .26
    
    	Although I think that core point of what you said was fairly good, it
    still felt like a new "paradigm", and more marketing-speak than a plan
    of action.  Lets see more implementation details - my experience here
    at DEC has been that adequate to good "visions" have been implemented
    very poorly.  I have seen people spend 4 months coming up with a vision
    statement that is one paragraph long (supported with 50 pages of
    theory), and then spend 2 months implementing that "vision" with no
    clear plan between the vision and the implementation.
    
    	...sorry, one of my buttons got pushed.  This is not the topic for
    this discussion.   But I will leave my first reaction anyway.
    
    	- Peter

    
    	I received a mail message after posting my last reply to
    	this note from an individual telling me that not everyone
    	in the field is aware of what Digital Services Engineering
    	is and asking me to explain it further.
    
    	I don't want to divert this note too far off the original
    	topic of discussion but questions have been raised about
    	how Digital does major projects like this and I think its
    	important to understand the new structure that Digital is
    	evolving towards to support this type of business.  If this
    	is more appropriate as a separate note, feel free to move
    	it.
    
    	I'm sure a number of people are not aware of what's happening
    	here because the direction is still evolving and many of the
    	details of the organizational implementation are still being
    	worked out.  I'll try to explain the concept as best I can.
    
    	The new organization structure we're evolving too is very 
    	complex...that's unfortunately a trade-off that has to be
    	made between having a number of well-defined small organizations
    	that are not well-integrated together and a large one that
    	has a number of different capabilities of different kinds in
    	different locations all well-integrated together (in theory).
    
    	There are local capabilities at the field level, specialized
    	"practices" in selected areas of focus, geographic "practices"
    	that are more broadly defined and broad-based engineering
    	capabilities to support the whole thing.
    
    	The analogy that I think helps simplify this whole thing is
    	a medical analogy....
    
    	   At the first level of "treatment", you have your "family doctor", 
    	   general practitioners, maybe some level of capability for minor
    	   surgery and so forth depending on the size of the office.  Your
    	   "family doctor" is the person you have an established relationship
    	   with, knows your medical history better than anyone else, has a
    	   good understanding of your overall health and can call upon other
    	   practitioners you may need for more specialized treatment, major
    	   surgery, etc. that is outside of his/her capabilities.
    
    	   (The field district resources are the family doctors and first 
    	   level of "treatment" and the focal point for bringing in other
    	   resources that are beyond their own capabilities)
    
           Then there are the practices...these are the specialists in
    	   selected areas of treatment...In medical practice these would
    	   be cardiologists, neuro-surgeons, etc.  In Digital practice,
    	   these are the new "practices" that are currently being defined
           to provide specialized experience in selected industries or
    	   application areas.
    
    	   All of these practitioners need a "hospital" to go to for
    	   major surgery and a medical supply company to provide some
    	   of the capabilities and products they need to deliver their
    	   services....that's the role of Digital Services Engineering.
    
    	   Digital Services Engineering is a composite of CSS, SWS/E,
    	   customer training, other organizations, and other capabilities 
    	   that never existed before all rolled into one organization.
    
    
    	The details of all this are still being worked out, but that's
    	the concept of the structure Digital is building to address this
    	kind of requirement.
    
    	Chuck
                                                 	
     
    
    	

    
    	Re: .27
    
    	I saw this reply after I posted .28.
    
    	The concept is a new paradigm as you say, but is very real.
    	Major realignments are going on throughout Digital Services
    	(formerly EIS and CS) to put together all of the pieces
    	of the organization to implement this concept.
    
    	This is a massive change, and its still taking place but
    	I assure you its very real.
    
    	Chuck
    

�	Major realignments are going on throughout Digital Services
�    	(formerly EIS and CS) to put together all of the pieces
�    	of the organization to implement this concept.
    
�    	This is a massive change, and its still taking place but
�    	I assure you its very real.
    
    I guess that depends where you sit. Out here on the left coast, the
    rumor mill has the reorg occurring about 10 days ago. Unfortunately,
    noone has felt a burning need to tell us IC's about it. 
    
    I can't help thinking that this is just year four of the continuous
    bird-cage re-org that started with SWS changing its name to EIS
    (Eternal Introspective Shuffle?) to reflect its new charter to
    carefully and continually reorganize until somebody puts them out of
    their misery.
    
    The "merger" with CS appears ill-named; a co-worker drew a parallel
    to the "merger" of the U.S. Marines and the Japanese troops on Iwo
    Jima, with CS playing the part of the USMC. :-) (I think).
    
    Uh-oh - my cynicism is showing .... and the rathole is getting a 
    bit deep - my apologies.
    
    - Larry.

    I agree strongly that we have to be able to pull together strong teams
    for projects like that outlined on .0, or we will step all over
    ourselves in the brave new world of open systems/IS, etc.  This kind
    of thing is done routinely in the aerospace/defense industries and
    is no big deal.  People relocate often and willingly, but a lot of
    participation is done remotely as well.
    
    BUT, and it's a big but, to do so requires a major change in philosophy
    that I'm not sure DEC is up to yet....or ever will be.  
    
    Also, the issue of "what happens after......" simply must be addressed
    or projects like .0 are doomed.  There must be some form of contractual
    guarantee or people simply won't do it.  Management promises are simply
    worthless, and I don't mean this as management bashing.  Too much
    changes too fast and people move around too much for me to ever fall
    for that again.  Anyone who lived through the Target Sales Force fiasco
    in 85/86 will never ever believe what management says again....and
    there are plenty of other examples, I am sure.
    
    As for me, I'm kinda interested in this project......but I'm from Minn.
    so it holds no terrors for me, most of my family still lives there, and
    I plan to retire in 3-4 years anyway, so I'm cool.  But I absolutely
    understand how others feel.
                               

Gene,

The project you describe is business in a new model for Digital.  It is large
(>$10 Million), complex (>50 workers), and long term (>1 year), and it is 
managed in the field.  The "in the field" part is going to be the hardest part
for Digital to learn.

I've only been with Digital for four years and I spent most of my career working
in process industry startups.  Chemical/smelting lines and such.  We were used 
to BIG projects.  Let me give you an idea.

Yesterday, I was down in Texas, at a major chemical manufacturer, meeting the 
plant manager and his staff, for some get-acquainted one-on-ones with the 
account team.  We were also pitching EDMS.  As I ran through the projects list
with the construction manager, the sales rep kinda sat there bug-eyed at the 
numbers.  The department has eight project managers and they only work on 
"little" projects of $50 Million or less.  Above that, the group gets involved.
The project managers will work two or three projects at once.  They average in
size, to about $10 Million, each.  They're just starting in on a $3/4 BILLION
unit, across the way.

These managers have extensive authority, and literally spend their entire bud-
gets at their own discretion.  Yes, there are checks and balances, but the 
project managers have the real authority.

In the field, Digital isn't even close.  It still requires some VP's signature
to buy a $1700 file cabinet.  I have seen several SI projects in the $1 to $3 
Million range, and all of these required at least four Digital Vice Presidents
to make any substantial decision about schedules, partners, etc.

Back when I was one of those above-mentioned project managers, I demanded that 
I deal with someone in charge.  When I was told that decisions about $1700 line
items were pending, the person who did the telling found themselves off-site,
quickly and permanently.  This continued until I had someone in front of me who
could get some work done.  I didn't have time for lackeys.

In this project, it seems you are asking people to "buy in" to living with what-
ever it takes to get the job done.  One thing it's going to take is real pro-
ject management, and that means authority, on-site.  I guess this means I have
a requirement.

If I doon't get to meet, shake hands, and evaluate the "boss," I won't even
consider picking up and moving to wherever-it-is.  I have to be able to look
her in the eye, and make my own decision.  She has to have the talent, training
and authority to hire/fire and spend every dime of the budget.

"Consensus" doesn't cut it, out here in the trenches.

thomas

    re. last couple
    
    The whole computer industry is changing rapidly. DEC is moving to slow.
    I had someone tell me today that this project is going to need a lean,
    mean, fast reaction team. He was right. Is this a new model for DEC?
    From everything I've seen to date - no doubt about it. 

    In the area of Imaging we are loosing fast because we can not get into
    the project business.  I think -.2 is right.  A project manager ( and
    product manager for that matter) needs to have control of all the
    strings.  A project manager on a major project should not report to a
    VP, the VP should stay out of the way and in the back ground unless
    needed.  A project manager should be in on the initial stages of the
    sell, define the project, do the selling, negotiate the contract, sign
    it, develop the solution, deliver it, and support it.  And collect the
    money.  No one should have control of a project manager but the
    customer.

    fat chance in DEC.

    re: .32
    
    I would love to work for a company that operated this way.
        John Sauter

    Well, there are a lot of 'em, but they ain't DEC!!  In the real world
    of Aerospace/Defense, etc., project/program/proposal managers REALLY
    do run the show, and nobody, but nobody messes with them.  When I
    worked for Aerojet (they do the intelligence satellites, etc.,) they
    had a football field sized War Room, with every conceivable planning
    tool.  Multiyear schedules were mounted on massive wall displays, and
    you could literally "walk-through" a project.  Project reviews were
    run with military precision with IC's waiting in the hall to be called,
    doing their thing for the 3-4 minutes provided, and then getting the
    hell back to work and not sitting in some silly review meeting all day.
    
    During the proposal stage the proposal manager was absolute God and
    King.  He defined the strategy, he made the pricing decisions, he
    interfaced with the Governments heavy hitters, and he executed on the
    spot anyone who screwed up, and he solely controlled the entire bidding
    budget.  He was also held responsible for losses...which were very few.
    
    ....and then I came to Digital Government Systems.  Found out that our
    Proposal Managers were nothing but publications supervisors.  Everybody
    and his brother was involved in the bidding process with anarchy the
    rule of the day.  Then, no matter what was finally arrived at, Sales
    then appeared (finally) in the last 36 hours and usually totally
    changed everything again.  The Proposal Managers was not even allowed
    to take part in the pricing process fer'chrisakes.  I KNOW we lost
    several very large bids because of our s...ty approach to the process,
    including a 984 million buck bid that was ours to lose...we were the
    damned incumbent!!
    
    Do I think we'll learn to do it right in the future??  Very doubtful.
    One reason out of thousands is that I (as an example) have to be able
    to tell an inquiring VP that I'm too busy to meet with him, as I have
    real work to do, and be able to get away with it.
    
    Rot's a ruck.

    re:36
    
    I know I am going to regret asking but....
    
    If Aerojet was so good......... why did you leave ?
     

    For strong family/personal reasons.  Aerojet was a nice place to work,
    BTW.  You felt like you belonged to something big and important.
    
    Oh, the military shuttle that went up yesterday was carrying an Aerojet
    satellite.  Actually, TRW makes the satellite...Aerojet does the
    infrared sensing and processing piece of it.  Interesting technology.
    We used to say we knew when a Red Army NCO lit a cigarette in the
    Urals.

    And when you said that, Dick, were you exaggerating? 8^)

    re: exaggerating?
    
    I used to work with these folks, and, well, let's put it this way:
    
    They only tell you about the stuff they don't care about anymore
     cause there's something else bigger and better "behind the curtain"
    
    re: this topic -- Gene, I'm really impressed with the things you are
    saying, and trying to work out... if half of them work out, this will
    be a truly memorable project with which to be involved!!
    
    Re: this project -- I too am on a large project ($50+ Mbuck, 100+
    people) and was promised lot's of "goodies" to entice me here to the
    job.  However...Relocation process is terrible, and inefficient, the
    family is ignored, you get to deal with the house issues (all of them)
    with occassional assistance/resistance from Corp Relo, and worst of
    all, being told that we would have relo out of here when the job was
    over (HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHahaheeheeheehee!!!!!) 
      
    With that off my chest, I really believe Digital has a very powerful
    network tool at it's immediate disposal that people do not know how to
    use well for large diversified projects (this will be the third large
    one I've seen/been involved with for Digital).  I'm reasonably sure the
    MN office could support the customer satisfactorily and the rest of us
    too with crisp, clear functional specs and good interface designs with
    clear data diagrams... you know, all that documentation "junk" that
    gets in the way of "Just doin' it" (smiley face, sortof) Naturally, one
    must assume the customer is comfortable with all these "magical"
    characters doing "magical" work for them, costing them LOTS of money --
    think about it for a minute from their perspective!!  Can we acheive
    that level of comfort??  After all, all they see are the MN folks that
    are local, plus a few "drifters" occassionally.  It poses a very real
    difficulty to customer trust and moral. Can the customer afford all
    those flights to speak face-to-face with us "magical" folks... can we?? 
    Is there a tool that lets us bypass the flights (yes)??
    
    Well, for the record... I like living in Seattle, and would not mind MN
    (even the winters:-) but live there just to work for 2-3 years??? 
    ummmmm, my experience says "Thanks, but pass".  Would I like to
    contribute to this project?? YOU BET!!   So this says to me "What
    incentive do I have to change my non-work situation for this job..."
    
       Gee -- wonder how many others are thinking like that too???
    
    Thanks for letting me splutter along... and now, back to the rain...
    
    Bruce Evans

    re .39 .... Nawwwww, we weren't that good.  A cigar, maybe???
    
    Actually, these babies can sense a missile lift-off, analyze the
    exhaust profile and trajectory, ID the type of missile and probable
    target in less time than it took to type this.
    
    ......and those were the old models.  I can't imagine how good these
    new one are.

Ahhh Gi'day...�

    Detecting the  cigarette would be easy, but, how did you know it was an
    NCO?

    Commissioned Officers smoke cigars.

    Jamie.

    Only if the NCOs give them one.
    
    Dave