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

Conference 7.286::digital

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

2085.0. "Corporate Computing: critical article on DEC" by EVMS::NORDLINGER (To read the unreachable STAR::) Tue Sep 01 1992 14:33

    Corporate Computing, Sept. 92 has written a seemingly 
    insightful and utterly devasting article on Digital. 
    
    Robert Ziff writes an article titled...
    
               DEC's Last Card
    
    With Its Once Revered Old Warrior Gone, 
    DEC is betting on New Technology. Alpha
    Looks like an Ace - That's the problem. 
    
    In summary, he claims if you want to see 
    DEC in 5 years look at Unysis today. Also
    he isn't very big on RT 128 in general. 
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
2085.1Is this guy ever right?FASDER::BDENORMANDIEBRUCETue Sep 01 1992 16:308
    re. 0
    
    Has this guy Ziff ever been accurate.
    
    I have problem drawing a parallel with DEC and Unisys.  My own personal
    experiences with Unisys is that whenever they had a problem they
    always blamed it on the other guy, who was either a Sperry or a
    Burroughs carryover.
2085.2there's plenty of that around here ...CUPTAY::BAILEYSeason of the WinchTue Sep 01 1992 16:5020
    >> 					whenever they had a problem they
    >> always blamed it on the other guy
    
    <soap_box>
    
    This, to me, appears to be a working definition of project management
    at Digital.
    
    I'm really not trying to be cynical, but now that I've had a chance to
    work in both the hardware and software development ends of this
    company, I STILL see this as the prevailing practice ... i.e. it's OK
    to blow deadlines or not deliver on promises as long as you can justify
    it by making it appear that someone else is to blame.
    
    We really need to overcome this tendency and start acting like we all
    work for the same company.
    
    <end_soap_box>
    
    ... Bob
2085.3Great Bobs think alike ..ULYSSE::WADEWed Sep 02 1992 05:0214
	Re -.1

>>	..... project management at Digital ... i.e. it's OK to blow 
>>	deadlines or not deliver on promises as long as you can justify
>>  	it by making it appear that someone else is to blame.
    
>>    	We really need to overcome this tendency and start acting like we all
>>	work for the same company.
    
		Seems to me that Bob Palmer agrees with you.  
		Remember his "no excuses permitted" message?

		Jim

2085.4accountability is importantBRAT::REDZIN::DCOXWed Sep 02 1992 08:4640
re>           <<< Note 2085.2 by CUPTAY::BAILEY "Season of the Winch" >>>
>                  -< there's plenty of that around here ... >-
    >
>    I'm really not trying to be cynical, but now that I've had a chance to
>    work in both the hardware and software development ends of this
>    company, I STILL see this as the prevailing practice ... i.e. it's OK
>    to blow deadlines or not deliver on promises as long as you can justify
>    it by making it appear that someone else is to blame.
>    
>    We really need to overcome this tendency and start acting like we all
>    work for the same company.
    
    I have HW & SW Project/Product/Program (or whatever else you'd like to
    call us) Managers and Specialists working for me. We manage internally
    funded new product development as well as customer funded custom
    projects. We are measured against our Phase 1 Exit deliverables
    (Business Plan, Functional Spec., etc) for internal projects, and the
    "contract" for customer funded projects.
    
    Our/their goal is "On Time, On Budget, Full Functionality at First
    Revenue Ship or at delivery to Customer for custom projects".
    
    Meeting those goals is a "3" rating, not a 1 nor a 2.  
    
    Not meeting one of those goals is acceptable ONLY when changes are
    negotiated BEFORE HAND.  That is, the funding authority or the customer
    MUST agree to the changes that cause the metrics to change, otherwise
    the original metrics stay in place.
	
    We believe those goals are fair and resonable; they are the default,
    not the exception.  That is what Digital pays us to do. Performance
    against those goals is noted at our/their reviews.  We do not offer
    excuses, nor place blame for our failures.  We either get the job done
    or we do not get the job done; we usually get the job done.
    
    and we are busier than one arm paper hangers...
    
    FWIW
    
    Dave
2085.5Still waiting ....BEAGLE::BREICHNERWed Sep 02 1992 10:187
    re: .4
    I'd suppose that IPMT (Integrated Problem Management Tool, planned
    to replace "since quite a while" the CLD "hack" ) is NOT
    part of your internal development shop ?
    
    ;-)
    fred                                                             
2085.6BRAT::REDZIN::DCOXWed Sep 02 1992 10:531
huh?
2085.7It's a compliment...SCAACT::AINSLEYLess than 150 kts is TOO slowWed Sep 02 1992 13:007
    re: .6
    
    .5 is saying that since you run your group properly, you obviously must
    not be involved with whatever tool he is talking about that is very,
    very late.
    
    Bob