Conference 7.286::digital

    So, um, who's the VP of Isolated Systems and Amateur Services?  (Hey,
    somebody had to ask ...)
    
    Steve

I think they are interviewing 3M-land middle managers that haven't been out of
their cube in 15 years for that job.  Given the 1000's of candidates, it may
take a while.  )))

A little field humor

    How does this position differ from Gullotti's?

    Gullotti was put on the bench a while back.  Dick Scarborough has been
    acting PS/SI manager.  This is the first sign I've seen from Palmer
    that he is serious about SI and consulting services.  Hope its not too
    late -- an incredible amount of damage has been done in the past 6-8
    months.

    re:.3
    
    Gulotti has his hands full as the U.S. Sales and Services Manager.  His
    role is to try to get the U.S. back on track and profitable.

    RE. last two: Russ Gullotti is hardly 'on the bench'. He was asked to
    tackle a most difficult problem - make the USA profitable. Senior
    managers in both the field and at corporate felt VERY good about his
    appointment. The announcement of the new SI manager has no reflection
    on Russ Gullotti.

    I sit corrected.  Some of us were unsure what the nature of Gullotti's
    appointment was.  BTW, "on the bench" was not intended as a slur -- the
    rumour I heard was he was being held for something really big....
    
    I still feel that the new appointment is a good sign, since noone had
    been permanently appointed to take over PS/SI.

If the new organisational structures are built as proposed, both Sales and
Professional Services are functions in their own right (alongside IM&T,
Marketing, etc). All these support the BUs in each territory.
								- Ian W.

    Fascinating, it looks like a multi-dimensional _matrix_ of

    o functions
    o territories
    o industry groups

    where there's a manager at each crosspoint and accountability is
    diffused.

... but only one dimension (optionally) pays the bills.

								- Ian W.

Copyright � 1993 Dow Jones & Co. from Business Wire

ROBERT MCNULTY JOINS DIGITAL EQUIPMENT AS VICE PRESIDENT FOR SYSTEMS &
NETWORKS OPERATIONS



MAYNARD, Mass.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Digital Equipment Corporation today
announced that Robert E. McNulty has joined the company as Vice President
for Systems & Networks Operations, with worldwide responsibility for
Digital's Outsourcing business, as well as Digital's Business Protection
Services, Service Management Support, and Operation Consulting.

McNulty, 53, will report to Gresham T. Brebach, Jr., Digital's worldwide
Vice President of Systems Integration and Professional Services, and will be
responsible for providing leadership and direction to the Professional
Services organization in 13 territories across the world through Digital's
newly-created, industry-focused, customer business units.

"Bob brings a wealth of experience and expertise to this critical assignment
in business start-up as well as systems and networks operations, and we
expect his efforts will help us to grow market share and achieve
best-in-class operational excellence and professional competency,"  Brebach
said.

McNulty comes to Digital after serving five years with The Equitable Life
Assurance Society, where he was Senior Vice President-Technical Management &
Operations.

Prior to joining The Equitable, McNulty served as Chairman of the Board,
President and Chief Executive Officer of Pathe Computer Control Corporation,
a technology-based manufacturing consulting firm.

He also has held key positions at AT&T, including Vice President of
Corporate Operations and Information Systems, and at Mohawk Data Sciences
Corporation, where he served as Director of Financial Services.  McNulty
began his professional career with IBM-World Trade Corporation, a
wholly-owned subsidiary of IBM responsible for IBM operations in all
countries outside the United States.

A native of New York City, McNulty holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from St. 
John's College and an Advanced Marketing Management degree from the Wharton
School at the University of Pennsylvania.

Digital Equipment Corporation, headquartered in Maynard, Massachusetts, is
the leading worldwide supplier of networked computer systems, software and
services.  Digital pioneered and leads the industry in interactive,
distributed and multivendor computing. Digital and its business partners
deliver the power to use the best integrated solutions - from desktop to
data center - in open information environments.

    I'm confused. How does Brebach's organizaton fit in with the CBUs. It
    was my understanding that the CBUs were the only ones with P&L
    responsibility. Do they each contract services from Brebach's
    organization.
    
    I have a similar question about Lucente's organization. Is this the
    return of the "functions"?
    
    Dave

    There's no explanation for this that I can see.  There seems to be
    a MATRIX between functions, geographies, and industry segments.
    
    The announcement in October 1992 that held so much promise of
    eliminating the problem of blurred lines of authority and
    accountability seems more moot with each passing day.

re: .12,.13

If the CBUs/PBUs have all P/L responsibility, then the Brebachs, McDonoughs,
Streckers et al. must have to contract out their people to these business
units to make enough money to pay their loaded salaries...wouldn't you think?

But the organization charts do look uncomfortably "matrixy".  It seems like
unncessary overhead.

On the other hand, at this point, Digital has to report its P/L as one
company...the CBUs/PBUs are not separate fiduciary entities.  (Yet!)  So
somebody (Steul) has to make sure the books close out right on a corporate
basis, even if the expense for this activity is not strictly a concernn to
a given CBU manager, say.

Still seems like a bit of a tangle.  But i trust it's a transitional stage.

								- paul

>Still seems like a bit of a tangle.  But i trust it's a transitional stage.

	I fear you are right, transition from bad to worse. The orginization
	of the company is getting harder to understand not easier.

			Alfred

    The CBU's are the Business entities. The rest - manufacturing, sales,
    pssi, finance, etc. are functions. Each of the functions is tasked with
    becoming best in class against defined benchmarks. Each of the Business
    units is tasked with becoming profitable.
    
    Yes, it is matrixed. It would seem that the alternative of
    incorporating EVERY function into the businesses would either be not
    cost-effective, or sufficiently dilute the expertise such that the
    capabilities would be non-competitive.
    
    I think it is real clear about who is accountable. Nor does
    accountability necessarily imply that only one person is responsible
    for achieving a goal.

    Look, the point of establishing only 6 CBU's was that they would be big
    enough (...how many times did we hear "FORTUNE 400" or "FORTUNE 200" to
    describe them...) to incorporate all the "functions" to be
    free-standing businesses.

    The point should be obvious to anyone: "functions" are what being a
    business is all about.

    We won't be reading about it here, but everyone is wondering about who
    is working for who, who pays for what, etc. among the CBU's,
    "functions", and geographies.
    
    We're back to the punishment of endless internal negotiations between
    organizations that don't share the same metrics for "expertise" and
    "capabilities".

    PS/SI is a function sold by the CBUs.  If PS/SI doesn't offer the best
    services for the money, the CBUs -- as P&L business centers -- have the 
    perogative of getting services elsewhere.