Conference 7.286::digital

    >There's a memo floating around here which says, in not so many
    >words, that all those touchy-feely classes and seminars offered by the
    >company (you know, like "Finding the Child Within") are being canned.

    will , Mary, i personally think that finding the child within is
    good for every one, it might not seem related directly to the DEC way
    of life but we all need to get in touch with our selves first before
    we can expand and project to the outside, plus these courses seem to 
    bring more harmonious feelings to DECeees and to bring us all together 
    closer in the cold harsh world of computing with bits and bytes and all
    that.  plus we can learn allot about our selves when we explore inside
    of our soles, we can find our weaknesses and strengths and deplore
    these to the benefit of DEC, us, the cooperations, our families, loved
    ones and all beyond and as the world turns for all to see.

    \bye
    \nasser

Re: .1

Here's a project for you Nasar- see if you can figure out how DEC became
such a large, great company *before* we had any of the types of courses
mentioned in the basenote.

If people want to 'discover their sole' with other DECies then let them
get together on their own time and money.

Lee

    .1
    
    	I agree with you.  What you said regarding how we all need to get
    in touch with ourselves is true and it does allow us to grow.  But that
    was a DECee way of life, the Digital that had a logo with square dots
    on the "i".  The new Digital has round dots.  And you know what they
    say about square dots (pegs) in a round dot (hole).....doesn't work.
    Change has given us a new way of life.  Right now all anyone needs to
    do is focus on Q4.  Worry about Q1 when Q1 arrives.

re .0

Gee, Steve, does that mean that they're not letting
you attend "Relaxation and self-esteem for C programmers;
escaping from the recursive macro mindset" ?

     its about time!!... they spend  ( waste ! ) much time on this as well
     as the endless list of "celebration of difference" stuff !! This is a
    job here!! we are all lucky we have one the way things are !

    Isn't Firewalking "touchy-feely" too? Presumably this and other courses
    are being sold to Digital as being tied to increased revenue generation
    - to motivate and empower your salesfolk. Seems kind of fluffy to me. 
    
    Ooooch Ooch Yow! 
    
    But seriously,
    
    What is your definition of touchy feely? How can you tell if classes
    are really contributing to revenue? How do you measure?
    
    What are the implications for people who want to upgrade skills to be
    able to generate revenue, but are not in a position to do so yet.
    Allowed? Discouraged? Does that amount to saying if you are a
    salesperson or an engineer you can take courses, but if you are not,
    forget it? 
    
    Of course, there may be lots of courses out there that should be
    eliminated, I wasn't sure which specific ones you thought ought to go. 
    
                                            
    			--Catherine--*
                        

I think they ought to outlaw the use of touchy-feely notes files during 
working hours!

Of course, with flex time and employees scattered around the globe in every 
conceiveable time zone, enforcement of such a policy would be difficult to 
say the least.  Besides, with future employement levels riding on the 
success of Q4, I doubt that anyone is wasting precious time frollicking in 
the notes files when they could be helping Digital back into the black.

Right?

    I think this may be the memo the base noter heard about - no indication
    that distribution was restricted (it was flagged 'FYI'), so.....
    
    
From:	NAME: Dick Farrahar                 
	FUNC: PERSONNEL                       
	TEL: 223-7738                         
Date:	21-Apr-1993
Posted-date: 21-Apr-1993
Precedence: 1
Subject: DEVELOPMENT AND LEARNING                                               1
To:     See Below


The attached is for your information.

    In January a Task Force was chartered to create a vision of how 
    Development and Learning could impact the transformation of the 
    Company.  Additionally, the Task Force was asked to make 
    recommendations about systemically tying its existing Development and 
    Learning organizations together to increase individual and 
    organizational effectiveness and to define where the new organization 
    should report and how it should be implemented.  On April 13, 1993 the 
    Senior Leadership Team reviewed the Task Force report and made the 
    following decisions:
    
    	 - We will integrate all Development and Learning activity, 
           including all functional training with the exception of customer 
           training.
    
    	 - A senior manager will be appointed to run the function of 
           Development and Learning.
    
    	 - The Development and Learning Manager will review existing 
           business plans and Strategic Intent work now underway by the SLT 
           to determine implications for Development and Learning work.
    
    	 - There will be a full assessment of the current portfolio of 
           development and education programs and associated costs.
    
    	 - A current skills "gaps" assessment will be completed based on 
           the business plan.  This will form the basis for the creation of 
           a Development and Learning portfolio to address current and 
           future needs. 
    
    Given the current Company conditions and the expected clarity that will 
    result from the assessment efforts described above, the Senior 
    Leadership Team has decided to put a hold on all discretionary spending 
    for management training that is not directly tied to the achievement of 
    near-term business goals or resolution of identified customer problems. 
    This freeze is effective immediately, and will continue until further 
    notice. 
     
    More specifically this short term freeze focuses on training, education     
    and development activity that is not related to generating revenue or 
    essential to meeting the customer's needs.  This short term freeze     
    covers external seminars and training sessions and internal training     
    provided by third party contractors or consultants that can be 
    eliminated or postponed without significant impact on near term (i.e. 6 
    to 9 months) business requirements.  It was not intended to discontinue 
    training that is either critical to revenue or that positions our 
    employees to meet essential current or near term business needs.  For 
    example, support for internal or third party product training should 
    continue.  Similarly, existing commitments made under Digital's tuition 
    reimbursement policy are not affected by this freeze.  This would 
    include future courses in a previously approved degree program.  We 
    would, however, ask managers to rigorously evaluate reimbursement 
    requests for new courses to determine whether they meet the objectives 
    outlined above.  We believe that particular focus on career related  
    (vs. job required) courses is appropriate.  
    
    Further questions regarding this freeze should be directed to 
    Betsey Scharlack. 

    As we move forward to complete the assessment of Company need and 
    re-focus the work, it is our intention to ensure that we use 
    Development and Learning as a strategic lever to achieve the Company 
    goals.  It is our belief that these efforts will result in a 
    Development and Learning function that supports the Company in 
    achieving "best in class" results.  Your support for these efforts is 
    greatly appreciated.

    

    	Yup, .-1 is the memo I was referring to. Several people sent me
    copies via email...and don't ask me how they determine if a course is
    to be considered revenue-generating or not. It'll probably depend on
    who wants the course (like fire-walking for executives).
    	By the way, Nasser, I've been called a lot of things in my day, but
    "Mary" was never one of them. I guess I *do* need one of those
    touchy-feely courses to discover the "woman within" and get in touch
    with my feminine side.
    	And Dave, I was demented LONG before I had to wrestle with
    recursive C macros!

    Holding their feet to the fire .... now *that* was good!
    
    Steve

re .8:

They may be freezing touchy-feely courses, but corporate-speak goes on.

>    In January a Task Force was chartered to create a vision of how 
>    Development and Learning could impact the transformation of the 
>    Company.

    
    How do I get one 'o them jobs creating visions?   This revenue
    generating is killing me!
    
    ;-)
    
    

    re:  .6, .10
    
    'their feet to the fire...'
    
    Ah, that's what those commentators are referring to when then mention
    the 'agony of de-feet'....

    I am glad that someone initiated this note because I too have a
    complaint.
    
    I have registered for 6 classes since January 93 and each class that I
    have registered for has been canceled.  These are software classes that
    assist me in creating presentations that assist my organization in
    generating revenue.  At first I was told it was due to lack of
    instructors but I have since found out that is not true.  If there
    aren't at least 4-5 paying customers registered for these classes, they
    are canceled (per Tony Wallace, US Field Finance).  In other words, 
    the employees don't count anymore.
    
    I elevated awareness of this problem and got nowhere.  It was then
    suggested that I talk to a person in John Rando's organization.  I want
    to thank her for being so helpful.  We found another alternative and
    the cost for classes is less than those being offered at PKO.
    
    If anyone is interested in learning about these classes please send me
    mail and I will be glad to help.  I don't know if anyone else has been
    as frustrated over this as I have been.  
    
    End of my soap box.
    
    Pat

      
      I heard something along that line in the DVN the other day from Bob
    Palmer. Without attmpting to actually QUOTE what he said, I got the
    impression from WHAT he said that he wasn't happy with the perceived
    return that Digital seemed to be getting for the investment in
    management development activities...in fact, he seemed to be of the
    belief that we weren't getting much of anything for it....
    I think the 'touchy-feely' stuff is aobut the same in return...might
    make some people feel all fuzzy and warm for the day, but does it
    really BUY much? Another thing...if you send 20 people to one of these
    "get hold of yourself and hug what you get hold of" thingies, and 20
    minutes before the session begins you sent out a memo telling the same
    20 that 50% downsizing was on the way, or tht everyone had to interview
    for the job they currently have, or that review cycles were jacked out
    6 months and no raises were planned this year, or some other wonderful,
    incentive-building thing, just what would YOU get from the loving
    little course??
    
       I'd MUCH rather have Digital take some of the money being spent on
    this sort of stuff and apply it to mandatory sessions which teach some
    of our managers what the people that they are managing are being asked
    to DO all day!! A lot of them seem to have no idea in that arena!!
    
       John Mc
       

In general, I do not get involved in notesfile discussions like
this.  However someone mailed me this note and I felt that I
ought to comment since it was a topic about which I felt
strongly.

Thank god we may finally get a handle on this.  For the longest
time it seemed that this company was determined to throw as much
money as possible into the sewer for the most outrageous,
nonsensical courses.  Maybe we will even go on from here and try
to control and get rid of the thought police who sometimes seem
to be in power at various levels of this company.

To prove that I am not just jumping on the band-wagon on this issue,
I am including some mail that I forwarded to one of our more senior
vice presidents more than two years ago about this very same topic.
I include the subject line that I used in forwarding this to him.

				Robert Rappaport
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:	STAR::RAPPAPORT    "Robert Rappaport - New DTN 381-1520"  1-APR-1991 13:46:53.17
To:	one of our more senior vice presidents who will remain unnamed here.
CC:	
Subj:	Please reassure me that we are not still encouraging this crud, especially in times of austerity.

From:	WECARE::CRSMAINT "TNSG HRD TRAINING - DTN 381-1820  29-Mar-1991 1304" 29-MAR-1991 13:29:42.61
To:	@TRAINING.DIS,@SEC.DIS,@ADD.DIS
CC:	CRSMAINT
Subj:	* Reminder/Announcement - "Understanding The Dynamics of Difference"
       *** April 22 - 23***              *** SEATS AVAILABLE***   - Please Distribute -

    *** REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED - SET HOST WECARE - USERNAME = CRS ***
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TITLE:          UNDERSTANDING THE DYNAMICS OF DIFFERENCE

DATE: 		APRIL 22 - 23		TIME:     8:30 - 5:00

VENDOR:         HRD&E	 		LENGTH:   2 DAYS       COST: $550.00

FORMAT:         SEMINAR			LOCATION: HEADMASTER'S HOUSE

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

INTENDED AUDIENCE:

Managers and individual contributors.

COURSE DESCRIPTION:  

Understanding the Dynamics of Difference provides an overview of the process
individuals use to develop perceptions and assumptions.  It gives 
participants a process by which to analyze the impact and/or results of
these perceptions and assumptions.  This course is presented as a component
of a Valuing Difference organization strategy which should be developed by
each group within Digital.

Methodologies include large and small group exercises and role plays.

PREREQUISITES:  

None

COURSE OBJECTIVES:  

As a result of active participation in Understanding the Dynamics of
Difference, participants will be better able to:

   o Recognize their differences.
   o Examine their assumptions.
   o Explore stereotypes that they hold about groups of people,
     organizations, functions, geographic areas, etc.
   o See ways in which assumptions and stereotypes affect them and
     their working relationships in Digital.
   o Apply course concepts to work situations.

COURSE OUTLINE:

  I. Recognizing our differences.
 II. Examining our assumptions.
III. Exploring the stereotypes we hold about groups of people, organizations,
     functions, geographic areas, etc.
 IV. Seeking out diversity and valuing the differences as assets.
  V. Understanding the significance of a value for difference as a major
     variable in Digital's continued profitability and productivity.
 VI. It is important that you dress appropriately for the outside temperature
     and for maximum comfort.  We may do some work outside that involves
     physical activity, so please dress accordingly.  The seminar design
     includes relaxation and fun to support particpants' learning.
 
DIRECTIONS TO THE HEADMASTER'S HOUSE, West Boylston, MA

From ZKO take Route 3 South to Route 495 South to Route 290 West to 140 North 
to 70 South to Elmwood Place.  It will take you an hour approx.

    Well, not all of us enjoys such a complete and innate functional
    understanding of all these difficult concepts.  But if you cannot even
    see the business value of the whole corporation having a wider
    understanding of the material described in the course content, then I
    guess the VP probably took your *April 1* message as an All Fools Day
    prank.

    In the relatively short life of this corporation it has grown from an
    ethnocentric New England-USA Company to become a global corporation
    that now sells 60%+ of its goods and services worldwide.  Part of
    achieving that success comes from understanding how to utilize the
    diversity of our worldwide personnel and applying that understanding to
    the needs of our global customer base.

    For DEC, I have visited or worked in England, Scotland, France,
    Germany, Denmark, Switzerland, Holland, The USA and a few other places. 
    I've been lucky enough to meet with and work with customers and
    colleagues from many parts of the globe.  Believe me - some of us less
    omnipotent types really needed and appreciated the kind of material
    included in the courses - courses that you are quick to deride as
    "touchy feelie crud".  I made a lot fewer socio-cultural faux pas after
    attending one or two such courses.  And I'm not concerned about being
    embarrassed by these mistakes - I'm concerned that it risks losing $$$.
      
    Understanding diversity positively affected my contribution to product
    design. Simple things too - you discover that 10% of the population
    suffers from one form or other of color-blindness, yet you see color
    used to convey information in user interface design. You understand
    that some people might be alienated by certain modes of expression in
    user information.  You have a chance to better work out team issues
    with your US team colleagues because you understand that different
    cultural factors underlie team dynamics.  At the end of the day, this
    translates into cost savings and revenue.
    
    I'm not saying that we will not be successful if we don't educate our
    organization in the interpersonal aspects of doing business.  However,
    we might be much MORE successful if we were able to employ such skills.
    
    Regards,
    
    Colin
    

    I too think that some/many of the touchy-feely courses are useful
    for many of us, given that we're working for such a vast, wired-
    together corporation.  But anyway, here's an interesting item from
    a few years ago (with 'hot-buttons')...
    
                              HPS EDUCATION                                     

     TITLE: COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE FOR MANAGERS                                  
     NUMBER:                            164-02                                  
     SCHEDULE:                          Apr 13 - 14, 1989                       
     LOCATION:                          MRO1-3, TRAINING 1, 2 ROOMS             
     TIME:                              8:30  - 4:30                
     INSTRUCTOR:                        YALE PATT                               
     COST:                              $ 400                                   
                             
********************************************************************************
     ENROLLMENT RETURN TO:              MRO1-2/E89 or HYPER::REGISTRAR          
                                        ON LINE: $COURSES                       
********************************************************************************

     TITLE: COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE FOR MANAGERS                                  
                                                                                
This course offers a two-day intensive treatment of the fundamentals of         
computer architecture and the hot-button topics that are being studied          
and marketed in the computer community with special emphasis on how             
they relate to computer architecture problems of high performance               
computer system.  The course will consist of eight 1 1/2 hour,                  
more-or-less informal lectures, with questions and comments encouraged          
throughout the day.  Questions which unmask jargon are especially               
encouraged.  A brief schedule follows:                                          

FIRST DAY LECTURES:                                                             

o  Intro and focus.  (What is computer architecture, where does it fit          
within the computing spectrum, what do architects do, how do they do it,        
what are the questions that they are dealing with today?)                       

o  Architectural choices. (If computer architecture is a science of             
tradeoffs -- and it is --, what are the choices that the computer               
architect has to weigh?  Within this framework, we introduce RISC/CISC,         
Data Flow/Control Flow, Supercomputer/Multi-micro -- and within that,           
the design style of Seymour Cray, virtual memory, paging vs segmentation,       
computers for number crunching vs. computers for artificial intelligence.)      

o  Performance enhancements via Microarchitecture.  (Caches, Pipelining,        
Interleaving, Instruction issue mechanisms, Branch Prediction.)                 

SECOND DAY LECTURES:                                                            

o  Study the Master. To understand the business of high performance             
computer design, it is useful to study the designs of the Master -- in          
this case the work of Seymour Cray.  We will examine his various                
machines, and in particular discuss the issues of vectors, loop                 
buffer, multiple functional units, chaning, the back-up registers,              
etc.                                                                            

o  RISC. If you want to go really fast, use RISC machines.  We will             
discuss what RISC is, what it isn't, why it happened, what's right              
about the notion, what's not right about it.  We will also examine              
some of the more popular RISC machines, both academic and commercial.           
Emphasis on SPARC, MIPS, Motorola 88000, AMD 29000.                             

o  Data Flow and its new twist, the High Performance Substrate (HPS).           
We will first look at data flow, what it is, why it still captures our          
fancy, why it eludes us, and how we might exploit it.  We will examine          
some of the very recent variations of data flow machines offered and            
about to be offered in the Marketplace: Cydra 5, Multiflow TRACE,               
Metaflow, Motorola 68050                                                        

o  Multiprocessing. (Characteristics, reasons for doing it, reasons for not     
doing it, issues -- cache coherency, interconnection networks, parallizability  
vectorizability.  Examples of multiprocessing, both academic and commercial.)   

.16> UNDERSTANDING THE DYNAMICS OF DIFFERENCE

I could not get approval to go to Alpha training .. communications and
network training .. etc .. approval to go to the above course was easier
than taking candy from a baby.  No, change that .. I was DIRECTED to
go to this course.

What's wrong with this picture?

When we're fat and rich and profitable then we can afford this kind of
stuff.  Not so under the current circumstances.  Reality strikes.  Get
rid of 'em.

I've been around for seventeen years and resolutely agree with the
earlier commentary as to our past.  I well remember one of the best
working relationships I'd ever seen in a company - we all got along
quite well - there were no problems with respect to women's issues,
race issues, sexual orientation issues .. etc .. now .. every time you
turn around the do-do is hitting the fan over these issues.

Sorry, that's the way I see it.
    
Bubba

re: .19

>					.. now .. every time you
>turn around the do-do is hitting the fan over these issues.

"You"?  Gee, not everytime i turn around...must be in a more apolitical
zone or something.

How about getting rid of the first half hour of every course where people
have to introduce themselves and some people feel compelled to gush on
about their spouse/SO/kids while everyone else looks embarrassed?  What a
time waster!  (Of course, i also found myself the last one in the lab at
3 PM on a Friday for Windows NT training...the instructor said caustically
that all the employees from Waltham and Burlington must've been heading to
the airport for their flights home! ;^))
								- paul

>>					.. now .. every time you
>>turn around the do-do is hitting the fan over these issues.

>"You"?  Gee, not everytime i turn around...must be in a more apolitical
>zone or something.

    no, no he was talking in second person. this is just a manner of
    speech, he did not mean you as in you, but you as in me, but said
    it second person grammar way, i know this from experience and
    i been trying to not talk in second person because i got once
    in big trouble with it. it is better to speak in first person because
    then you dont get in trouble with it.


    now back to the subject , i still think these course are good for you
    because they raise your awareness of other and the environment, and
    you'd rather work with a dude who is aware of differences than with one
    who only knows bits and bytes but dont know human awareness and feeling
    deep down inside all of use and what makes us the way we are and the
    basis for it and try to reach out to all with open arms and acceptance 
    irregardles of whatever it is that causes friction between our own 
    inner selves and the people that we so interact with on daily basis
    today , tommorrow and for years to come .

    that all i have to say on this right now.

    \nasser

    
    Re: .19
    
    >> .16> UNDERSTANDING THE DYNAMICS OF DIFFERENCE
    
    > No, change that ... I was DIRECTED to go to this course.
    > What's wrong with this picture?
    
    Perhaps nothing.  Did you stop to consider whether that directive
    by itself was intended to tell you something?
    
    fwiw,
    Steve
    

    Oh .. believe me, Steve, I asked precisely the same question ... no,
    it had nothing to do with me personally but every group member above a
    certain level was required to go.  Unfortunately, I was at or above
    that level.

    While I was in this "seminar" I did a rough calculation of the REAL
    cost to Digital.  It's not just the cost of the course and the
    presenters, but when one considers the salary/overhead of those in
    attendance - the REAL cost is staggering.

    Consider 15 people at an average salary of $50K/year.  This gives
    $750,000 year.  Let's load it at 100% overhead.  We're now to $1.5M per
    year.  Assuming 2,040 working hours per year per person .. that's $735
    per hour.  Assume 8 hour day:  about $5,880 per day for 15 people to
    sit in the room.  For a two day seminar this is about $12,000.  A
    little further this comes to $120,000 for 10 sessions.  For 20 sessions
    it's not all that difficult to see that we've spent nearly 1/4 of a
    million dollars.  It's not at all difficult to see that one can spend a
    million dollars, EASY, on this.

    This is the *tangible* dollars.  What about the intangible?  Hard to
    estimate.

    The real question (I guess) .. "is it worth it?".  One will probably
    get as many opinions as there are nodes on this network.

    Bubba

    One further comment .. when I asked my manager why *I* had to go to
    this course .. he made it crystal clear that I was in all probability 
    more than qualified to LEAD the seminar .. but .. he had no choice - I
    had to go.
    
    Bubba

    
    Bubba, you need the courses.
    
    trust me.
    
    \naser

I'm sorry, but a week-long course in C or Motif programming or DCE concepts
would make me much more valuable to Digital and our customers than a course in
How to Value Differences and Be a Nice Person.  Most Digital employees I have
ever met have no difficulty dealing with those around them who are not of their
sex or race.  There are many who could have used a good week at a product or
technical course, though.

Paul

    Focus outside of Digital, for a moment.  
    
    During the 60's and 70's, discrimination and womens' movements gained
    some political clout.  This clout was translated into laws under which
    lawsuits were won.  Other laws required affidavits of
    non-discrimination to be affixed to all bids.  But, one cannot put
    "people of difference" in place at all levels, in an instant (tho I
    suspect there are some swaps we each think would be a snap ;^) ).  So
    what became an "acceptable" alternative to Employment Statistics at
    Higher Levels, were Attendance Statistics of Difference courses.
    
    What does this say, now, that we think we can dismantle this mechanism?
    Have the '80's and '90's dismantled the activism that made companies
    install courses as defenses?  Are the courses no longer sufficient
    evidence?  Have we in this company enough Employment Statistics to
    confirm our Affidavits?  Who is to know?  I personally don't think
    we're yet out of the woods; but measured internationally, we might have
    good numbers.
    
    In summary, for every touchy-feely reason for these courses, there was
    also a reason which made serious economic sense.
    
    IMHO,
    
    Rich

.27> In summary, for every touchy-feely reason for these courses, there was
.27> also a reason which made serious economic sense.

I've been asking about economic justification for these courses ever since
I took the UDD course.  The best that I've seen to date: some organization
that bought three DECmate IIs and the sale was related to the UDD "strategy"
that we as a company advertise.

Bubba

.25> Bubba, you need the courses.

Fine.  I'll volunteer for the experiment.

I'm a senior sales executive and have responsibility for a rather impressive
customer base (Occidental Oil International Headquarters, the largest K-12
school district in the State of California, California State University,
etc ...).  My working relationship with my customers is excellent.  (My 
secretary has always said that my handling of my customers is "shear art
work").  In the face of adversity from Digital and competition I continue
to be successful - happy customers and profitable sales.  I think that this
is a reasonable measure.

My working relationship with my subordinates, peers and superiors leaves
little to be desired.  They're always calling me to see what they can do
to help .. I think that this is a reasonable measure.

Give me some justification for taking me out of the field for three days
to take this course.  Oh, and, I don't make a small amount of money.  DEC
pays me well.
    
Bubba

>    Give me some justification for taking me out of the field for three days
>to take this course.  
    
    No problem.
    
      <<< Note 2480.29 by MORO::BEELER_JE "Rush Limbaugh for President" >>>
                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    
    tim
    

    The day that this company takes me out of the field for three days and
    puts me into a "Valuing Differences" course because I like Rush
    Limbaugh and despise Slick .. is the day that I submit my resignation.

    Bubba

        Having had the  pleasure  of knowing Mr.  Beeler for some years
        now, and knowing a  little  of his track record in Sales, I can
        say with some authority;
        
                . Jerry needs no assistance in the ValDiff area
                . Jerry needs  to  be  out  where the rubber meets the
                  road _selling_!
                . Jerry's political beliefs  are irrelevant, since the
                  man is a professional in all  he does, and he does it
                  well.
        
                .  I agree with his comments - leave us alone to do the
        work that makes Digital money, and give  us  the  courses which
        will assist us in that aim - we're intelligent and professional
        people,  capable  of  rational decisions regarding career paths
        and necessary  experience  versus  politically correct required
        training.
        
        Believe  it  or  not,  Mr.    Grady,  some of us can even  have
        disparate political views, (I'm a  Scottish  Nationalist),  can
        even respect our fellow employees regardless  of  race, colour,
        sex  or  creed  (I'm a [protestant] Scot  who's  married  to  a
        [Catholic]  French/American  woman) and still get the job  done
        without the 'benefit' of touchy-feely seminars.
        
        Regards anyway,
        
        Andrew Fraser 
        (who  has  wasted  numerous  non-productive  days in compulsory
        training which pre-assumes [no 'sp'] that I'm a bigot!)
        
        

    >    Having had the  pleasure  of knowing Mr.  Beeler for some years
    >    now, and knowing a  little  of his track record in Sales, I can
    >    say with some authority;

    like, sure you'll say that about your buddy, you scratch his back
    and he scratches your back in return.

    these courses are good for you. plus, like what you got to lose
    by you and Bubba getting more in touch with your selfs through
    these courses? the worst that will happen is becomming more
    rounded DECeees and that can't be bad!
    
    may be you and Bubba can go togother to one of these courses and
    let us what you think of it afterwords? 
    
    \bye
    \nasser

    I rest my case.
    
    Bubba

    Gee Bubba, if THAT's (re.29??) the way people are judged in your
    group... ah.. maybe... Have you got any openings???
    
    I can hardly remember when I had a defined job to do, and was allowed
    to do it.
    
    I have led teams with team members whose home contries were at war
    with each other.  I don't need some book learnin' class to teach me 
    about valuing differences.
    
    Managers keep sending me to silly courses in hopes that I will stop
    being a trouble maker and become a nice obsiquious yuppy twit (like
    them).  NO WAY.  It would take a frontal lobotomy.
    
    Judy (I value differences because I am one,)
     

    ref .35 (Judy)
    
    >Managers keep sending me to silly courses in hopes that I will stop
    >being a trouble maker and become a nice obsiquious yuppy twit (like
    >them).  
    
    OMIGOD !!
    
    you are calling managers in DEC a "obsiquious yuppy twit" ??
    
    is this what you are saying? is it? are you implying we have twits
    managing us?
    
    some people are really brave! i would never ever dare call any of my
    bosses anything even close to that never mind an obsiquious yuppy twitts
    and in public too for crying out loud!
    
    what is this frontal lobotomy please?
    
    thanks Judy !
    
    \bye
    \nasser

>>             . Jerry's political beliefs  are irrelevant, since the
>>               man is a professional in all  he does, and he does it
>>               well.
        

Perhaps Bubba does behave professionally when among his customers, but
he is NOT demonstrating his professionalism here;


>>  MORO::BEELER_JE "Rush Limbaugh for President"
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>>    The day that this company takes me out of the field for three days and
>>    puts me into a "Valuing Differences" course because I like Rush
>>    Limbaugh and despise Slick .. is the day that I submit my resignation.


My advice is: limit your politics to SOAPBOX and take the course and listen
carefully.  There is more to life than making one's budget and maybe, Bubba,
you are  costing the company more than you bring in by insisting on raising
blood pressures every time you pen a Note.

Dennis Slough
Colorado Springs CSC

>	maybe, Bubba, you are  costing the company more than you bring in 
>	by insisting on raising blood pressures every time you pen a Note.

	Anyone who's blood pressure rises in response to seeing Jerry's
	P_N is much more in need of a "Valuing Differences" course
	(if anyone can be said to be "in need" of such a thing) than 
	Jerry is.

					Tom_K

    Sorry Dennis - you just failed the final for Valuing Differences.
    Please repeat the class, and try not to miss the point again.
    
    I have never listened to Russ L. but I think I like Bubba, or at 
    least I like some of what he says.  He is different and I value 
    that.  I would be really boring if we all felt the same and lived the
    same and thought the same.
    
    Speaking of differences, I have worked with Nasser.  Now there is
    someone who is DIFFERENT.  But he sure keeps things interesting.
    A frontal lobotomy is a surgical procedure (not done much anymore)
    that destroyes part of the frontal lobes of the brain.  It turns
    a violently insane person (trouble maker) into an obsiquious twitt with
    the IQ of a ripe banana.
    
    Judy
    

    RE: .38 Dittos :-)
    
    		Alfred

     Are there any touchy-feely courses for SPELLING?  YO!  Before anyone
else picks up and continues this poop, the word is OBSEQUIOUS.

                                   Greg

    it appears that .37 is confusing Valuing Diversity with being so 
    politically correct that notes become opinion- and content-free  -
    what a dull and paranoid environment to contemplate...
    
    /dlw
    

.39 (CAADC::BABCOCK)

>>    Sorry Dennis - you just failed the final for Valuing Differences.

Cute.

Let me put it this way.

If you, who missed my point, are comfortable saying, indiscrimately, in
front of a customer;

	Slick [Willie]

	or, even,

	"Rush Limbaugh for President"

then I think this company needs "Valuing Differences" courses even more than
I thought, simply to improve our chances of winning new business.

No doubt these things have been said by Digital people to our customers
without damage, but only when the situation was qualified.  Even then I
suspect anyone saying these things did so with that kind of ambiguous smile,
difficult to duplicate in electronic communication, that says;  "I may
really mean this, but then again, I may not."  You can try it yourself in
Notes by including:  ;-), etc.  but when it comes to "Slick" it's not worth
it, because it's not funny.

If you agree with me that these words are inappropriate for customers then
tell me why your co-workers deserve less.

Dennis

.37> My advice is: limit your politics to SOAPBOX and take the course and
.37> listen carefully.

Minor "nit".  I took the course and listened carefully.

.37> There is more to life than making one's budget and maybe, Bubba,

Digital Equipment Corporation's continued existence is predicated upon
the ability of the sales force to continue to (profitably) sell products
and service for Digital.  I really don't care how good the products and
services are - if the sales force don't sell 'em then this entire discussion
is academic - 'cause aint' none of us gonna' be here to discuss it!

Yes, these "touchie-feelie" courses are fine when we have the time and can
afford them.  Right now, neither is the case.

.37> you are  costing the company more than you bring in by insisting on
.37> raising blood pressures every time you pen a Note.

Interesting.  I was just discussing revenue ... it has been estimated that
I've contributed somewhere in the neighborhood of $200 million to Digital's
coffers since I've been in sales.  It's mind boggling to think that I have
cost Digital more than $200 million by having a reference to Rush Limbaugh
in my Personal_name.

    .-1

    Dennis, 

    good answer, good answer .

    .39
    Judy,

    Thanks Judy! that is one of the nicest things any one told me for
    a long time, i also enjoyed working with you on SMARTS with
    the rest of nice DECeees, we had a ball on that project and it was
    fun working with all the DECeeees over there.

    you still remember those little ducks that were born on the side
    of the lake in front of our building ? i miss the Mexican food
    place we used to go for at lunch.

    say hi to all the DECeees on SMARTS and keep up the great work you
    and every one else are doing there.

    \bye!
    \nasser

>If you agree with me that these words are inappropriate for customers then
>tell me why your co-workers deserve less.

	If you really can't tell the difference between what's appropriate
	to tell customers and what's appropriate to tell your co-workers than
	I hope that you are not privy to any company private information.

	Professional sales people, and Jerry is one such, do not talk politics
	to customers if at all possible to avoid it. That doesn't mean they
	should not be free to talk politics with co-workers. 

			Alfred

    
    
    Mr. Slough,
    
    Most people have the decorum to know what to speak to a customer about,
    if they did not chances are they would not be successful in sales.  We
    ought to take these touchy feely courses and flush them.  Our employees
    need to learn technical skills and the like.
    
    
    Mike

    Believe me, I go out of my way to avoid sex, politics and religious
    discussions with my customers.  Of course, there are some customers
    which are aligned with my political thogughts and I will engage them in
    political discussions .. why not?  It helps to build more of that
    elusive "relationship" that each sales person strives for.
    
    For the most part the area of the country that I'm in is very VERY
    anti-Clinton.  This is fortunate for I just blend right into the
    woodwork.
    
    "appropriate for customers"?  Ha!  You wouldn't believe some the things
    that I've heard from customers - on both sides of the fence:
    
    	Customer: "Thank God Bush is gone"
        Me:       "yes, now, about expanding that network..."
    			- -
    	Customer: "All Clinton is interested in is getting the queers
    		   into the military so he can screw that up to"
    	Me:       "Yes, now, we can upgrade the 4500 to a ....."
    			- -
    	Customer: "Perot is a fool and only fools vote for him"
    	Me:	  "Yes, now, let me tell you about Alpha ..."
    
    I hear it all.  I hear things from my customers that would (properly)
    get me fired in a heartbeat if I said the same thing to my co-workers. 
    Please, don't tell me that what's right for dialogue with customers is
    proper for dialogue with co-workers.
    
    The only place I "draw the line" is when they say something negative about
    Texas, the USMC, or the Dallas Cowboys.  I might .. just might engage
    said customer in a conversation about such commentary .. :-) :-)
    
    Bubba

        Texas? They threw me out - I kept forgetting the Alamo.
        
        USMC? Among the best.
        
        Dallas Cowboys?   Hah!   The cheerleaders are the only thing(s)
        worth watching!
        
        :*)
        
        Andy
        
        PS.  Big layoffs in our group today, with more to come in June.
        Get busy Jerry - we need you doing what you do best.
        

re Note 2480.29 by MORO::BEELER_JE:

        > (My  secretary has always said that my handling of my
        > customers is "shear art work").  
                        ^^^^^

    	I've noticed that once you leave the great halls of Digital and
    encounter actual humans, it helps to have a personality and to be able
    to engage in conversations about things other than computers. Building
    a relationship with customers is very important...And people with
    personalities and an ounce of common sense know when it's appropriate
    to say or not say certain things. Apparently, some people find this
    whole notion incomprehensible. Unfortunately, you can't really teach
    people to have common sense, but it might help some people in this
    NOTEs conference to get out a little more!

.51> ...And people with personalities and an ounce of common sense know
.51> when it's appropriate to say or not say certain things.

That, my friend, is the understatement of the year.

Bubba

    
    I wouldn't know Bubba if I tripped over him, so I can be somewhat
    objective.  I find it annoying in the extreme that some folks 
    are presuming to lecture him on how he should behave in front 
    of customers.  If he is as successful as he (and others) say, 
    THEN LEAVE HIM ALONE.  His track record should speak for itself.
    If he was making insensitive, politically offending statements
    to customers, that would quickly show up in his results.
    
    He should not have to explain/and or defend his political views. 
    If he is successful with customers, then he SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED
    to attend any training that he doesn't want to attend, and he SHOULD
    BE ABLE TO attend any training he deems fit for his purposes.  Period.
    
Glenn
    

    
    
    I agree... those that find Bubba's political views or insensitivities
    offensive should layoff and value his rights to be different.  I've
    spent most of my 17+ years in hitech outside of Digital.  Its a
    tough world out there and I was amazed on comming to Digital
    how much emphasis my old ESDP management put on the touchy feely
    BS.  I had to watch what I said since I could have been twisted 
    around to imply that I was trying to offend someone.
    
    I like Archy Bunker types who treats all people the same, regardless.
    Maybe we should de-program those who were overexposed to valuing
    difference type training.... give them a good dose Andrew Dice Clay
    assertiveness to help them deal with the real world.
    
    Give 'em hell Harry
    
    

    If you like Archy Bunker and Andrew Dice Clay you would love working at
    Intel.  I spent a century there one year.  At the first staff meeting I
    attended I almost went into cardiac arrest!  They all talk like that. 
    They call it Constructive Confrontation.  It is the foundation of their
    corp. culture.  Get everything on the table, in nice simple english,
    then deal with it.  No hints, no hidden agendas, no veiled
    implications, just the real facts AND feelings.  It took some getting
    use to but I learned.
    
    Then I came back to Digital, I have been in trouble ever since.
    
    Judy (forever foot-in-mouth)
    

.54> I agree... those that find Bubba's political views or insensitivities
.54. offensive should layoff and value his rights to be different.

One minor nit ... if anyone is offended by anything that I say .. they need
only tell me so.  I will resolutely and sincerely appoloize and do my best
to insure insure that I not make the same mistake again.

I'm still flabbergasted that someone would think that I need to take
a valuing differences course for the simple reason that I have "Rush
Limbaugh for President" as my personal name in VAX Notes.  Then again,
perhaps he was only joking .. I'll be more than willing to give him the
benefit of the doubt until I hear differently.

Bubba

    Bubba, i bet you 5 dunketts donuts he had his tongue in his
    cheek when he said that, i know cause i know people si'kicks,
    he was just pulling your feet, dont take it so hard man!

    you are not a bad dude really, could use some improvements, but
    like who doesn't !

    keep up the good work and we look forward for an inspiring next
    quarter for DEC and all of us with more profits and better things
    to share.

    \bye
    \nasser

Well, if Bubba's that successfull maybe he should be designing the courses
that everybody else takes. Then again maybe it's the touchy-feely courses
that Bubba has attended that have turned him into such a sensitive hunk. I
wouldn't give a damn who got upset over my personal name. It's not Bubba's 
problem - it's theirs. 

Bubba makes a difference that should be valued. Lush 'is that a pistol in your 
pocket or are you just happy to see me' Rimbo might just do as good a job 
as Billary anyway....:-). 

re .55

	Question: How much has Intel made over the past 5 years? How
	much has Digital made over the past 5 years? Perhaps they
	are onto something we need to check out...

					Tom_K

    
    
    RE:  .55     I've also been out to Intel over the past three years.
    		 They do call a spade a spade.  One thing that our
    	         team had a laugh with while we were out at our first
    		 Intel trip was that Intel was offering a course on
    		 "Assertiveness Training" targeted to people with Oriental
    	         cultural background.  Seems that some new hires were
    		 having a tough time adapting to the west coast style 
                 based on their upbringing and non-confrontive personality.
    		 Not trying to type cast any group here... don't get
    		 me wrong.  But the artical we read desribing the course
    	         and its target audience had us DECies in stitches while
    		 we were being forced ionto the Valuing Diffs training.
    
    		 gb
    
    		 background.

    I read an interesting article a while back.  Seems that the popular
    stereotypical views of traditional oriental "upbringing" and
    "non-confrontational personality" results in higher educational success
    in US high schools.  Those from the native culture with its
    (presumably) "assertive confrontational" background don't seem to do as
    well.  I'm also at a loss to explain how this apparent lack of
    assertiveness and apparent unwillingness to indulge in confrontation
    and competitive behaviour on the part of orientals has led to Japanese
    business success in several key world markets.  Perhaps the "Made In
    Japan" assertiveness course is better designed than the "Made In the
    USA" version?
    
    Another article in the current issue of New Scientist seems to imply
    that there was also much internal infighting over the design of the
    Pent-up.  So much strife, in fact that the resulting compromise crisc
    (neither cisc, nor risc) design may not do what they hope in competing
    with Mips, SuperSparc or Digital's Alpha (sic) in the high end
    PC-to-Workstation market.  

    The story also pointed out that the new chip is a year late, has low
    and unreliable yields, and runs a lot hotter than its' predecessor,
    probably requiring a nice big noisy cooling tower. Maybe they should
    call it "Crisco"� architecture as it's likely to melt down easily or
    change the trademark to "In Hell Inside".

    Is there REAL competition in InHells' current PC microprocessor market?
    If so, then I guess it would be reasonable to attribute elements of
    their business success to a differing corporate philosophy on
    "preferred styles of interpersonal interaction".  Given the scenario
    outlined in the New Scientist story, it doesn't seem that the assertive
    straight-talking approach had a radically positive effect on bringing
    their latest offering to an already competitive market.
     
    Personally, I'll wait and see how the "assertively designed" PentHouse,
    does against our "valuing differences" AXP in the workstation market.
    ;-)
     
    Colin

    � For the benefit of those from other cultures, a brand of cooking oil
      sold in the US which is solid at room temperature.

RE:                   <<< Note 2480.61 by SMURF::WALTERS >>>
      
>>    Is there REAL competition in InHells' current PC microprocessor market?

     That question occurred to you too, huh?  I was just enjoying the chuckle-
headed leaps of (il)logic in this conversation.  "Mike is a good runner, and 
he's the local grand exalted wizard.  If I join the Klan, maybe I'll be able 
to complete the Boston marathon!"

     I hope none of Digital's customers are using products designed by 
similarly logical minds.

                                       Greg                                

>     I hope none of Digital's customers are using products designed by 
>similarly logical minds.

I guess you're unfamiliar with our product set?

    When I came across this old note, somehow I was reminded of this 
    current discussion on whether Bubba Values Differences...  enjoy!  8^)
    
         <<< QUARK::NOTES_DISK:[NOTES$LIBRARY]HUMAN_RELATIONS.NOTE;1 >>>
               -< What's all this fuss about 'sax and violins'? >-
================================================================================
Note 1182.29                   What's in a name??                       29 of 31
QUARK::LIONEL "Free advice is worth every cent"      99 lines  22-JUL-1991 13:43
               -< Relevant item from "US News and World Report" >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A coworker had tacked up outside of his office wall the following piece from
the July 22 issue of US News and World Report, a magazine known to be somewhat
on the conservative side.  I thought it made interesting and, at times,
amusing reading, and thought I'd share it with people here.  (Please don't
assume that I necessaarily agree with the author's views.)

					Steve

The New Verbal Order, by John Leo

Wishing to employ the correct modern term for "disabled", the Philadephia
Federation of Teachers set up a "Committee for Members with Special Needs."
That didn't work.  A homeless person came by, announcing a special need
for housing.  Then it became the "Committee for Members who are Physically
Challenged", but a frightened fifth-grade teacher showed up, thinking it
was a support group for instructors intimidated by their students.  So now it
is known as the "Committee for Disabled Members."  "Everybody understand the
words and nobody protested," said James Gallgher of the committee, satisfied
at last.

The descent into accurate English as a last resort is ever more arduous.  In
the disability-rights movement, one must grope through a fierce blizzard of
euphemisms; the uniquely abled, the differently abled, the exceptional, the
handicapable, injury survivors and people with differing abilities.  A recent
bulletin from the movement lets us know that Porky Pig, formerly a stutterer,
should be listed as speech-imparied, whereas Mr. Magoo is visually
handicapped and Captain Hook is orthopedically impaired.

From the Pentagon to feel-good self-esteemers, everyone seems to be
contributing mightily to the steady debasement of the Mother Tongue.
Entrenched euphemisms include senior (old), differently sized (obese),
meaningful downturn (recession), work stoppage (strike), quarantine (blockade),
make sexual dysfunction (impotence), educational equity (quotas),
undocumented workers (illegal aliens) and substance abusers (winos and
junkies.)

Mindbenders.  On the PC front, we have dominant culture (the mainstream),
underrepresented groups (blacks, Indians and Latinos), survivor (victim,
as in incest survivor), monocultural (white), Third World (non-white) and
"racist!" ("I disagree with you on that").  Diversity means racial 
representation, as the office of "diversity manager" on so many campuses
makes clear.  (A group composed of St. Francis, Vivaldi, Falstaff, Jackie
Onassis, Hitler and Mick Jagger would not be diverse, since all are
mono-pigmented.)  "Colored People", as in NAACP, is racist, but the
backwards construction "people of color" is progressive.  Terms keep sliding;
Indians became Native Americans or Amerinds, but since both terms include
the dread name of a Eurocentric cartographer, the preferred term is now
indigenous peoples.  "Oriental" has been declared a racist word, so all
college departments of oriental studies that do not wish to be burned to
the ground in the name of tolerance should rename themselves rather quickly.

PC-oriented newspapers, such as the Los Angeles Times, employ this remote
campus tongue as if it were real English.  The Times, which uses physically
challenged without irony, once referred to a rap star's Eurocentric suit.
This meant ordinary Western clothes and not a suit that believes Europe to
be the focal point of all world history.

Pentagonese has come up with a new euphemism for friendly fire, or shelling
your own troops; incontinent ordinance, which sounds like something June
Allyson warns us about in TV commercials.  The definition of peace ("the
temporary cessation of hostilities") does its bit to attrit, maul and
collaterally damage the language.

Animal-rights activists insist that the word "pet" is demeaning and should
be replaced by "animal companion."  But that term is itself under fire because
it implies that humans are somehow distinct from the rest of the animal
world, an idea that reeks of speciesism.  While a new and improved term is
being dreamed up, pets can be called "friends" and "protectors".  Animals
are never "wild", they are "free-roaming" or "free".  And expensive vinyl
pants are now known as "vegetarian leather."

Campuses are particularly vulnerable now to the spread of oddbal feminese.
Two of these terms - herstory and womyn (the latter circulated by the same
segment of the population that spelled America "Amerika" during the '70s) -
actually made it into the new and outstandingly softheaded Random House
college dictionary.  My brother Peter, the distinguished Pittsburgh 
columnist, says that if female history is "herstory", then a history of
humanity should be his'n'herstory, and a man with herpes should be listed
as a hispes survivor.  Word comes that a feminist professor now calls her
seminar an "ovular".  Let's hope that no one tells her the etymology of
"testimony" or she might have womyn ovarifying in courts across Amerika.

Finally, as a public service, here is how a few familiar books and movies
might be translated into modspeak:

  - "Beauty and the Beast" - A Lookism Survivor and a Free-Roaming
    Fellow Mammal

  - "War and Peace" - Violence Processing and the Temporary Cessation of
    Hostilities

  - "Les Miserables" - Persons with Special Needs

  - "Three Blind Mice" - A Triad of Visually Impaired, Wall-dwelling Protectors

  - "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" - One of the Monocultural Oppressed
    Womyn Confronts the Vertically Challenged

  - "Men at Arms" - The Myn Are at It Again

For the surprisingly large number of comedically challenged herein who 
didn't realize it, when I suggested Mr. Beeler's personal name
indicated he needed a Valuing Differences class, I was joking.

For those who have had their sense of humor removed, or lost, Mr.
Limbaugh is, IMHO, one of the least tolerant personalities I have ever 
heard of.  His fans appear to share his myopic perspective, and his 
strong tendency toward the kind of petty, name-calling rhetoric that 
we find earlier in this very topic.  Common courtesy and social graces 
take a back seat to this "art" of the clever, content-free retort. 
Note the "obsequious twit" tangent.  In other words, if anyone on
Earth could use a Valuing Differences class, it's the Geraldo
Rivera of political commentators, Rush Limbaugh.

But, perhaps instead of "Valuing Differences" coursework, we should develop
a better sense of humor around here.  I can appreciate the differences
in opinions being expressed, but there's no excusing the rude, Rush
Limbaugh included.  That isn't debate.  That is sophomoric bickering.

tim

>But, perhaps instead of "Valuing Differences" coursework, we should develop
>a better sense of humor around here. 

Somewhere in this file, Steve Dipirro suggested that bonuses should
be awarded on the basis of "sense of humour" ...  that'd do the trick.

    re:.-1
    
    I like that.
    
    tim
    

re: 2480.65 (Tim Grady)                            
    
    So let the debate on Rush Limbaugh begin:
    
>> For those who have had their sense of humor removed, or lost, Mr.
>> Limbaugh is, IMHO, one of the least tolerant personalities I have ever 
>> heard of.  His fans appear to share his myopic perspective, and his 
>> strong tendency toward the kind of petty, name-calling rhetoric that 
>> we find earlier in this very topic.  Common courtesy and social graces 
>> take a back seat to this "art" of the clever, content-free retort. 
>> Note the "obsequious twit" tangent.  In other words, if anyone on
>> Earth could use a Valuing Differences class, it's the Geraldo
>> Rivera of political commentators, Rush Limbaugh.

    NO!
    
    I don't believe it is appropriate to debate the views of some political
    commentator in this file.  Let me be the first to say that he is
    irrelevent to this file and to this company.  It is his attitude, and
    the attitude of those like him, that exemplify the issue that is
    addressed by Valuing Diversity training.
    
    A debating style that focuses on personal insults and lacking substance
    is simply bad manners.  Humor at the expense of others is rude, and
    sophomoric.  Those concepts transcend the individual perpetrators, even
    those as imposing as Mr. Limbaugh & Co.  It's not acceptable coming
    from children, much less nominally reponsible adults.
    
    If you don't understand why your manager believes you would benefit
    from Valuing Diversity training, perhaps it would help to think of it 
    as remedial charm school. ;-)
    
    tim
    

    re: 2480.69 by Tim Grady:
    
    As this second note discussing the opinions of Rush Limbaugh held by
    Tim Grady begins:
    
    >> I don't believe it is appropriate to debate the views of some political
    >> commentator in this file.
    
    And he continues:
    
    >> It is his attitude, and the attitude of those like him, that exemplify
    >> the issue that is addressed by Valuing Diversity training.
                                                
    And this is attributed to Rush Limbaugh:
    
    >> Humor at the expense of others is rude, and sophomoric.
    
    And Tim Grady concludes:
    
    >> If you don't understand why your manager believes you would benefit
    >> from Valuing Diversity training, perhaps it would help to think of it 
    >> as remedial charm school. ;-)
    
    Please, Tim, clarify if the above is intended to be humorous and if it
    at the expense of others.
    
    Pat Sweeney
               

>    I don't believe it is appropriate to debate the views of some political
>    commentator in this file.

	Then why did you proceed to do exactly that?

			Confused,


				Tom_K

    
    Rush limbo is full of it!
    
    now lets go back and talk about DEC stuff for crying out loud !
    
    please !!
    
    
    thank you,
    \nasser
    

    Pat,

    I do not believe that either of my replies offered humor at the expense
    of others.  I do believe that Valuing Diversity training should be
    suggested for those who appear to have difficulty dealing with others
    with whom they have little or nothing in common.  An alternative,
    humorous euphemism for training for those who have difficulty getting
    along with others is "charm school".  In other words, Yes, Pat, I was
    kidding.

    Tom,
    
    Read my comments again.  I have not discussed Mr. Limbaugh's views,
    political or otherwise.  I did discuss his attitude, which IMHO is rude, 
    and sophomoric, and examplery of one who would benefit from such training.
    He is an example of a growing number of people who would supplant
    intelligent debate with snappy and cute insults, and in doing so,
    somehow lead people to believe that they've actually said something
    intelligent.  Hiding behind an "anti-PC" facade, they wrap themselves
    in the First Amendment and absolve themselves of any responsibility for
    trashing the people with whom they simply disagree, or whom they fail to
    understand.  Hardly what I would call intelligent.  Rude is more like
    it.
    
    Limbaugh is irrelevent. Bad manners, or a lack of courtesy within the 
    company and within notesfiles, however, is quite relevent.  It is
    almost comical that such poor manners could successfully be portrayed
    as the anthem of the downtrodden masses, in their struggle against the
    "politically correct" or "cultural elite".  How silly, and
    self-important that all appears.
    
    I'm not talking about Limbaugh.  I'm talking about courtesy, manners,
    decorum, respect for the opinions of those different from oneself.
    
    Still confused?
    
    tim
    

    >I'm not talking about Limbaugh.  I'm talking about courtesy, manners,
    >decorum, respect for the opinions of those different from oneself.
    
    Actually, you're spending a fair amount of time talking about Limbaugh
    in a vain attempt to use him as a universally recognized metaphor
    for intolerance.  Perhaps you need another devil.
    
    But no matter.  Let's talk about the second sentence which more nearly
    approaches the subject at hand.  There are two ways to parse it: One,
    that respect for opinions different from your own is a desireable end
    or two, that the opinions of people who are different from us are to be
    respected.  Number one is a prerequisite to enlightened discussion. 
    Number two is irrelevent. Unfortunately, as I understand it, Valuing 
    Differences is more about the latter than the former.
    
    In the context of business, a persons race, gender, sexual preference,
    physical ability or religious affiliation is largely immaterial.  If
    I'm not mistaken, Digital pays us to to get a job done.  If I let these
    extraneous attributes get in the way of doing my job, then I deserve to
    be fired.  On the other hand, being an atheistic handicapped lesbian of 
    color (an AA dream ;^)) does not lend any extra credibility to a set of
    ideas and opinions.
    
    We don't need to _value_ someone just because they are different. 
    Difference deserves _respect and tolerance_ (at least in the context of a
    business), nothing more.  To be valued, you need to contribute more
    than you cost.  What Digital needs to value are better business plans,
    products, service quality, manufacturing techniques and the like. 
    Ideas and opinions (which are not all created equal) that are the
    best.
    
    Respect everyone.  Value only the good ideas.
    
    Al
    

.73> I do believe that Valuing Diversity training should be
.73> suggested for those who appear to have difficulty dealing with others
.73> with whom they have little or nothing in common.

I have had the occasion, over the last 17 years, to work with a number of
people at Digital Equipment.  In the course of this lengthy period I have
worked quite effectively with those with whom I had one and only one thing
in common - that of our assigned task of profitably selling hardware and
services to our customers.  We all performed our respective tasks and we
performed them well.

Who is to decide what "difficulty dealing with" really means?  When I'm
working with someone to configure a large and complicated system I care
about and VALUE one and only one thing - that individual's talent and his
or her ability to get the job done.  Nothing more and nothing less.  I
could ABSOLUTELY CARE LESS if that individual is a male or a female, black
white yellow or brown, Catholic Protestant or atheist, straight or gay.
Believe me, I could care less.  Have I, in the past, never had "difficulty
dealing with" people with this perspective?  Not once.  Not one single
time in 17 years.

This "difficulty dealing with" may be in the eye of the beholder.  Is it
your opinion that because I really don't care .. I inherently "have
difficulty dealing with" people and need some valuing differences course?

To whose advantage is it if these "differences" are even brought up so
that I may assess whether or not I care .. or quite frankly .. give a damn?
    
If I detest the Catholic church .. is there any necessity, any value, in
me knowing that the individual is Catholic?  If I think that gay people
are immoral is there any inherent value in bringing this out so that we
can now have something to effectively polarize ourself and DEFINITELY
interfere with our chartered tasks as employees of Digital Equipment?

.73> I did discuss his [Limbaugh's] attitude, which IMHO is rude, 
.73> and sophomoric, and examplery of one who would benefit from
.73> such training.

I happen to think a great deal of Rush Limbaugh.  Does that in some
de' facto manner make me a candidate for such training?

.74> We don't need to _value_ someone just because they are different. 
.74> Difference deserves _respect and tolerance_ (at least in the context of a
.74> business), nothing more.

Bingo.  Nothing more and nothing less.

There are many things that I definitively DO NOT "value".  Respect, yes.
Value, no.

Bubba

    Re: .74.
    
    This is a curious semantic argument, for indeed, how can one possibly
    have respect for an individual for whom one holds no value whatsoever.  
    IMHO, valuing anyone, at least at some level, is a prerequisite for 
    respecting them at any level.  Name calling is symptomatic of a lack of 
    respect, and therefore an inability to see any value in the target
    individual. If you can perceive value at some level in any given 
    individual, then you are capable of showing some respect.  That is the 
    foundation of common courtesy.
    
    Re: .75
    
>Who is to decide what "difficulty dealing with" really means?
    
    In the workplace, your manager.  If your manager tells you that you
    would benefit from a valuing differences class, then IMHO this is
    precisely the issue.  Management not only has a obligation to lead, but
    also a responsibility for continuity of morale.  Telling an otherwise
    productive employee that they would benefit from a VoD course is
    considerably more diplomatic than telling that same employee they have
    problem dealing with people, don't you agree?  At the same time,
    getting that employee into training addresses the morale of the rest of
    the organization.
    
    As an employee, our obligation to conduct our business affairs with
    proper decorum does not end when we leave the customer's office. 
    Indeed, Jerry, your constant presence in these notes files seems to 
    indicate that either you are dialed into these conferences from your 
    customer's site, or you are always in your local Digital office.  We
    have a right to state our opinions in the workplace, but an obligation
    to respect the same rights of our fellow employees, without reducing
    the discussion to name calling and petty, personal insults.
    
    Respect for other peoples cultural, ethnic, or religious background, 
    that is "valuing" their "diversity", is the first step toward learning
    to better deal with people who are different than ourselves.  Just
    because you disagree with someone's ideas, does not give you the right
    to insult them (e.g. "looney lefty", "obsequious twit", etc)  That is
    childish, IMHO, and unbecoming a civilized adult.
    
    For example, if you believe that gays are immoral, that's your opinion;
    it is also your prejudicial judgement of fellow employees.  Feel free
    to express it, but don't feel free to wantonly, and quite frankly
    selfishly, spew meaningless, content-free, personal epithets at
    individuals or groups who disagree with you.  That's rude.  You have a
    right to state your opinion, however, you definitely do not have any
    right to be rude.
    
    tim
    
    

    RE: .76
    
    Just *WHAT* are you talking about? Jerry has demonstrated that his
    courtesy level is far above a 101 level. Why do you continue to look
    for a problem that doesn't exist?
    
    Marc H.

    
    
    Maybe Mr. Grady is the one in need of a course or two.
    
    
    
    Mike

    Let's try to keep this discussion on track.
    
    I didn't say Jerry was being discourteous.  I also didn't say he should
    attend the training, his manager did.  Not everyone is so polite as
    Jerry.
    
    Incidentally, and for what it's worth, I agree with Jerry that it is
    inappropriate to send all employees above a certain level to a course
    that they do not specifically require.  Sometimes.
    
    For example, in 1986, after seven years with the company as an engineer
    and technician, I was ordered to attend CSST (technical product
    training for new hire sales people) because I would be providing sales
    support for them.  Six weeks in New England, in February, on expenses.  
    A colossal waste of money.  That sort of thing eventually happens to
    everyone, but it has nothing to do with the content of the course.  The
    new hire sales people who went with me needed the training.
    
    In the case of Valuing Differences training, though, consider the
    effect on a group of employees if only specific individuals are singled
    out as needing the training...  How does that effect group morale?  It
    may make the most sense in this case to send the whole group rather
    than risk doing more damage than good by sending only individuals who really
    need it and thereby alienating them from the rest.
    
    There's a differnce between sending people to inappropriate training in
    an effort to blindly follow policy, and the justification for the
    training being offered itself.  The former is a wasteful management
    practice, and the latter is indicative of a need in the corporation.  I
    think the waste should end, but I also know that the need for this
    group dynamics training persists.
    
    tim
    

    
    re: .76
    
    Give it rest.  As one of my colleagues has so eloquently pointed
    out, we are being suffocated by pedants.
    
    Glenn

    Re: .80 (suffocated by pedants)
    
    I do not flood these files with endless diatribes on a wide variety of
    subjects.  Nor do I haunt every topic with clever replies at every
    turn.  Once in awhile, I encounter a topic on which I have a strong
    opinion, and I express it.  Sometimes it takes a few replies to get the
    point across, especially when the audience is so large as it is here.
    
    I'll give it a rest when I'm comfortable that I've made my point,
    without it being misconstrued as merely another stereotype. 
    
    tim
    

    RE: .81
    
    If that truely is your goal, then I would suggest that you explain
    more. Your comments do seem stereotypical.
    
    Marc H.

    
    Re: respect vs. value.
    
    It seems that some of those writing here look at Valuing Differences
    as only a social issue.  While it is without doubt a social issue,
    the point of addressing it with training goes far beyond that.  The
    point of *valuing* those differences and its importance to Digital
    is that they have the potential to be powerful assets in doing
    business.  It just could be that the difference you were assuming
    was only social might, if you considered it a different way, become
    a resource.
    
    Steve
    

.83> The point of *valuing* those differences and its importance to Digital
.83> is that they have the potential to be powerful assets in doing
.83> business.

I would, in all seriousness, love to know more about these "powerful
assets" that will allow me to do my job better.  How can we turn the
differences between the fundamentalist Baptist and the gay person into
a "powerful asset"?  How can we turn the differences between the Jew
and the Arab into a "powerful asset"?   I'll stop right there.  Give
me some concrete examples of precisely HOW we turn such differences
into powerful assets that will allow us to do our job, for our customers,
better.

Thank you,
Bubba

    
    Re: .84
    
    OK if you want an example I'll give you one.  White males
    raised in western cultures are raised in an environment where
    they are taught and encouraged to see things from a win-lose
    perspective i.e. the old dog eat dog paradigm.
    
    Males raised in eastern cultures and, more generally, women of either
    western or eastern cultures tend to see things from a win-win
    perspective.  Being a white male and knowing this I tend to rely on
    women colleagues to help me see possibilities for win-win that I might
    otherwise miss.
    
    Steve
    

    
    re: .84
    
    Mybe you were raised this way, but I wasn't.  Please avoid
    generalizing, which I believe they teach in UDD, no?
    
    (haha, I win :-))
    
    Glenn

    I assume we have both Jewish and Arab customers; a salesman familiar
    with both cultures because of exposure to both Jewish and Arab
    co-workers will, presumably, be better at selling to those markets.
    

    
    sorry, I meant re: .85 (guess I lose)
    
    Glenn

    reply .85 by GSFSYS::MACDONALD contains a flagrant falsehood

.85>    Males raised in eastern cultures and, more generally, women of either
.85>    western or eastern cultures tend to see things from a win-win
.85>    perspective.

    This is not true.  I have had some significant experience with males
    and females of two different oriental cultures 1) Japan, and 2) Arabia.
    Both groups are radically NOT of this stereotype.

    My own experience tells me that people are just as dod-eat-dog in the
    East as in the West.

    They just to do it differently.

    Greg

    
    Re: .86
    
    When comparing western and eastern cultures the win-lose vs. the
    win-win mindset is a commonly found difference.  Making that
    generalization is not a problem if you leave it at that level and
    don't apply it to individuals.  There is also the the possibility
    that a generalization applied with some sense produces a good
    result and not a bad one.
    
    Steve
    

    
    Re: .89
    
    Did you ever consider that perhaps it was with *you* that they
    weren't that way?  Perhaps the only game you could play was yours.
    
    Steve
    

    in reply .87 by Steve Wellcome (VERGA::) gave an example that is
    predicated upon a false assumption.

.87>    I assume we have both Jewish and Arab customers; a salesman familiar
.87>    with both cultures because of exposure to both Jewish and Arab
.87>    co-workers will, presumably, be better at selling to those markets.

    Exposure to co-workers inside of Digital, which maintains a liberal
    western cultural environment, does not equate to experience of either
    Israeli or Arabic culture.

    Your assumption is that meeting and working with a person in the US and
    working with him in the US will give you "a feel" for that person's
    home cultural situation.  This is a false assumption.

    Meeting and working with a Saudi or an Israeli in Digital and "valuing"
    him will not give you insight into the cultural situation from which he
    came.  To gain such insight you must go and live in his culture and
    live by the ground rules of that culture and suffer the consequences of
    failing to adhere to those ground rules.

    "Valuing" the Saudi's diversity has absolutely nothing to do with
    working with him.  A person can be valued as a person and also be
    given a strongly negative value for his religion, culture, and personal
    actions.  But you can still work with him, even when you detest
    something about his behavior.

    The trick to achieving this is simple.  DON'T TALK ABOUT IT.  It is not
    a business situation and you don't need to discuss it in your working
    environment. 

    Greg

> White males
> raised in western cultures are raised in an environment 

That's a pretty sweeping generalisation - you probably need
to a attend a "valuing diversity" course to help you realise
that not all "western cultures" are the same.

    re .91 by GSFSYS::MACDONALD

    Personal attack is beside the point.

    Touchy-feely courses are almost universally scorned by engineer-types.
    While I understand this, I think engineers should also consider the
    possibility that they do have something to offer.

    Engineering skill is one thing, indispensable of course.  Skills
    related to managing self, relating to others, understanding differing
    cultural perspecitives/paradidgms are NO LESS VALUABLE, only
    harder to come by.

    A lot of problems in this corp might be solved if more people
    took these kinds of courses seriously.  But it's very challenging
    work to do so, and hard to measure the results.  So much easier
    to cast aspersions...

    My $0.02

I don't think that I could possibly expand on the gross generalizations that
were made in the response to my question.  As far as the sales environment
goes, were I to make generalizations like that I would be history in a nano-
second.

I never, ever, never, ever assume ANYTHING.  Generalizations about people
(especially customers) are deadly.

.92> DON'T TALK ABOUT IT. It is not a business situation and you don't
.92> need to discuss it in your working environment. 

Can we all say ... BINGO!

.95> A lot of problems in this corp might be solved if more people
.95> took these kinds of courses seriously.

Here's another dumb question .. how did we survive, prosper, grow .. over
the last 25+ years without these courses?  If I may be so brazen to ask:
pick one problem (that shouldn't be all that difficult) and tell us
how taking these kinds of courses "seriously", on a large scale, could
have played a significant part in the abatement or avoidance of the
problem that you choose as your example.

I'm not picking on you but am very serious about my question and looking
forward to your answer.  Let me give you an example:

I once read a book that started with "... if our military and political
leaders in recent times had studied this work of genius, Vietnam could not
have happened as it happened;  we would not have lost the war in Korea
(we lost because we did not achieve victory); the Bay of Pigs could not
have occurred;  the hostage fiasco in Iran would not have come to pass; the
British Empire would not have been dismembered; and, in all probability,
World Wars I and II would have been avoided - CERTAINLY they would not have
been waged as they were waged, and ,the millions of youths obliterated 
unnecessarily and stupidly by monsters calling themselves generals would
have lived out their lives."

Quite frankly .. I poo-poo'd the above when I read it.  Well, I continued
through the book and believe it or not .. the preface (as quoted above)
was not at all too far from the mark.  [I think that every sales person
in Digital should be *required* to read ... "Sun Tzu, The Art of War"!].
Hence, from the same perspective I find your statement somewhat on the
incredible side ... but .. am looking forward to hearing the "rest of
the story" from you.

Thanks,
Bubba

  re Note 2480.95    by  RANGER::WESTERVELT 

>    Engineering skill is one thing, indispensable of course.  Skills
>    related to managing self, relating to others, understanding differing
>    cultural perspecitives/paradidgms are NO LESS VALUABLE, only
>    harder to come by.


	Most of the skills needed to get along with people are a result of
	having a modicum of common sense, respect for the individual, and
	a generous touch of courtesy. People that do not have these skills
	or are so self-centered that they are unwilling to pretend that they
	have these skills do not belong face-to-face with a customer.

	To say that these skills are harder to come by than engineering
	skills is not true, to put it mildly.

	John

    The essence of this issue is that in the current/new DEC, you shut up
    and do what you're told. Not only to "touchy-feely" courses usually
    just repeat what you had in Management 101, they run counter to the
    mindset now required at DEC to succeed in an increasingly hierarchical,
    even tyrannical culture.
    
    "Mr. Kahn, welcome to 'Valuing the Soldier.' I hope that you will
    ... ARGGHHUUUGGGLLLLLEE ...! <-- (sound of facilitator being run through
    with large, sharp battle weapon).

>	Most of the skills needed to get along with people are a result of
>	having a modicum of common sense, respect for the individual, and
>	a generous touch of courtesy. People that do not have these skills
>	or are so self-centered that they are unwilling to pretend that they
>	have these skills do not belong face-to-face with a customer.

Yup. That's what I keep trying to say too. A little common sense and courtesy
goes a long way. People don't usually need to be taught social skills as
they learn from experience. However, I've run into quite a few that could
use a lesson or two. So I can't make that blanket statement. But this has
NOTHING to do with valuing differences. In fact, I've never taken one of
these classes. So I don't spend a lot of time focusing on peoples' differences
and trying to understand the dynamics of those differences. I just treat
everyone the same, and I'm the same in person as I am in mail or NOTEs files
(scarey, isn't it?). This makes it a lot easier for me, and it's NEVER gotten
in the way of my job or productivity. Would a VoD course help me do my job?
Absolutely not.

>	To say that these skills are harder to come by than engineering
>	skills is not true, to put it mildly.

And believe it or not, there are engineers who possess both sets of skills.
Nerds come in all shapes and sizes, and not all of them are engineers (just
most of them!).

    
    Re: .94
    
    First, if "personal attack is beside the point", then why is it
    that you titled your response to me "Bronx cheer to .85", and
    in the text of your note characterize my point as a "flagrant
    falsehood"?  If personal attack is not the point, then simply
    saying that you disagreed would have been sufficient to make
    your point.
    
    Second, I did not intend my rebuttal as an attack.  My point was
    simply that your personal experience does not by itself prove
    my point wrong and that your experience could certainly have had
    more to do with you i.e. limited understanding of the other culture,
    etc. than with those whom you were interacting with.  That is not to
    say that I was implying that you were somehow wrong and they were
    right.  Right and wrong is not the point and has nothing to do with
    what I am talking about.
    
    Steve
    

    Part of the problem with this discussion is the use of the term "touchy
    feely" for non technical, non business oriented courses.  I would
    maintain that useful, substantive training in certain psychological and
    cultural areas would do most of us some good in business situations. 
    Knowing aspects of Japanese culture has certainly helped our sales
    efforts in New York, for example.  Psychological training should also
    help a manager motivate his employees, which is clearly one of his
    responsibilities.
    
    "Touchy feely" implies lack of substantive content in favor of a
    getting in touch with one's feelings.  Sometimes courses can turn into
    this and it is usually a sign that the class has been poorly designed
    or poorly taught.  However, there are some times when it makes sense to
    make employees "feel" better.  In fact, we need it now so that we can
    rededicate ourselves to working hard for DEC.
    

    Ok, I wasn't going to enter into this, but can't resist.  Here's my
    experience of one of those "touchy-feely" classes:
    
    A cross-functional peer that I worked with came back from one of those
    classes and learned to reply to statements from others with "Thank you
    for sharing that gift with me."
    
    On the other hand, sometime *after* he'd taken the class, his response
    to a group photo in which I unfortunately had forgotten my jacket and
    ended up in the middle of the group, and which was shot with a wide-angle
    lens, was (and this is a direct quote), "Aw, geez, will you look at
    those t***."
    
    Face it, simple respect for others, plus a little compassion and
    sensitivity is either learned when you're growing up or not.  If you
    haven't learned it by now, a touchy-feely course from Digital isn't
    going to even scratch the surface.

    
        re .101
    	
       >	However there are times when it makes sense to make employees
       >  	"feel" better.
    
    
    	And there are much better methods than 'touchy-feely' courses to
    	do this, including getting this TFSO business over with or doing
    	concrete things to improve employee morale. 
    
    	A couple of weeks ago, I saw individuals running around here at
    	PKO3 with some type of military uniforms on. I don't know what
    	course they were attending, but I wonder what value the uniforms
    	lent to the class.
    
    	John
    	

>Here's another dumb question .. how did we survive, prosper, grow .. over
>the last 25+ years without these courses? 

These times are not those times.  Just because we did it then does not
mean we can do it now, without changes in our way of working.  Then we
were hot, today we have a lot of folks with different agendas than
pure engineering.

A lot of problems I encounter in the workplace are NOT technical but
inter-personal.  And while you can always go to a book to learn technology,
it is not so easy to look into yourself - and change yourself.

'Touchy-feely' is insulting because it assumes there is no technology
in the field of psychology, group dynamics, etc.  When I hear people
knock it, I think sometimes they are right and sometimes they don't
want to deal with the real problem.

> If I may be so brazen to ask:
>pick one problem (that shouldn't be all that difficult) and tell us
>how taking these kinds of courses "seriously", on a large scale, could
>have played a significant part in the abatement or avoidance of the
>problem that you choose as your example.

A simple example is meeting management.  If people who run meetings in this
company were to take this technology seriously, untold $ could be saved and
productivity would improve.  

A more complex example is group dynamics and the decision making process.
I took a course which applied the theory of transactional analysis to
workplace interactions.  The instructor demonstrated very clearly
the connection between our psychological states (and how we act out of
them) and the Bottom Line.  The point was that if we understand ourselves
and others better, we can choose to behave in more effective ways (i.e.
not playing psychological games) which contribute to productivity.

My point is that techno-types automatically scorn technology which is
not in their domain.  In so doing, they give short shrift to something
that might be valuable.  In no way am I suggesting that technological
excellence should take a back seat, but I disagree that it is necessarily
more difficult.  There's more to knowing yourself than exhibiting a 
modicum of common sense.  There's different kinds of technology.

In my current organization, for instance, there's a big emphasis
coming down from the top which says "we will make issues discussable".
This is an excellent example of applying a principle of human interaction
to the workplace in a way which can positively affect profits.

BTW, I think both of us have valid points of view.  In some respects,
we might be talking apples and oranges.

>[I think that every sales person
>in Digital should be *required* to read ... "Sun Tzu, The Art of War"!].

Sounds touchy-feely to me.  Whassa matter with you, Bubba?  :-)

    Once apon a time, in a group far, far away ...
    
    ... those of us in that group were required to attend Touchy-Feely III
    (our already having been forced to endure Touchy-Feely I and
    Touchy-feely II in previous lives).
    
    Not long thereafter, we got a new group manager (i.e. my boss' boss'
    boss). He declared a certain morning "Breakfast with Tom *." Fresh and
    glowing from TFIII we attended and were taken into Tom's warm, empathic
    embrace, when he turned his chair around and said, "Now please; tell me
    how you really feel about how we are doing our job in this group." I
    was one who, warmed by the vibes from TFs I, II, and III, told Tom*
    what I thought. Tom warmly thanked me.
    
    Several days later ... my boss' boss (who had not been at the breakfast
    meeting), called me into his office, closed the door, and then spent 15
    or 20 minutes shrieking at me, purple-faced, about telling Tom honestly
    how well I thought we were doing our job. He warned me not to ever tell
    anyone, anywhere, ever again, anything about our group, whether I was 
    asked to or not. 
    
    This gentleman had, like me, been to the TF Series.
    
    You learn what you live.
    
    
    * not his real name, but a clever pseudonym
    

>    Several days later ... my boss' boss (who had not been at the breakfast
>    meeting), called me into his office, closed the door, and then spent 15
>    or 20 minutes shrieking at me, purple-faced, about telling Tom honestly
>    how well I thought we were doing our job. He warned me not to ever tell
>    anyone, anywhere, ever again, anything about our group, whether I was 
>    asked to or not. 
>    This gentleman had, like me, been to the TF Series.

    Proof positive TF is sorely needed.  So, the guy flunked.

    You misunderstand.
    
    Tom* went to my boss' boss and complained that I had told Tom what I
    thought -- after Tom had _asked_ me to tell him what I thought.
    
    There is no training anywhere to correct people like Tom.
    
    Tom single-handedly subverted any potential feelings of trust or
    comradeship by being JAPM.
    
    
    ken
    

    >by being JAPM.
    
    hello Ken, what does please JAPM means?
    
    thank you,
    \nasser
    

    Ken,
    
    No other person, irrespective of role, would even get past 30 seconds
    of screaming purple-faced at me.  Valuing differences or any other
    interpersonal skills training is not incompatible with individual
    assertiveness or even your rights as an individual.  Guys like that
    only get away with it because other people let them.  All you had to
    do was tell him to put it in writing and walk out the door.
    
    If you had, you wouldn't feel so bad about it now.  The manager who
    tried to do it to me was TFSOe'd after 17 years with DEC.  I'm still
    here.
    
    Colin
    
    
     

    re. .108:
    
    JAPM: Just Another Poisonous Manager
    
    
    ken
    

    re. .109:
    
    I did put this in writing, along with a number of other problems I'd
    had in that group. Personnel was called in. In response, "disciplinary 
    procedures" were started against me for "poor performance" and I had to 
    get a job in another group.
    
    Subsequently, I used the "open door" to try to resolve this and other
    issues. The door was slammed on my ... er ... 'hand.'
    
    The manager involved has been promoted several times since.
    
    Who's cynical?
    
    
    ken
    
                                                         

>    There is no training anywhere to correct people like Tom.

    Of course not... Tom has to correct himself!

    The best illustration of this I've ever heard says, when you want
    to change the world, start by drawing two concentric circles; the
    outer one represents the world and the inner one represents you.

    Start by changing the inner circle.

    I think the general drift is, that you can't FORCE someone to change by
    making them go to a "Touchy Feely" course.  The person has to WANT to
    change first.
    
    Even at that, some of the courses I've been to at Digital, left me
    feeling like I had wasted 2 or 3 days when I was done.  One course in
    particular, "Learning to Cope with Change" was very unproductive.  I
    thought the course material that we covered could have been done in 1/2
    day rather that 2-3 days (Breaks were excessively long, a lot of time
    in class was spent on small talk, etc.).  I didn't feel any more
    equipped to deal with change after I had taken the course, than before
    I took it (And I went to the course WANTING to pick up some techniques
    on dealing with change).  
    
    I believe that if management perceived they were getting a payback for
    a lot of these courses, then they would be willing to continue with
    them.  I think part of the problem is that its tough to change a life
    time of patterns in a 2-3 day course (especially when the time during
    the course is used less than productively).
    
    Bing

    The best way to Cope with Change is to be Qualified in as Many
    Different Lines of Work as Possible.	8')
    
    
    kbs
    

    Question:  Are the courses .. like "Understanding the Dynamics of
    Difference" .. indeed "gone"?
    
    Bubba

My personal opinion is that these courses are a waste of time and money, and
have absolutely NOTHING to do with the business world.

I'm hired to do a job. It is MY responsibility to grow, learn, mature, and
live my life as I see fit. It is NOT DEC's task to teach me someone
elses's concept of manners, inter-relationships, etc. If these become part
of my job and I am deficient, then I had better shape up on my own, or
leave because I don't agree, or get fired or moved because I cannot do the job.
If people don't agree with my personal views - that's their priv, but it is
not their place to make me or others accept such things. It's not a
requirement that you "agree" with someone's social views to get a job done.
Simply maturity and professionalism BETTER be enough.

DEC is my place of work -- not my home or my parents. I receive a salary and
medical benefits for performing tasks that this company desires. If I
make friends here, all the better. But it is NOT anyone's place to enforce
politically popular values on me. In fact, because of my religious choices,
they would often come in conflict.

It does NOT help me become a better support person or programmer to
take these courses, and this is my desired job. I took one of these things
once, and what I got out of it was a methodology to label or catagorize
people (basically pre-judging them in an instant), so I could "in turn"
use certain approved methods of manipulating the relationship to my
advantage. The is *NOT* what I consider a good value. I will now always refuse
to take such a course. If I feel I need help in an area - I'll take such a
thing on my own as a personal growth goal - not an employment requirement.
If DEC wants to help me select and pay for something I think would be
worthwhile, that's a different matter.

I am reminded of Saturday Night Live's "Guy Smiley" character, who has
been convinced that he needs to change to be "good" to such a degree, that
he's a member of multiple 12-step programs, and is the most screwed up
person you've ever seen.

RE: .116

	Nope, that's Stuart Smalley...  But that's....OK..

						mike

    re .116
    
    What if DEC's customer base changed so that we were now dealing with
    Japanese customers 50% of the time (or Moslems or Chinese or Martians)? 
    It would be prudent to train you to deal with these people if your
    background did not adequately prepare you for it.  And, for the most
    part, our university training has NOT prepared us to deal with non
    Western cultures.
    
    If you knew your stuff technically, the company would want to prepare
    you to deal with a new customer base with a non technical cultural
    class.  I would.

Some of these "touchy-feely" courses have some value.  It's not appropriate for
someone to have to attend one of them in lieu of a badly-needed technical
course.  We all have a small amount of time per year for training.  The training
we attend should be that of most value.

Paul

    
.116<< he's a member of multiple 12-step programs, and is the most screwed up
.116<< person you've ever seen.
    
       Flame On
       (Deleted)
       Flame Off

       By making the above statement you appear to be instantly pre-judging 
       people who are trying to improve/better themselfs.  Exactly the
       thing you are complaining about in the following statement.
    
.116<< once, and what I got out of it was a methodology to label or catagorize
.116<< people (basically pre-judging them in an instant), so I could "in turn"
    
    
    

    Doesn't all of this boil down to:  "If the course isn't of value to you
    on the job, don't take it.  If it is, then do so."  A course type
    (touch-feely or technical) isn't inherently good or bad.  Many have
    taken courses like Investment in Excellence and walked away saying that
    it made a major difference in their professional and personal lives. 
    Obviously it worked for them, while it didn't for others, especially
    those who were forced to take it.)  If your priority is taking a
    technical course, then that's what you should be doing.  Other people
    have different priorities and a different set of needs on the job.  One
    of the complaints registered here was about a manager who betrayed a
    trust (Breakfast with Tom), who badly needed the skill set, but clearly
    hadn't integrated it into his own behavior.  He was not walking the
    talk, a very common problem.  It takes a long time to do change.
    
    It should be noted that Saturn has implemented Steven Covey's 7 HABITS
    OF HIGHLY EFFECTIVE PEOPLE and credits it with much of their success. 
    Since they produce the highest ranking American car on the JD Power
    Survey, perhaps there's something there we ought to be looking at.  In
    this note, Covey's work wouild be classified as "touchy-feely" and
    therefore not be offered at Digital.
    

    By the way, should this notes file be eliminated?  It's touchy-feely.

    >By the way, should this notes file be eliminated?  It's touchy-feely.
    
     GET OUT OF HERE !!
    
    \nasser

    So, how are you defining touchy-feely?

    .-1

    Hi Donnellan, i had my tongue in my cheeks. you dont really have to get
    out of here if you dont to. you are an ok dude.

    >So, how are you defining touchy-feely?

     humm, good question, i think i define touchy filly courses is where
    you learn to get in touch with your self, deep down inside, and
    about other DECeees feelings and why they are different from you, and that
    it is ok that they are different and how to get along with DECeees
    around you .
    
    i never been to one so i can't be for like sure, but i know they are 
    good for you.

    hope this helps.

    hang in there.
    
    \bye
    \nasser
    

.125> ...i think i define touchy filly courses is where you learn to
.125> get in touch with your self, deep down inside...

In that case, I define USMCRD (United States Marine Corps Recruit Depot),
Parris Island, South Carolina .. as a "touchy-feely" course.

.125> i never been to one so i can't be for like sure, but i know they are 
.125> good for you.

Too busy taking technical courses to go to these ... "courses"?

Bubba

    RE: 121 the Sature example.
    
    That's different, they believe in it.  It is part of everything they do
    every day.  Employees are rewarded for behaving in a manner consistent
    with the 7 habits.  Managers behave that way.  It kind of binds their
    corp. culture together and provides a yardstick by which behavior and
    decisions can be measured.
    
    We used to have such a yard stick.  It was the corp. philosophy.  Since 
    that was discarded, we have had no way to measure behavior.  If the
    objective of these courses was to bind together our beliefs as a corp.
    entity, or to spell out the rules we were expected to live by at work,
    I would think them well worth the time.
    
    That, however, is not the case. (re the "breakfast with TOM" example). 
    The courses are just empty words.  You go to the course, listen to the
    words, and (in the case of investment in excelence) you may feel
    inspired for a day or two.  Then you return to your job.  If you try to
    practice what you where taught, you get stepped on (or screamed at). 
    You see that the reality is not consistant with the things discussed in
    the class.  Do the right thing, and you end up being labeled as
    uncooperative, a trouble maker.  I speak from a lot of experience.
    
    Judy (the uncooperative trouble maker)
    

    To those that don't like the touchy feely stuff....it may be
    interesting for you to read some of the research that strongly suggests
    that organizations are socio-technical systems and that you cannot
    optimize one aspect of the organizations and ignore the other.  A group
    of brilliantly technical people put together in a room are going to be
    less effective every single time than the same group if they were put
    through some kind of team/group dynamics/touchy feely stuff.  This is
    what we keep preaching to our customers every single day...technology
    is not the answer but is a part of the solution.
    
    I am surprised at some of the rhetoric in here...I am not defending
    every single touchy feely course but do believe that most of them add
    as much value as any of the other courses.  There are obviously
    exceptions and a debate about specific instances might be more
    valuable.
    
    Dalip

    Is anyone aware of what our competition (IBM, Sun, HP, etc ...) does in
    this area of the so-called "touchy-feely" courses?
    
    Bubba

    
    Re; .129.
    
    Good question. I can see IBM spending the money, but somehow the
    notion of Scot Mcnealy's or Bill Gates' employees spending their
    time at these courses is hard to picture.  
    
    Glenn

    when i worked at EDS there was a touche feely courses too, i took one of
    them about customer feelings and communications and how to approach them 
    from human side point of view, in one exercise, one EDSeer stand in 
    front of the class and describes a geometric shape that only he was
    looking at , he describe it in words only and we try to draw it
    down on paper and at the end we see if you got it close to the correct
    one, and i am proud to say that i was the only dude to get it right too! 
    the nice teacher told us this is an exercise to teach you good verbal 
    communications in describing things to others .

    i liked the course , it was more fun than the techee's courses .
    
    this was in 1989. 

    \bye
    \nasser

re Note 2480.128 by POBOX::RAHEJA:

>     This is
>     what we keep preaching to our customers every single day...technology
>     is not the answer but is a part of the solution.
  
        So, how have our customers been doing lately?

        Bob

    	We're trying to help them get over their guilt for abandoning us to
    buy products from HP and Sun. We're even jumping right in there and
    helping them migrate away from our products to show what good sports we
    are. They're really happy. They feel warm and fuzzy all over. And I
    sleep better at night with a clear conscience knowing that we did the
    right thing by helping others, standing on firm moral ground. Pay no
    attention to that HP sales guy standing behind you about to cut your
    throat.