Conference 7.286::digital

    Ah...

    It wasn't the absence of leadership, poor strategy, and lack of focus
    that is the source of Digital's problems.

    It seems that Digital acquired since 1988, a uniquely stupid, arrogant,
    and ineffective sales force.

    It's gotta be true.  Would Digital's senior management distort what
    customers complained about at DECUS?  Would they have another agenda?
    
    You be the judge.

re: .0

>    Digital Equipment Corp. plans to bring its top 800 sales and marketing
>    managers together for three days starting July 7.

Gosh, that oughta start off the Q1 expense picture with a bang . . . 

-Jack

    What about the salespeople who are not in the top 800? Aren't they the
    ones who need the most help? Think about it. If one is a top
    salesperson one is probably highly motivated and well skilled. That 
    doesn't describe people who are a problem. What is being done 
    to turn around the problem sales people? Or are we just TFSOing the
    people not in the top 800?

    			Alfred

    Maybe that's all who will be left 
    
    
    and then there were 800......
    
    -sandy
    

    >What about the salespeople who are not in the top 800? Aren't they the
    
    The meeting is for salesMANAGERS.

    Re .-1
    
    You didn't read .0 in enough detail it said "800 Sales and Marketing
    MANAGERS"
    
    Maybe this is the problem. Too many chiefs and not enough indians.
    
    What I find sad is that people continue to dump on the sales force.
    Folks they're NOT the problem. The problem is that they have no
    leadership and no infrastructure they can use so that they can actually
    go out and sell. They have the spend too much time working internal DEC
    bureacracy and process.
    
    Lately I have been talking to actual sales people a LOT. I'm an
    engineering manager and my group in the last year released a new
    product set. So I took it on myself to get close to the customer and
    actually HELP the sales force sell a complex but high margin product
    set (3270 Connectivity). Each week I get told who in the USA has quoted
    my product set. Immediately those sales reps get an electronic mail
    message from me detailing exactly what resources there are available to
    help close the sale and the offer of my engineering group's support if
    necessary. Many of the sales reps I subsequently talk to to have told
    me how much they appreciate receiving information they can use rather
    than generic marketing bullshit sent to galatic distribution lists.
    In talking to these sales reps I use the opportunity to understand the
    problems they're facing in the hope that I can do things even better in
    the future. Typical problems are:
    
    	1, Inability to obtain accurate information quickly.
    	2, Processes that don't work
    	3, Lack of corporate focus
    	4, No local technical sales support (they're all being TFSOed while
    	   the golfing managers protect each others asses).
    
    I have yet to speak to a sales rep who I consider to be a bozo. In
    general they've done their homework when they call me and are focused
    on selling. They seem to know how to do it too. Pity so many roadblocks
    are placed in their way.
    
    Oh yes I do have one complaint about the sales force. When I want
    something from them they never return my mail messages. I'm trying to
    get reference accounts established. My guess is helping me do this
    falls off the bottom of the list. Understandable in these times but
    frustrating.
    
    The ire of Palmer and crew should be focused on the bloodsuckers
    sucking up all the G&A money on the SG&A line on the balance sheet.
    A an excellent FIXED cost that could be zapped right down.
    
    Dave

   This may be more than just Sales and Marketing managers.  District
   service managers have some mandatory (read: cancel your vacation if
   you have to) meeting in early July.  I suspect they will be attending
   as well.

    Maybe 800 will attend and x00 will return th the field ?
    
    Just a thought,
    
    \bill

    I've been with Digital sales for the past 9 and 1/2 years and continue
    to confirm for myself the lack of management leadership/direction
    within this company.  I have over my career with DEC enjoyed much
    success as well as failure.  What I have experienced over these years
    is that Digital, unlike so many other companies, have no "Sales
    Managers" but rather "Sales Administration Managers".  What can we
    expect when goals are set up such that managers are asked to carry out
    top management directives and have no ability to make on-the-spot
    changes within the field when these directives end up being
    roadblocks to sales.
    
    The top management of this company continues to not accept
    responsibility for the problems we are experiencing.  As we continue to
    stutter along, the field is TSFO'ed and the people deciding on the cuts
    remain.  As KO said years ago, management is responsible for the
    performance of this company.  And look what happened to him. 
    
    The article in .0 details customers complaining about sales reps and
    how one director for Rhodes College in Memphis "had to buy Sun
    Microsystems, Inc. workstations after being an all-DEC shop in large
    part because of a weak sales job by DEC"
    
    I'm sure that with a little digging in to this account you may find
    that DEC management had no rep assigned directly to the account or you
    may find that a rep was assigned, but the account had a history of such
    low annual purchase volume that a distributor needed to be assigned. 
    This results in the DEC rep not being focused on that account because
    of measurement goals established at the beginning of the year and the
    distributor waits for the order to just appear.  Or the order turned
    out to be two SUN units being sold at 75% discount.  Hard for the
    customer to pass that up.  My point is that a little investigation
    usually reveals the truth.  Something we don't care to face.  
    
    This is not an uncommon event.  I have experienced this all too many
    times and when these negative comments come from a customer, everyone
    tries to find someone else to blame.  The blame almost always is
    directed down the food chain.  Which brings us back to BP's statement
    describing his sales force as "probably the least productive in the
    world, fundamentally because they're not well prepared."  I, for one,
    take exception to this statement.
    
    Enough for now...
    

    Dave

	You hit the nail on the head, I'm tired of people dumping on 
    the sales force. Granted there are some who shouldn't be in sales,but
    the majority of sales reps. that I've worked with are good/hard working
    people. The systems they have to use are terrible, talk about a loss
    of productive usefull time in front of the customer!

	Don't start dumping on the sales force, they're not the majority
    of the problem, everyone in this corporation needs to share the blame
    in whats hurting DIGITAL right now!

    Rick 

    
>>    Digital Equipment Corp. plans to bring its top 800 sales and marketing
>>    *MANAGERS* together for three days starting July 7...
>>
>>    Palmer blamed the sales shortcomings on a "*MANAGEMENT* failure"...
    
    The *EMPHASIS* is mine. Dare one hope that Bob really understands the
    *SOURCE* of the problem, and intends to address it directly??
    
    (BTW, I'm a software engineer, and I would have rejoiced mightily had I
    seen a similar article with "software" substituted for "sales" in the
    first two paragraphs.)
    

    The problem is not the sales force. When 64 mbytes of memory cost
    $8000.00 list (for an ALPHA) from Digital and $2350.00 from a third 
    party, well you figure it out. Most customers already have.
    
    Regards,
    
    Ray 
    

    
    Re.last
    
    They ALL have it figured out.  

    When Bob Palmer took over this company and started laying off people
    and cutting costs, he promised that great changes were going to be
    made rapidly, and that Digital the company would be going through a
    massive transition.
    
    Almost twelve months later, many changes have been made, people laid
    off, and costs cut. The company is indeed going through a transition.
    
    Why does it now come as a surprise to him that massive change and
    massive cost cuts have caused massive problems?  Maybe he should try
    a simple experiment:  Try changing the valves on a car engine and
    removing half of the pistons, while the engine is still running at
    full speed.  
    
    I'm not saying that we did not have problems before:  we did in spades.
    Support systems have been failing for years, the Sales force spends
    most of it's time fighting internal blocks, and Sales Management has
    lost all understanding of what the customer expects from us. But all
    of the shotgunning and political musical chair games have just made
    matters worse, not better.  I cannot identify a single positive
    solution that has been put in place this year to help a sales rep 
    do his job better, manage customer expectations, or improve customer
    satisfaction.  And that is the bottom line.
    
    Geoff

    re. .10
    
    ah kurt. slow day? as usual tho you hit the nail on the head. as did
    mr. garrod as follows:

Note 2543.7 by SMAUG::GARROD 
    
    >What I find sad is that people continue to dump on the sales force.
    >Folks they're NOT the problem. The problem is that they have no
    >leadership and no infrastructure they can use so that they can actually
    >go out and sell. They have the spend too much time working internal DEC
    >bureacracy and process.
    
    BINGO!!
    
    Lately I have been talking to actual sales people a LOT. I'm an
    
    >Many of the sales reps I subsequently talk to to have told
    >me how much they appreciate receiving information they can use rather
    >than generic marketing bullshit sent to galatic distribution lists.
    
    BINGO! BINGO!
    
    
	>. Typical problems are:
    
    	>1, Inability to obtain accurate information quickly.
    	>2, Processes that don't work
    	>3, Lack of corporate focus
    	>4, No local technical sales support (they're all being TFSOed while
    	>   the golfing managers protect each others asses).
    
    BINGO. BINGO. BINGO.
    
    >I have yet to speak to a sales rep who I consider to be a bozo. In
    >general they've done their homework when they call me and are focused
    >on selling. They seem to know how to do it too. Pity so many roadblocks
    >are placed in their way.
    
    they are people to. and for a very long time have been paid reasonably
    well but treated little more than corporate second citizens. same with
    sales support, of which there is very little left.

	I was told from someone who was at DECus and heard Bob's talk
	that Bob corrected himself and said that sales MANAGEMENT needs
	to be fixed and he's going to do that.. I believe that he may
	have also pointed out the 6 tiers or so of MANAGEMENT in
	the sales dept.

	Like Burns said, maybe 800 go and x00 return. One could always
	hope.

							mike

    
	
	re Note 2543.11 by GLDOA::CUTLER 

>	Don't start dumping on the sales force, they're not the majority
>    of the problem, everyone in this corporation needs to share the blame
>    in whats hurting DIGITAL right now!


	Yes, we agree. The problem is that the 'blame' is not being shared
	equally in the corporation.

	John
    

    Really, two things are being discussed here.  A internal announcement
    which no one saw outside of Digital, and an article in COMPUTERWORLD
    read by 120,000 people which really knocked the Digital sales rep.
    
    How would you feel after shielding Digital from the customer's wrath.
    
    I'm sorry, but...
    I'm sorry, but...
    I'm sorry, but...
    
    Now, it's time to shoot the messenger.
    
    Pat Sweeney

    re: .7
    
    >Inability to obtain information....
    
    Why make them work for it?  Why not *publish it* right from the get go?
    
    Why not give them all the information they need when the product ships.
    After all this time, you would think that the PCU people would KNOW
    what the sales force needs to sale their product.  GIVE IT TO THEM.
    
    

    In my nine years of selling at Digital, I've consistently asked for:
    
    * information that is accurate, timely, and easy to get to.
    * information that is complete (and doesn't lead to phone calls 
      to some Hot-line to clarify WHAT WAS REALLY MEANT)	
    * information that is contained IN ONE SOURCE (not the 
      multiplicity of sources now: Sales Update, DECdirect, Systems
      and Options, Network Buyer's Guide, Product Bulletin, Software
      Price Book, Systems Price Book, Services Price Book, etc. etc.
      ad nauseam.
    
    Of the 10 sales managers I've had in 9 years (no exaggeration),
    only one understood what I was talking about; he is no longer with
    the company.  The rest are simply too far removed are too caught 
    up in other, "more important" issues.
    
    I even suggested that the reason we have Hot-lines in this company
    is because of the sorry state of information flow.  What great job 
    security.
    
    LET'S FIX THE REAL PROBLEMS IN THIS COMPANY!

Attached is a verbatim transcript of the audience question and of 
the Bob Palmer remarks that are in question.

While I may be biased, I think that it is pretty clear that Bob is
explicitly saying it is not the fault of the sales force, but of the
company's management.  IMHO, here's the pertinent excerpt:

   "Now, our sales force is perhaps the least productive in the
   world -  fundamentally because they are not well prepared.

   "They don't know what it is that management is trying to do.

   "This is a management failure - this is not a failure of our
   sales force - this is not a failure of our engineering, or
   other good people at Digital.

   "This is a management failure, an unwillingness to focus.

   "It's management.  It's my responsibility to fix it, but it
   is going to take more than an afternoon."


    

                        A verbatim excerpt from:

    QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS WITH BOB PALMER AT DECUS ON JUNE 08, 1993


AUDIENCE QUESTION:

    For all DEC wants our business, DEC is a hard company to do business
    with.

    Communication internally is very poor.

    Marketing is stabbing sales in the back and vice versa.

    And the administrative people are doing their best to chop off
    everyone at the knees.

    Do you see that as a problem? What are you doing about it?


BOB PALMER'S ANSWER:

    That's a serious problem and it's common to anybody doing the kind
    of transformation that we are doing.

    We're more guilty, I think, than many. I mean its not an accident
    that every analyst, nearly, that writes about Digital extols the
    quality of our engineering - you know, talks about how competent we
    are in that space, and pans our marketing effort because we never
    had a clear message - nobody understands  what it is.

    Now, our sales force is perhaps the least productive in the world - 
    fundamentally because they are not well prepared.

    They don't know what it is that management is trying to do.

    This is a management failure - this is not a failure of our sales
    force - this  is not a failure of our engineering, or other good
    people at Digital.

    This is a management failure, an unwillingness to focus.

    It's management.  It's my responsibility to fix it, but it is going
    to take more than an afternoon.

    One of the first fixes, and the hardest thing to find was the person
    to lead that effort.

    I interviewed more people for the worldwide position of Worldwide
    Sales and  Marketing Vice President at Digital than any other
    position in my entire career.  And, having found the person I
    thought was best, I did more background checks personally, never
    mind the search firms - personally calling and talking to folks
    than any other individual I've ever hired.

    And the issue was to bring focus to our marketing messages so that
    you as customers understand where is it we're going so you can plan
    your businesses - so our sales force can communicate that to you
    in confidence.

    Ed's been on board about 6 to 7 weeks. We're having a worldwide
    meeting - 7th, 8th, and 9th of July - bringing in 800 of our top
    sales management people.

    We're going to talk to every member of that senior leadership team -
    that is every member of the functions and the business units, and
    myself - Ed Lucente - and  we're going to start a new focus on
    marketing and messages and address the issues that you've raised.

    I see those as the most urgent for us to fix - in terms of driving
    profitable  growth in the future.  As you know, the company has been
    losing a lot of money in the past - last year, we lost 2.8 billion
    dollars, which is a huge number by any circumstance.

    But, while I've got the chance, I want to mention to you that we are
    still very strong financially. We've been reducing our losses
    dramatically in the last 8  months.

    Many of the analysts think that we'll go into the black this quarter
    - in my  position I can't make forecasts of any kind around that
    subject - but the  analysts have been pretty accurate in the last 3
    quarters. We are stemming those losses and we have a very strong
    balance sheet - debt to debt plus equity is one of the lowest in
    the industry, so financially we're very sound but we need to grow
    the business.

    We can't cost cut our way into the future...

    We have to do it...

    We've got to grow the business - to grow the business we have to
    solve the problems you've raised.

    There is no one else that's responsible other than management. We've
    got to fix it.

    I hope that the next time I address you, hopefully a year from now,
    most of that will be behind us. It will not get fixed in an
    afternoon.

    You know the style of company that we've had where there is so much
    empowerment and so much ability for each person to do his or her own
    thing - and most of which I want to keep.  We don't want a
    bureaucratic, stifling environment at Digital Equipment. 

    But, we still need to provide a framework and a general
    understanding from top management down, what we are trying to
    accomplish so that our marketing messages and our sales force can be
    consistent, and professional, and competitive.

    re .21
    
    You probably touched the biggest individual area of waste in this
    company. Just think about, how many hours is spent in writing all this
    information. Then us, who need to understand, what is the current
    state of products, spend even more time to cross check all these 
    different sources - if we find them. And of course, one mesure of
    the quality of a speci�alist is, how well he/she knows, where the
    information can be found. ...and then we pretend, that we make good
    use of our excellent worldwide network.
    
    --Ritva

    RE: .22 I suspect that many could and would argue details about where
    the fault lies or what things are wrong. However, this line:

   "It's management.  It's my responsibility to fix it, but it
   is going to take more than an afternoon."

    makes me feel somewhat encouraged. BP is accepting responsibility for
    fixing the problem. He acknowledges that there is a problem and that 
    senior management is responsible for fixing it. No pushing off the
    blame or making excuses. I like that.

    			Alfred

    re: .24   Me too!  Took the words right out of my fingers ...
    
    Steve

    whatever bob palmers intentions with his remarks about the sales force
    what has happened is not good. bob, as i understand it, it a shrewd,
    intelligent, disiplined businessman that knows how to address audiences
    and the press. KO was, unfounded IMO, blasted by the press for not
    being such. perception being what it is, fair or not, many people in
    sales feel the top man just creamed them. 
    
    i wonder just how low morale can go?

    That's most unfortunate.  It wasn't what he said, as .22 indicates. 
    Palmer simply echoed what the sales force has been screaming about - no
    support, lack of clear direction, disjointed product set, etc., etc. 
    Finally someone at the top acknowledges the problem, its effects, and
    owns up to the responsibility to change it.  

    
    I'd like for the person who said "administration does it's best to cut
    off everyone off at the knees" would be assigned to work the position
    for a year.  They then might be a bit more sympathetic to what goes on
    there and the regulations we have to adhere to as well as the tools
    which we have to work with.
    
    
    Mike (who has been part of administration for 7+ years and is sick of
    being the scapegoat for the lack of knowledge of others)

    >the regulations we have to adhere to as well as the tools
>    which we have to work with.

    Those things are as much a part of "administration" as the people who
    work there. Perhaps more so. If the regulations and tools you use are
    getting in the way of making it easy to sell and support customers than
    "administration" deserves some of the blame. If you can't do anything
    about it but complain to your managers and you are doing that I'm sure
    people understand. While you can ask people to be sympathetic to your
    plight, from your own words, it sounds like complaining about the 
    administration organization is justified.

    		Alfred

    Ok Ok so I haven't read all the replies yet, but...
    
    1) DIGITAL HAS A TERRIBLE SALES FORCE.  
    
       One salesman is a salesperson, two salesmen are a team, three or
    more become a force and a force needs 'management', i.e. Leadership,
    Direction and Motivation.  Our 'sales force' is a sales farce because
    Digital Has No Sales Management.
    
    Proof:  Proof is always the bottom line, so here's one:
    
    Pathworks can do anything Novell can do.  Pathworks can do things
    Novell can't do.  Pathworks costs <= Novell.  (First dip that whines
    "but you need a $40,000 VAX to start pathworks is to be SHOT!  Vaxen
    start at $4,995.  Most Novell servers a b-i-g Compaqs running over
    $10K.)  Novell not only exists, it leads the market.  So...
      - The product is better
      - the product is not more expensive
      - The product is deliverable (today and with short notice)
      - The product isn't selling.
    Because:  NOBODY'S SELLING IT!
    
    There are other 'proofs' available on request.
    
    How to fix things:  Genuine no-holds-barred LOSS REVIEWS!
    
    Where:  If a rep has blown it he gets sh*t.
            If marketing didn't come through they get sh*t.
            If management has failed they get sh*t.  
    
    It doesn't take a genius to see who'll be able to start a farm...
    
    

    Gee that sounds so simple.  Maybe when the present sales force leaves
    you'll be able to show the new ones how simple it really is?  Or maybe
    you'll be able to 'carry the bag' also?
    
    cw

    Re .30
    
    Should we perhaps start a "Golden Fleece" award note string ?  This
    sounds like a prime candidate.
    
    

    
    If 1., Digital' sales force is so bad, and 2. The quality of the sales
    force has this much impact on the success of a product, then:
    
    Somebody should notify Novell that they can stop their marketing
    campaign.  Their sales force is so much better that they will win
    without advertising or trade shows. 
    
    We should bring back the sales people from 1986-1990 when we were
    kicking butt in the market place.  Apparently these people are all
    gone, since we are getting different results now.
    
    Then again, there is another possibility.  We may be getting
    out-marketed.  naaah, that couldn't be it.  It has to be the sales
    people.

    I have been in sales for 7 years at DEC. I have exceeded my budget
    every year including the present year. I have never respected my
    managers at DEC ( I have had four plus one district manager ) because
    they have never taken any sincere interest in the business I was
    working and therefore they could not possibly have done any effective
    coaching. Sales management at DEC is a conduit through which sales reps
    provide forecasts. I was TSFOed this past Monday.

    Reply .30
    
    PATHWORKS can NOT do anything Novell can do. PATHWORKS can NOT provide
    FAST file services (it is SIGNIFICANTLY slower). There are MANY DOS
    applications which REQUIRE Novell either because they are written for
    Novell hooks or require the faster speed Novell provides.
    
    While I don't have personal experience in installing Novell, I have
    heard that it is SIGNIFICANTLY easier to set up.
    
    These are REAL issues faced by sales/sales support out in the field. We
    are not asked to blindly spout marketing fluff - we are asked REAL
    QUESTIONS about REAL ISSUES.
    
    The reason that a Digital product is not the market leader is NOT
    ALWAYS the sales force.
    
    Pat

    Here's a viewpoint from Asia. I joined Digital 5 years ago because of
    its tremendous engg. reputation and as a fair employer. Now I'm much
    more worldly-wise.
    
    Digital was built by idealists who thought everyone would be dedicated
    and humane like them. So they didn't worry too much about the kind of
    people being recruited, organisation structures and top-down
    goaling and so on. It's been a beautiful place for people who are
    cunning and manipulative, who add very little value of their own but
    just manage by controlling resources and hiding information artfully.
    I've never been in a brainstorming session called by my manager! It's
    always "Go out and bring business, and show us that you're earning your
    salary". And being in Marketing, I've felt terrible about the way we've
    let our Sales people down. 
                              
    Mr.Palmer's absolutely on the right track, but many of us may not be
    alive by the time he reaches us!

    re: .30 - You must be new here, management NEVER gets shot, sh*t, or
    whatever!

    Regarding .30:
    
    Loss Reviews are not the answer.  If you can't trust the management
    sitting in judgement, don't expect the blame to go anywhere but down. 
    Besides, who gets to do the loading of the gun?
    

    Re.35
    
    I think you missed the point...

    NOVELL vs Pathworks -  A Religous War -- I have a customer who  has
    zealots on both sides of the issue.  I have been in meetings where it
    has turned into a regular shooting gallery.  Clearly there are
    differences between Novell and Pathworks.  Some of it is good for DEC
    and some of it isn't -- Start-up, Performance, and SW availability are
    real knocks against PW.
    
    Regarding costs:  Enclosed is a pricing summary from my customer on
    Novell.  
    
    NCR 3445 486/33	14,100
      32 MB RAM
      SCSI Adapter
      2.8 GB Disk
      1.44 MB Diskette
      E-NET adapter
    
    Maynard DAT Backup	 2,450
    UPS			 1,000
    NOVELL NWARE
     (100 Users)	 4,219
    Mac NLM (100 USers)    350
    Novell NFS NLM	 3,270
    Intel Lanspool	   214
    Saber Menu System
     (100 Users)	 1,600
    
    		Total	27,293
    
    A PW client license goes for $205 per copy.  That  makes it $20,500 for
    that piece of the pie.  If I contrast that with the customer's pricing,
    I'm hard pressed to match costs -- NFS doesn't count.  Sooo, that means
    at best, the price comparison is $6,383 VS 20,500 -- a $14,117
    DIFFERENTIAL.  If the customer uses basic file and print services, it's
    tough to overcome the Zealot's position -- We have used NOVELL
    certified Engineers to pursue the issues to compare and contrast the
    offerings -- It doesn't matter -- It's a religous war at the techie
    level -- Business folks don't care except for costs -- If the Techie
    goes the the Business person and says:  "They do about the same job --
    Novell does things a little easier and there's more application
    software running on it.  Pathworks is real nice for a Wide Area Network
    and has more capability than Novell -- We wouldn't use it all, but it's
    there.  Pathworks costs $14,000 more than Novell.  Which one should I
    get?" 
    
    Wanna guess what the answer will be.
    
    Regarding the baseline on the quality of the sales force -- Hmmmm --
    I've been in sales for a long time -- When I interviewed at DEC 6+
    years ago, I told the person who interviewed me that DEC was going to
    hit the wall and I wanted to be there when it happened because therein
    lies opportunity -- I was right.
    
    The thing about DEC S/Rs is that they're farmers -- They plant their
    seeds and tend to the crops.  They keep the weeds out of the fields and
    they try to keep the varmints from eating their crops.
    
    It worked because DEC had a reasonable corner on the market -- I came
    to DEC from the role of a gun slinger in another company.  I had to
    transition to being a farmer -- It wasn't easy.  There's a role one
    must play.  Given that forever upper sales management was staffed by
    folks from the Services side of the organization (Read:  Never carried
    a saled bag and don't have a clue.), the farmer role was very
    comfortable -- Along came RISC -- Along Came UNIX  -- Hello -- Now I
    not only have varmits chewing on my crops, I have Gun slingers trying
    to take my land -- It ain't fair!
    
    The sales force needs to do two simple things:
    
    	1) Get pissed off
    	2) The gun slingers need to put down their shovels and holster up --
    
     Let the farm be tended by farm hands.  The thing about being a gun
    slinger, you have a very simple rule -- Those who live by the gun, die
    by it -- 
    
    Two things have happened to me:
    
    	I'm pissed off
    	I put my holsters back on and they feel good!
    
    The Street Peddler
    
    

    To those of you who thought/think .30 attacks individual salespeople,
    or salesPEOPLE in general, please believe that is NOT the case.
    
    It is whoever would do what was done to .35 and their firends, buddies
    and supporters.  If the guy can sell and Podunk doesn't need him (they
    have 80% market share and a full and happy staff) then there are other
    cities which do not have 80% market share that oculd use him.  If
    Digital chooses not to, then shame on them.
    
    

    
    Re: last (Don)
    
    No offense taken.  I am a Sales Exec on a very large account.  Here is
    an expansion of my response to your challenge in .30:
    
    A sales force can be no better than its marketing support.  Even a great
    salesman cannot overcome poor product concept, design, or marketing. 
    Of these three functions, the most important is marketing (see the IBM
    model for a wonderful example).  Quality of the sales force is often
    not an issue in the success of a product (see the Procter & Gamble
    model for an example of this).  
    
    DEC's sales force is one of the most aggressive around, despite all the
    distractions of the last two years, and despite unbelievable
    competition on both price and performance.  We have been out-hyped in
    almost every area of technology, and yet we have managed to maintain
    and even grow the business, despite bewildering drops in price/
    performance of our products.  
    
    When a baseball club starts losing, the manager is replaced.  More 
    attention is placed on the welfare of the players, and team-building 
    is instituted.  If the problem is training, the training program is 
    modified.  No one ever blames the players.  On the other hand, if 
    sales fall off, everyone blames the sales force.  No-one looks at the 
    management culture, no-one admits that there has been no product 
    training, and no-one wants to look at the appropriateness of the 
    product set.  Why is this?   
    

    In the term "sales force", I think sales management and marketing is
    included - if you think otherwise, then change the term from sales
    force to sales and marketing force or whatever suits you.  With .42 I
    agree, generally. 
    
    One bit, though, it seems when we meet a customer 'objection',
    particularly with early products, we say "Oh, sorry." and walk away. 
    We never come back - the Pathworks example is valid for this argument
    as well.  Yes, techies make religious wars out of things.  This aside,
    while it may be true that Netware 3.11 is easier to install and run
    than PCSA V1, it is not true of 3.11 versus Pathworks 4.1.  But we let
    ourselves be tarred early on.
    
    If we take the same line with, for example, Alpha, then the first day
    someone else does the leap-frog over us (about 8 months from now) we'll
    say "Sorry." again and go home.  I hope not.
    
    As another comment on sales PEOPLE.  I have worked for about 9
    different organizations in my way-too-long career, and only one cut
    sales positions - NSI Marketing.  They, too, wanted short-term savings. 
    The savings were never realized.  The company went broke.  Near the end
    payday was a race to the bank because only about 3/4 of the payroll was
    covered.
    
     

To give some marketing feedback on the technical comparisons between NetWare
and Pathworks.

Pathworks is targeted at Fortune 1000 companies. People need an investment in
Digital servers to bring out most of its added value. Novell is targetted
at small workgroups (installed base predominantly sub-20 PCs).

The average size of company in the UK, today, is 30 people and (like in every
other major industrial nation) is continuing to decline. Who's better 
positioned for future growth?
								- Ian W.

    
    re.30 -- Loss reviews
    
    
    Fully support loss reviews, but with a totally different intent to the
    one you describe.
    
    Object of loss reviews should be to learn how to do better next time,
    NOT to shoot the unfortunate members of the team. Exactly the same
    principle appleis in mandatory filing of aircraft incidents --
    intention is to add to the sum of knowledge & improve the whole pilot
    population, not to find a scapegoat to pillory. However, if the same 
    team/pilot fails more frequently than their peer group, there may be a
    performance issue to be understood..
    
    The association of loss reviews with blame is precisely why they are
    rarely held, or the lessons rarely published. How much better that the 
    causes of loss (price, performance, functionality, social skills, lack 
    of "incentives", poor presentation etc etc) were known, & appropriate
    corrective help given to the field -- whether as training, discounts,
    adjusted prices, robust software, or whatever is required.
    
    In one company I was with, I'd throw a party for the bid team when we
    had just submitted an RFP to say thanks, & to gather info on how strong
    we felt, & what we already knew we could do better next time. When we
    knew the outcome, we'd have another get-together as a wake or a
    celebration, & we would again (non-judgemently) review the position in 
    hindsight. Worked well for us, kept everyone motivated -- & improved 
    the quality of our bids next time. FWIW.
    
    
    Colin
    

    Walk away?  Walk away, did you say?
    
    In the intervening notes from .40 on, some interesting points were made
    -- I agree with the assessment that Sales can only sell what you have
    -- Further, the last couple of years have been ugly -- But to say --
    Walk away -- Gimme a Break -- I'm still fighting the Pathworks Novell
    War in this account -- The last PW we put in over Novell (In this
    FOrtune 500 account) was in an Anti-DEC camp.  The install of 4.1 was
    not as easy as Novell 3.11 --- BUT -- the customer likes the product,
    even though he wanted Novell -- I lost one Novell deal after that and
    I'm about to get another PW deal -- Think about this comment -- I'm
    talking about winning on low priced, low density commodity products --
    I shouldn't have to focus on this issue -- Novell doesn't have a direct
    sales force calling on end-users -Hmmm - Must be a good marketing
    message
    
    And anudder thing -- Someone mentioned Alpha within the context of
    walking away -- For the last two years, I've replace H/P Apollo with
    DECStations and it done for other reasons than the DECStations are
    faster than H/P -- It would have been easy to walk away -- Now that
    ALPHA is here, I discover that my little 64 MB box doesn't have enough
    memory to run efficiently -- Like 85% CPU idle time due to paging - DO
    I want to walk away?  Yeah I do -- BUT -- I can't - I hate to lose --
    WE had to fix that little technical problem with a business fix -- 
    
    In my office, I'd say most of us are fairly aggressive -- The Farm
    Hands have been put on the highway -- We are recovering from the
    mentality of the following little story:  I believe there is this
    little country club inside of DEC -- The "You help me, I'll help you"
    folks.
    
    A service type - Upper level moved into the area -- His significant
    other was also a DECie.  She moved out here with him and ended up in a
    Sales Position -- She had absolutely ZERO (maybe even less) sales
    experience!
    
    She was had the same account I had (She was an Installed Base Rep).  We
    went on a joint sales call to meet a person neither of us had met
    before.  We went through the preamble and overview routine and then she
    pulls out the 3 inch VMS Source Book and hands it to the customer.  She
    said:  Here's a book of software, why don't you look through it and
    when you see what you want, give me a call and we'll see what we can
    do."
    
    After the meeting, I asked her what her plan was if the customer looked
    through the book and didn't find anything of interest.  (Little message
    here, folks)  She didn't have a good answer because there aren't any. 
    Sooooo, then I asked her why she went into sales.  She said that she
    had been at DEC for 10 years and wanted to try something new.  She felt
    that it would be wonderful if she could help customers directly.  She
    was gushy about being fulfilled and all that stuff.  
    
    I'm sitting there thinking:  "What planet did she come from?"  Actually
    she came from Maynard -- Explains some things
    
    The point is that DEC has hired Secretaries, Field Service folks,
    Finance Folks, and others who don't have a clue -- I believe it stems
    from the Service Mentality of Upper Level Management in the Pre-BP days
    -- Don't need real sales folks -- Just need bodies -- The stuff sells
    itself and we know how to fix it when it breaks.
    
    Actually, I haven't seen an H/R rep move into sales -- Hmmm --Maybe
    that would be the right move  - They're pretty good at sales.
    
    Finally (Whew) -- It'd be nice to cut and run every time you hit a bump
    on the way to Nirvana -- BUT -- You can't and the Sales folks who I
    know don't.  If I had my druthers, I'd much prefer sitting on the aft
    deck of my second bad habit -- The USS Scurvy Queen swilling beer and
    contemplating why the lure at the end of my line ain't working.
    
    The Street Peddler

    re .46  I think you said it well.  The stuff sells ITSELF.  Times have
    changed........ the customers don't need DEC the way they used to.
    Customers used to need mainframe computers and the price didn't really
    matter much because there wern't many alternatives to DEC or IBM.
    
    Now, customers can buy a desktop work station from many many
    vendors for a fraction of the price that a VAX costs.  And we 'wonder'
    why our sales fell off the cliff.  The economy DROVE DEC before.  Its
    changed.  Now we have to SELL our products at competative prices
    instead of having the customers beating down our doors to buy our
    equipment.
    
    I believe our quality is still there. But the customers are perciving
    more bang for the buck from our competitors.
    
    Jeff

    A new article has appeared regarding this in Information Week.
    
    It quotes Ed Stokes, network analyst for Citgo Petroleum Corp. in Lake
    Charles, La. "but sometimes the whole process of just giving them our money
    and getting delivery of the products makes you wonder if it's
    ultimately worth all the headaches."
    
    Dave Roberts "a user od DEC systems" at Verifone Inc. of Costa Mesa,
    Ca. "...sometimes it can take as long as six weeks to get one
    product that's been ordered.
    
    Now, I ask you, does that sound like a problem within sales rep's
    "empowerment"?
    
    Next the article quotes CEO Robert Palmer, "our sales force is the least
    productive in the world" for a non sequitur to the first three
    paragraphs.
    
    The "deliverable"? "making the sales process less bureaucratic and
    encouraging workers to be more agressive".  Earlier the article says
    this is the organization that Palmer has been putting in place since
    last fall.
    
    How do people assess the amount of progress against plan in this
    critical area?
    
    The big disappointment to me was the lack of candor of Palmer, Demmer,
    Giordano, and Christ in blaming it all on the sales reps and their
    "culture".

    I read a report from a workshop presented this summer at Carnegie-
    Mellon on managing change successfully in a company.  Change and 
    culture go hand in hand.  If you want to make a change in a company 
    without changing the culture, then you have to operate within that 
    culture.  If you want to make a change that doesn't fit the current 
    culture, then you have to first change the culture.
    
    I am not familiar with the culture of sales reps.  But, I strongly
    suspect that what customers are asking for is counter to the culture of
    those involved.  This is also why Bob Palmer is experiencing such
    frustration with management -- he has been asking them to make changes
    that conflict with their culture and their culture is going unchanged.
    
    "That's not how we do things at Digital ..."
    
    Steve

Re: .46  never walk away -Street Peddler

I conclude from reading your reply that you're good at what you do and that you 
treat every sale sopportunity as a battle you want to win.

The point about "walking away" is that sometimes a customer's situation is such
that the vendor who gets the business is doomed to fail.  We don't want to 
"win" such prizes.  What we need to do is quickly disengage ourselves (espec-
ially you good sellers), i.e., walk away, from beating some other good seller 
out of a deal that will cost us and engage you in one that we can make money 
on.

It's analogous to the prize fighter who will keep punching and punching, never
giving up, even if it kills him.

We don't have to win at all costs.  We have to pick our battles carefully, walk 
away from less- or non-profitable opportunities, and move on to the ones we can
win and make money at.


Re: .48 progress to plan  -Pat Sweeney

I see a continuing problem that's having a devastating effect: this self-
loathing I see in so many people.  Almost everyone walks around trying to see
who can out cynic the next.  Mr. Palmer needs to come up with something fast
- a profitable quarter might do it - to give people reason for hope.  Morale
is in the pits, the lowest I've ever seen in any collective group of people.


Bruce Langston in Los Angeles

    
    I found the attached pretty uplifting. I think it makes a lot
    of sense. and no I haven't bothered TOM to find out if I can post this
    memo. I looked through it and I can't see any really confidential
    information. I'm posting it here as a service to our readers to show
    that there are still some people around in high places that believe we
    can succeed.
    
    To the moderators please don't automatically hide or delete this
    posting because posting it here is against the letter of Digital
    policy. Yes I know what I'm doing is against P&P but quite frankly I've
    better things to do than track down permissions. If you don't like it
    being here track down the permission yourself or tell personnel to fire me
    or something. I'm using my good judgement. I of course would not post a
    mail message that contained stuff that I felt would cause the author or
    the company harm if it got outside the company.
    
    Dave

                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M

                                        Date:     16-Jun-1993 11:28am EDT
                                        From:     Tom Colatosti
                                                  COLATOSTI.TOM AT A1 at NEMAIL at NQO
                                        Dept:     Eastern States
                                        Tel No:   274-6584

TO: See Below

Subject: COMPUTERWORLD ARTICLE                                       

       ** PLEASE DISTRIBUTE THIS MEMO TO THE SALES UNIT MANAGERS **

I am sure many of you and your customers have seen the attached article 
from the recent edition of Computerworld.  While the sales force faces many 
challenges to remain competitive in a dynamically changing industry, it is 
clear to me that the author's conclusions are completely out of context 
with the quotes attributed to Bob Palmer and the customers.

The facts are that no company in the history of American business has grown 
from zero to $15B in revenues as quickly as Digital (let alone do it when 
prices were falling 30-40% per year); in one of the most competitive 
industries on earth; and against a competitor whose size was greater than 
the advantage any company in any industry enjoyed over their number 2 
competitor (GM/Ford; Boeing/McDonald Douglas; Coke/Pepsi, etc.).  
Furthermore, in 1988-1989 Digital was one of the top 10 most profitable 
companies in America.  Therefore, up until the last 3-4 years Digital was 
growing rapidly and was extremely profitable.  It is hard to believe that 
anyone could believe that Digital's sales force was not an integral part of 
that success.  It is equally preposterous for anyone to suggest Digital's 
recent profitability challenges are due to the "quality of the company's 
sales organization".

History will show the flat period Digital experienced in the late 
80's/early 90's was a result of three factors:

1.  Digital was slow in adopting RISC technology and therefore saw its VAX 
    architecture fall significantly behind the market in terms of Price and 
    Performance.

2.  Digital was slow in adopting the move to UNIX and was therefore 
    perceived as resisting the movement to "open systems".

3.  Digital was slow in adopting the move to personal computing.  We 
    virtually did not participate in a segment that now accounts for more 
    than $50B or one third of the industry spending.

Despite those three major handicaps, I believe it was the Sales 
Organization's dedication, energy, professionalism and commitment to the 
customer that has sustained the company.  It is clear to me that the power 
of our account relationships between our sales organization and our 
customers has been our greatest competitive advantage during this difficult 
transition.  I know this.  You know this.  Digital's senior management 
knows this.  And, more importantly our customers know this!  

Now for the really good news.  Remember the issues I described as being the 
problem?  They are fixed!!!  

1.  Our Alpha AXP technology is industry leadership.  We now out perform 
    all our competitors at every price/performance point.  

2.  Our commitment to OSF/1 UNIX, Open VMS, Windows NT is industry 
    leadership.  Digital, more than any other company, has helped unify 
    UNIX, adopt real standards, and offers a real choice of operating 
    systems.  

3.  Our leadership and success in PC's is obvious and widely acknowledged.  
    
So we have leadership products and technology; we are getting our costs 
down dramatically; we have an energized and competent Senior Leadership 
Team and, most importantly, we have an outstanding Sales organization!  
Digital is truly back!

We have a lot of work to do in the Sales organization.  Our training has 
been insufficient; our tools and systems have been poor and we need to 
deploy new selling models and methods to adapt to the industry change and 
varied customer buying behaviors.  However, don't let that confuse you on 
what we know about our selling organization.  You are competent, dedicated, 
energetic and professional.

As we get ready to enter FY94, I believe we are well positioned and have 
the potential to have one of our best years ever.  Sun has no architecture 
for the 90's, IBM can't see a world that is not dominated by mainframes, 
HP's technology has hit the wall and they don't have the services/solutions 
capability the market needs and the SI players generally lack our 
networking and integration capability.  Therefore, FY94 will see most of 
our competitors entering their transition cycle just as we emerge with 
leadership products, a customer focused organization, a loyal customer base 
and an aggressive sales incentive program!

I know you were vital to getting Digital to be a $15B company and I am 
confident you are going to be a vital part of getting Digital to the next 
$15B!

Thank you for your continued commitment and contribution to the company's 
success.

Regards,
Tom  

Subj:	Firing Up the Sales Force

    From Computerworld June 14, 1993
    
    PALMER VOWS TO FIRE UP DEC SALES FORCE
    
    By Craign Steadman
    Atlanta
    
    Digital Equipment Corp. plans to bring its top 800 sales and marketing
    managers together for three days starting July 7.  Given the barrage of
    complaints DEC executives faced at the Digital Equipment Users Society
    (DECUS) conference last week about the quality of the company's sales
    organization, it probably will not be a congratulatory meeting.
    
    Bluntly acknowledging the criticism, DEC Chief Executive Officer Robert
    Palmer described his sales forces as "probably the least productive in
    the world, fundamentally because they're not well prepared" - a comment 
    that drew applause from the user audience.
    Palmer blamed the sales shortcomings on a "management failure" and said
    it will "take more than an afternoon" to resolve the problems.  "Maybe
    a year from now, most of this will be fixed."
    
    User complaints about sales were not hard to find at DECUS.  Verifone,
    Inc., a Costa Mesa, Calif. maker of credit-card processing machines,
    got frustrated enough to have its sales representative removed from
    the account.  "We made a specific point of sayinmg, 'We still want
    Digital products, we just don't want to deal with Digital sales,'"
    said David Roberts, an information systems employee at the conference.
    Another user said his sales rep sold him a VAX6000 that would not run
    his version of the OpenVMS operating system and memory cards that did
    not fit into his workstations.  "You're just falling apart on us," he
    told a DEC official.
    L. Charles Lemond, director of the computer center at Rhodes College
    in Memphis, had to buy Sun Microsystems, Inc. workstations after being 
    an all-DEC shop in large part because of a weak sales job by DEC.  "You
    have to go down and beat on the door to get them to sell you a
    computer."
    Edward Lucente, DEC's new vice president of worldwide sales and
    marketing, is scheduled to present his plan for the sales organization
    at the July meeting in Boston, according to a spokeswoman.
    But others said that while responses are slower on noncritical matters
    and telephone support, major problems are still being handled to their
    satisfaction.  "In the past, they had some marginal people in field
    service," Lemond said.  "All those marginal people are gone now."

    A truly superb letter from Tom.  Thanks for posting it.  We need more
    of that kind of insight.	

    Aha -- The Palmer DECUS gambit -- I have the exact (Verbatim) Q&A with
    BP in front of me as I speak --- How's this: "...the least productive in
    the world - Fundamentally because they are not well prepared.
    
    They don't know what management is trying to do.
    
    This is a management failure, an unwillingness to focus."
    
    The rest of the comments relate to how serious he thinks the problem is 
    -- He says: "One of the first fixes, and the hardest thing to find was
    the person to lead that effort."
    
    Now for those of you who ain't bag carriers, that is a statement of
    substantial import.  I can't begin to tell you how it galls me to be
    led by someone who doesn't have a clue -- They talk the talk, but they
    sure as hell can't walk it.  Chick Shue with his five powerful messages
    was okay -- But then after that, it goes down hill to the extent I
    didn't even care who was driving the wagon.  We called Dave Grainger
    Grave Danger -- I saw Zereski on a DVN doing a song and dance and I
    said: " Nahhh!"  Now we have Neutron Eddie -- Great -- As I said
    before, you live by the gun, you die by it.  Tis exciting times -- I
    think BP and the FNGs are going to get the deal done.
    
    On a personal note -- to the guy from Ca -- Like the gambler, you gotta
    know when to hold them and when to fold them -- I am keenly aware of
    when to do that.
    
    Finally, an observation from the street peddler:   We gotta stop
    whinning and wasting mental cycles -- I discoverd how to use the Notes
    conferences just a couple of months ago because I needed to get past
    the Kabookie dance being done regarding Alpha -- Then I discovered all
    of these Notes conferences - Became addicted -- Became appalled -- I
    have never heard of so much bitching before.  In the past when we had
    VAX revenues, we had the time to do this -- The revenues aren't there
    -- ergo we don't have the time -- Remember -- Everyone likes to kick
    Digital -- It's been that way forever -- It's been said that DEC is a
    company everyone loves to hate.
    
    Why is that?  Who owns that image?  My guess is that there is no one
    answer --- There are many -- But you know what - Who in the hell cares? 
    I sure don't  - I don't have time to deal with that -- I run across a
    customer with that mentality and I look upon that person as a challenge
    -- I believe, from the beginning, that I am more intelligent that they
    are -- Think about it -- I made a career decision to work for Digital. 
    If Digital is as bad as they say, that has to make me pretty stupid --
    The fact is that my mother raised an UGLY child -- Not a stupid one.
    
    What do each of you think about that within the context of your career
    -- R U Stupid?  Did U do a stupid thing and go to work for a junk
    company?  I think not -- Soooo, if we can collectively get our attitude
    out of the dumper and look upon the stuff in front of us as an
    opportunity to kick some ass, life can be a lot of fun.
    
    The fact is I used to be an Electrical Engineer -- Skiied into a tree
    one day -- Suffered irreversible brain damage -- The company I worked
    for made me a sales guy -- Wanted to have me gainfully employed with my
    diminished mental capacity -- That means I can't have very many
    multiple threads in my thought process -- Soooo, I either think about
    my customer and my competition or life on the USS Scurvy Queen.
    
    I can't think about why the sky is falling or why fuzz grows in my
    navel.  Think about it!
    
    The Street Peddler

    My point about "culture" needs to be re-emphasized:  Culture is bunk.
    Blaming anything, but especially the culture of the sales reps for
    Digital's current state, is meaningless.

    The sales reps are close to the customer and are aggressive.  The
    problem has been the strategies and the products.  Tom Colatosti's
    memo is the first recognition of this I've seen outside of a Notes
    Conference or a conversation with another employee.

    Shue, Shields, etc. _suppressed_ the style, behavior, attitude, etc.
    that sales reps brought into Digital with them from being a customer or
    selling for another company like insisting on accountability and
    honesty.

    The sales reps want accurate delivery information, why shouldn't they?

    The sales reps want rational software pricing, why shouldn't they?

    The sales reps want profitable business for Digital, but with the
    perpetual inability to create a computer systems to track "business"
    and "profit", sales reps have followed the incentives they have been
    given.

    Look at what the articles are criticizing.  Can a sales rep change that
    by himself or herself?

Re:  .53
    
    "The company everyone loves to hate"  That should not be a surprise to
    anyone.  Just read through this notes conference.  Sit in on most of
    the senior manager presentations to customers....They are all quick to
    point out all the wrong things Digital did.  In effect, we train
    ourselves and our customers to focus in on all the negative
    stuff...Then we wonder why customers don't have a lot of respect for
    us.  We continously perpetuate that kind of thinking, both internally
    and externally.
    
    Now I know some of the naysayers will say that we must focus on all the
    bad stuff, point it out and adress it.  I agree.  But at some point, we
    have to get beyond that.  The external world is not as excited about
    Alpha as we had hoped perhaps because they have picked up the signals
    from us.  The external world is not as excited about the reorg in DEC
    because they have picked up the signals from us.  Like they say, a dog
    can smell fear when it confronts a person.  It is the same with us. 
    Customers and others can smell our fears and are quick to take advantage
    of it.
    
    I am not suggesting that we bury our heads in the sand and ignore what
    is happening around us.  We were faced with letting a large number of
    people go.  Ultimately, DEC handled that about as compassionately and
    as generously as is possible in today's climate.  I am sure there were
    cases where the wrong people were let go and cases where it was not
    handled well.  But look at it from an overall perspective.  Let us
    grieve for those that were let go....but then let's get on with life. 
    Instead of wallowing in self pity and grief sessions for those that
    were let go.  That is perhaps an area where DEC could have invested
    some attention...this whole area of helping the survivors get through
    these traumatic times.
    
    
    Folks, let's get on with our lives.  Let's boogie.  Let's rumble. 
    Let's bury our ghosts.  We have grieved enough for those that are no
    longer around and for the old DEC.  From everything that I read, we are
    positioned extremely well to take advantage of what is happening in the
    industry...as long as we can focus our energies externally.
    
    Whew!!!  Had to get that off my chest.
    
    Now, back to the naysaying.    
                        

    A person should only worry about those things that they can control.
    
    A reasonably slippery Sales person takes into account their living
    environment and adjusts for it.
    
    There are many things in this world that I can't control -- I can't
    spend cycles trying fix things I have no control over -- What's
    important is knowing that I have no control and advising management of
    the perceived problem.
    
    A story:  I used to work for a person who I hated like he was from the
    old neighborhood -- Even so, he was the best business person I ever
    worked for -- The man was verrrry good.  
    
    One day he had a meeting with his reports -- It was early in the AM --
    We walked into the conference room - It was dark and he was sitting in
    front of a Fake fireplace he had put in the front of the room --
    
    The purpose of the meeting was a "Fireside Chat."  
    
    During the meeting he talked about knowing about things you could
    control -- To emphasize the point, he handed out to each of us (and I
    still have it) a hammer handle about 14 inches long -- He said: " Each
    of you should only try to hammer problems down with what you have.  For
    those problems that you don't or can't control, you need to rely on the
    fact someone has a bigger stick to take care of it."  With that he pulled
     out a huge ax handle -- He said: 'This is mine -- Get the message." 
    
    
    The Street Peddler

    
    RE: .55
    
    I think you have somewhat missed the point.  Sure, we all greeeve a
    little for our fellow team mates that are no longer here.  BUT, that
    is not what is wrong.  The problem is that it doesn't make any
    difference if you are a 1 or 2 performer any more.  If you are in 
    the wrong place at the wrong time, ***you are history***  PERIOD!!!
    
    One has no way of knowing if THEY will be gone next month or not. 
    People are spending their time "looking-over-their-shoulder" afraid
    that they will be "hit" on the next round...and it is even worse now,
    the rags are saying layoffs will continue through 1994, and the
    package will be VERY small for any future TFSOs.
    
    So, you tell me, is the problem that we are morning for our lost
    team mates, or that we are (deap down), scared for ***our*** job.
    
    

    There are two ways to create profit:
    
    	o Control and cut expenses (Read TFSO)
    	o Sell more stuff
    
    As a group, which one of the above can we own?
    
    The Street Peddler

...looking over your shoulder and do your job!  It's what we pay you for!  Not
only that, but it will keep your mind off that over which you have no control.
Not only *that* "not only that" but this one, too:  If you're working and 
not looking over your shoulder, you'll be contributing to what we must believe
is the inevitable recovery of this company.

Maybe it's arrogance or conceit, maybe na�vet�, but I really was pretty 
confident that I'd survive the latest purge, and I did.  And I kept doing my
job, because it's what I'm paid for.

We may be rudderless, but we're not adrift.  We're moving with a powerful 
current called downsizing, client/server and systems integration (SI). We 
really have no choice about it.  Get with the program.

I'm not a pollyanna, I'm a realist.  Some of my friends were laid off, too.  
I also believe that some of the TFSO decisions were not good for the company.
I'm a database specialist by trade and have made myself a systems integration 
specialist because that's the current I could identify.

We all have a resposibility to earn our paychecks.  They may not be the highest
in the industry, but they're not "chicken feed" either.  Live up to your
responsibilities, do your part, look ahead, worry about and put your energy 
into something that will make positive impact.

We must change the tide of emotion from the downward negative spiral to a
positive move in one of the obvious directions we can.

Bruce

    A couple of things from one who just celebrated 10 years in Digital
    Sales.  Like Flying an airplane, the #1 thing you have to do is always
    fly the plane.  Even when everything is going to shit around you ,
    always, always fly the plane.  #2 thing to do is once #1 is under
    control, is "Plan you flight, fly your plan"  That's where the control
    part comes in and the Street Peddler is right on the nuts regarding the
    two options folks and they are as he pointed out clearly:
    
    		1.  Reduce expenses
    
    		2.  Sell more widgets and high margins.
    
    And now a word from our sponsor.  This came to me the other day and I
    thought it might bring some levity to the topic at hand:
    
    
    				SALESPEOPLE
    
    It has been said that salespeople create problems for their bosses,
    their customers, and their spouses and sometimes for conservative
    credit managers, for hotels and for each other.
    
    They make more noise, create more cheer, correct more errors, adjust
    more differences, spread more gossip, explain more discrepancies, hear
    more grievances, pacify more belligerents, and waste more time under
    high pressure without losing their temper.
    
    Salespeople contribute much to society and to the public economy.  In
    many ways, they are undoubtedly a tribute to themselves; they draw and
    spend more money with less effort and with less return than any other
    business group.  They come at the most inopportune time under the
    slightest pretext, stay longer under opposition, ask more personal
    questions, make more comments and commitments, put up with more
    inconveniences, take more for granted under greater resistance, than
    any group or body.
    
    They introduce more  new goods and services, dispose of more old goods,
    load more freight cars and airplanes, unload more ships, build more
    factories, start more new businesses, and write more debits and credits
    in our ledgers.
    
    Yet with all their faults, they keep the wheels of commerce turning and
    the currents of human emotions running high.  More cannot be said of
    any person on the earth.  Be careful who you call "salespeople" lest
    you flatter them.
    
    				Unknown
    
    
    Now with that said, let's go fly the plane, travel safe and have some
    fun.
    
    Mav in Minneapolis
    
    

    Re .60
    
    Sales folks -- Ahhh yes -- Some sea-stories:  The difference between a
    sea story and a fairy tale is that a fairy tale starts out: "once Upon
    a time."  A sea story starts out with: "This is no shit -- This is the
    .."
    
    Sooo, some sea stories:
    
    The person I hated from the old neighborhood had some verrrry good
    ideas -- He said:
    
    Plan the Plan
    Write the Plan
    Work the Plan
    If it doesn't work,
    Fix the Plan
    Work the Plan
    
    For a brain damaged peddler, that was a fairly easy concept to
    internalize.
    
    He also had some other diddies:
    
    Make sure your plan accounts for losing the benchmark.
    
    Always take the high road -- Don't grovel in the mud.
    
    Even with all these pearls of wisdom, I still hated him.
    
    My view of Sales folks:
    
    When I came to DEC, I looked around and saw a bunch of pseudo hot-shots
    -- I likened them to a flashy running back on a football team -- U know
    -- Smooth moves -- Their teeth sparkeled (sp?) in the sunlight -- Lotsa
    gold chain.
    
    Everytime I referred to myself as a Peddler, I was looked upon like I
    was from another planet -- I think the difference between a peddler and
    a sales person is the difference between that flashy running back who
    needs a bunch of folks out in front of him, and a Muddy, grungy, bloody
    defensive lineman.
    
    Alex Karas of the Detroit Lions strategy used to be to wade through
    everything in front of him to get into the backfield quickly -- He'd
    wrap his arms around everyone there and start tossing out folks until he
    found the one who had the ball.  WHen he had that person, a payment was
    made.
    
    The Street Peddler

    RE.61
    
    Ahh yes, the tales of lore...  That's a least a two Bud conversation.
    
    Sometimes even Joe Montana got dirty, but he always was there makin'
    the big plays.  Gale Sayers, Walter Payton, the Juice, Montana, Morino,
    Staubach perhaps their teeth sparkled (and why not they could have them
    capped for the kind of money they make) but they did know and
    understand the value of an offensive lineman.  Get me the hole or split
    the defensive backs and I'll take it to the line.  Sales people are
    very event driven folks, like runway behind you, altitude above you and
    the gas you didn't buy on your last layover, nothing has less value
    then the order you just booked and shipped.
    
    A professional peddler in MPO.
    

    I'm a former Sales Support person and a 12� year Digit.  I've noticed
    something very disturbing.  Because I've kept in touch with friends in
    the field, I keep informed.  I'm disturbed about the layoffs (=TFSO)
    because some of the sales being laid off are not the marginal ones.  
    One of the laid off sales reps was a consistent over achiever.  I even
    heard him explain to his boss one day that he ought not to have his
    quota increased as he was having a "spike year".  I accompanied him on
    a number of occasions and saw how how professional he was.  If I ever
    built a sales organization, I'd build it it around him.  I've heard
    that other sales who've been laid off are also 100% performers.
    
    QUESTION:  When the account focus changed from geographic to industry
               (I was told that was in progress 2 years ago when I 
               transfered to the CSC), did the credit for sales revenue
               shift from the local sales rep to a centralized organization
               with an industry focus in a back East organization.
    
               Also, correct me if I'm wrong about that aforemention change
               in account focus.
    
    
                                                 Kurt

    I want to address the folks who were talking about Pathworks vs Novel.
    
    I sell Lots of Novel to run on Zeos PCs and get credit for it.
    The reason is simple, metrics. Digital has a contract with the Navy
    called PC LAN. In the catalogue there is Novel (no Pathworks) and 
    Zeos PCs (not DECs). We sell them, they by it, I get credit and the 
    company makes a profit. I can't help it that Digital's PCs aren't
    on contract to sell. For those of you wondering the Navy PC-LAN
    contract is estimated to be about 135 million with about 70-80 million
    to date. Unfornutately most all the hardware and software that's on
    it isn't ours. I know this doesn't make sense, but we make a profit
    on this stuff.
    
    Regards.
    

    I wonder if anyone is working on getting our stuff on approved vendor
    lists like this one.  I understand we make money here pushing the
    Novell and Zeos, but it doesn't seem a great intuitive leap we could
    make MORE money selling DECpc and PATHORKs.
    
    George
    

    From what I understand, our PC people wouldn't go that low. The Zeos 
    486/33mhz box sells for $1857.00 to the Navy off of the PCLAN contract.
    We are going to sell 800 units into the Navy next FY. The add on NIC,
    Novel,Installation Services,Training,Help Desk...ect. and you can see
    why this is a profitable contract. Also, this is also ironic, we
    contract most of the service work out to subs because the margins are
    better than using internal folks. 
    
    So ity goes.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Pathworks require a VAX?
    
    Laurie.

>>   Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Pathworks require a VAX?
    
   No.  There's a Pathworks server for both Ultrix and OS/2.

    No, you misunderstand me (my fault). My point is, is Pathworks any use
    for a network of PCs, and only PCs?
    
    Laurie.

.1> It seems that Digital acquired since 1988, a uniquely stupid, arrogant,
.1> and ineffective sales force.
    
    I wouldn't go that far, but I know of one large university that had
    $250k to spend and wanted Alpha boxes.  The DEC sales rep came back
    with a bid that was entirely VAXes.
    
    For whatever reason the rep did this, we lost the bid.  They bought
    Sparc Stations instead.

 >     No, you misunderstand me (my fault). My point is, is Pathworks any use
 >     for a network of PCs, and only PCs?

    As was stated, Pathworks servers exist for OS/2, which runs on PCs, so
    the answer is yes.

    If you're wondering about networks with no servers at all (pure
    peer-to-peer networks, which don't scale at all in the PC world), then
    I'd guess that Pathworks wouldn't be your choice (speaking as a
    Pathworks user but not as a Pathworks configuration expert).

RE:                 <<< Note 2543.71 by STAR::BECK "Paul Beck" >>>

�    As was stated, Pathworks servers exist for OS/2, which runs on PCs, so
�    the answer is yes.
    
    I've done it again. My apologies. Another qualification, MSDOS PCs. It
    was cost I was getting at, and a comparison to Novell.

�    If you're wondering about networks with no servers at all (pure
�    peer-to-peer networks, which don't scale at all in the PC world), then
    
    So, Microsoft's Windows for Workgroups is not competition for Pathworks
    then? Peer-to-peer networks are surely the most cost-effective solution
    for small installations. Are you saying that there aren't enough such
    installations to bother with? Novell and other PC networking tools, can
    also use an MSDOS 486 PC as a server, as can Windows for Workgroups.
    I'd suggest that if Pathworks doesn't support small peer-to-peer
    networks, or an MSDOS server, it should.
    
    Most of the time, I have respect for your notes, I generally agree with
    you, but statements like "(pure peer-to-peer networks, which don't
    scale at all in the PC world)" have too much of an air of "we don't
    need that sort of business" about them for my comfort. I believe it's
    that sort of belief that's caused many of our current problems. Of
    course, I may have misunderstood you.
    
    Laurie.

 >     Of course, I may have misunderstood you.

    You misunderstood me.

    I'm in no way associated with Pathworks, and can't speak for their
    plans, marketing strategies, or for that matter the range of
    configurations that their current products can accommodate.  I was
    simply trying to draw the distinction between peer-based and
    server-based PC networks, and not to assign any value judgments to their
    worthiness of our attention. (That peer-based PC networks are very
    limited in scalability may be a value judgment, but I believe it's an
    accurate one, and doesn't say we shouldn't be going after the business.)

    The best place to explore what the proper strategy for Pathworks
    vis-a-vis peer-based PC networks would be in one of the Pathworks
    conferences. I was trying to reflect my impression of current reality:
    Pathworks is currently designed around a server paradigm, and I'm not
    *personally* aware of it being useable peer-to-peer.
    
    The other part of the point is: an OS/2 server can use the same 486 PC
    that a Novell server could use - OS/2 needs more memory than MS-DOS, but
    otherwise the hardware platform is still the same thing - the biggest
    real difference is the software running on the platform (and, in the
    case of peer versus server-based networks, whether a node is dedicated
    as a server or is also used as a workstation). 

    Re .-1
    
    Would you care to explain why PC per based networks don't scale. PCs
    today have more power than the majority of VAX systems that Digital has
    ever sold. I was under the impression that for years we were promoting
    DECnet as the way to build peer to peer networks using VAX systems. So
    what's the difference when you insert PC instead of VAX?
    
    Dave

    Didn't mean to start a whole networked PCs digression here...

    Again, it's not the hardware base that's the issue. PCs tend to run
    MS-DOS and MS-DOS doesn't have multitasking (and MS-Windows doesn't have
    preemptive multitasking). That's where I think the limitations are.

    There are also hardware limitations with concurrent interrupts on the
    ISA bus which could limit I/O throughput - these would be alleviated by
    configuring EISA systems, which is what most serious servers are in the
    PC world - but most PCs in use are ISA-based. Hardware performance isn't
    entirely measured in CPU cycle speed.

    I think peer-based PC networks based on a reasonably robust preemptive
    multitasking operating system could scale (though you'd still want
    servers for off-LAN routing). My comments about scaling assumed we were
    talking about MS-DOS (not, say, NT). With the kinds of hoops you have to
    jump through to make MS-DOS do many things at once, I think there are
    serious limits on how far you can push it.

    Peer-based networks based on DECnet and TCP on VMS or Unix systems work
    because the service-offering nodes can offer services to many clients at
    once while continuing to serve local users. I don't know how many
    concurrent clients can be supported under Windows for Workgroups while
    still serving local windows, but I wouldn't think it would be many
    before the non-preemptive scheduling would start taking a toll. Anybody
    actually know? (Without ratholing this topic any farther?)

>    Again, it's not the hardware base that's the issue. PCs tend to run
>    MS-DOS and MS-DOS doesn't have multitasking (and MS-Windows doesn't have
>    preemptive multitasking). That's where I think the limitations are.

Doesn't DR-DOS cover this?

    re:.76
    
    DR-DOS is a clone of MS-DOS, with no multitasking.  The promised
    successor, Novell Dos 7.0, is supposed to have multitasking.  Real Soon
    Now.
    
    re:.72
    
    The PC Server market is not at all like DIgital's familiar DECnet
    market.  Novell servers do NOT run MS-DOS.  Novell Netware IS the
    operating system.  Or think of it as an embedded system running on PC
    hardware.  Novell clients run MS-DOS (or OS/2) and get services from
    servers.  Pathworks servers do NOT run MS-DOS either.  They do,
    however, run multifunction operating systems (Unix, VMS, OS/2 1.3)
    which provide multitasking and provide LAN Manager (more in the future)
    Server services.
    
    It is possible with OS/2 PCs to run "peer to peer", but it's not widely
    done nor so far as I can tell common with Pathworks.  DECnet VMS is, of
    course, peer-to-peer.  WNT will be able to run peer-to-peer.  But given
    the preponderance of MS-DOS desktops, with its weird memory limits,
    most PCs don't want to be peers.  They want to be served.
    
    Some of our sales force understands this real well.  That's why they
    have made Pathworks number 2.  But we're still a niche player.
    Old 1980's SNA-vs.-DECnet-based arguments about "peer is better" don't
    wash in this space.  SNA's a totally different dinosaur.  My take on
    them all is summarized in my "Six Models of Networking" paper which you
    can copy from
    
    CARAFE::USER1:[GOLDSTEIN.DOC]6MODELS.PS
       fred

    Somebody please mention licenses.  Novel licenses 20 users at a crack 
    from the server (not per client). I think another reason why Novel is
    so popular is because of ccmail. 
    
    None of this was my point from .64. The point is I am just a flea on
    this dogs tale. All I want to be is preceived as a success, so I sell
    what my customer wants. I just can't imagine that we will last very
    long if we are selling our competitions products.
    
    Regards,
    
    Ray

   Re: Note 2543.79 by ORO50::REEVES "Fire and Forget."
   

�    Somebody please mention licenses.  Novel licenses 20 users at a crack 
�    from the server (not per client). I think another reason why Novel is
�    so popular is because of ccmail. 
    
   The last PC product presentation by Digital that I attended said that
   both Novel and MS were moving away from server based licensing to
   client based licensing, so it was no longer a factor in comparing
   Novel and MS favorably against Digital.  
   
   This presentation was by a special Digital PC Marketing team making
   presentations to customers U.S. wide.

So, about that fired sales force...

Has anyone got the scoop on what Mr. Lucente ahs done to fix the management 
of us ineffective peons this week?

Sorry to disturb the facinating rathole...

Matt

    There is a two page LIVEWIRE today on what is happening at the meeting.
    
    -sandy
    

Thanks, Sandy.  

Has anyone actually talked to people that attended and gotten the 
impression that Mr. Lucente and Mr. Palmer have gotten their arms around 
the problems?  Will the CBU's which are marketing groups going to report to 
the Executive VP of Marketing and Sales?  Are we in for some consistancy, 
or more of the same?

I can only get into Livewire a couple times a week (the network out here is 
not so good) and the article was 9 screens of winning and being competant 
in a lot of things we have not proven competance in before.

I hope to hear more later.

Matt

    The fact that Matt believes the five end-user customer business units
    
    	Discrete Manufacturing and Defense
    	Consumer and Process Manufacturing
    	Communications, Education, Entertainment
    	Financial, Professional, Public
    	Health
    
    are mere marketing units, and given the historical lack of impact that
    "marketing" has had at Digital, it's amazing how little impact this
    reorganization has had.  It's almost as if with each reorganization the
    rhetoric increases and the tangible effects get smaller.
    
    As far as I know, no Digital employee has the title "executive vice
    president".  There have been three "senior vice presidents" of which
    two have resigned.  I'm still looking for evidence of reducution of 
    layers of managmement and pushing down the levels at which decisions
    can be made.
    
    Livewire.  The senior leadership team has demonstrated competency in
    giving motivational speeches.  Certainly "winning" is better than
    "losing" and the sales managers need some psychological manipulation,
    but I hope the senior leadership teammates spent some time listening to
    the things that sales managers talk about with me and are working on
    solving their real problems.

    
    Minor nit re -1 :
    
    
    CPM was re-named CPT a few weeks back -- the T is for Transportation.
    
    The whole thrust of the Boston meeting was that the Business Units are
    real, & do own the strategy in their areas -- & are accountable for
    delivery.
    
    3 focus areas stressed for Digital in FY94 --
    
    Client/Server Leadership
    
    Alpha marketplace acceptance
    
    Making the Numbers
    
    I was impressed by the consistency of the message across all speakers
    -- clear that significant effort was made to show clarity & unity.
    
    
    Colin
    

I will admit my ignorance of the CBUs, I still think they're marketing 
organizations, but we like to think of them as more because they now own 
what would classically be called marketing.  They own determining what 
customers needs are, what we can produce to address those needs, how to 
produce the product (whether service or physical item), and how to distribute 
the product.  In the bad old days we let some decisions go by default (sell 
direct if at all possible), and let others make decisons for marketing 
(there is a demand for a box that is like a PC but not exactly like one).

The CBUs seem to be a true marketing organization.  Whether or not they can 
live up to the expectaions is not yet proven.  I am in a CBU, and the 
organization the CBU subsumed had such a small travel budget the marketers 
were in a Digital building over 75% of the time.  I would bet some were in 
their offices talking to other Digital marketers over 90% of their time.  
They were led by people who were being measured on expenses instead of 
increasing revenue.

I thought you measuered operations by cost control and sales and marketing 
by revenue enhancement.  Silly me.

If you think CBUs are more than marketing, than what other functions do 
they hold?  They do not have engineering, but do have some engineering 
funding control.  They do not have operations, but do set forecasts being 
fed into operations.  Hopefully they will have operations input so that we 
can actually ship what is forecast instead of having operations modify a 
forecast.  They do own some sales and distribution, a classic marketing 
function.  They own strategy, a classic marketing function.  They do not 
own their own Human Resources or Finance functions.  Seems like a marketing 
function to me.  Since I am in one, (though 3150 miles from the hub) I 
could well be missing something.

I have heard several times that a change of management and management 
policies is felt slowly through an organization.  Perhaps as much as 3 
years for huge orgainzations.  Ken was fired a year ago, and it seems like 
the top two layers are feeling the effects.  Perhaps another year is 
necessary to get the full effects felt out here, and then another year 
before our customers truely feel it.  Currently it is retoric, and that may 
be the best that can be hoped for.

Obviously we have felt the negative effects, and I empathize for those 
hurt.  I am speaking to the new messages and proofs.

I thought that Mr. Lucente was the Executive VP of Sales and Marketing.  Is 
he actually the Senior VP of Sales and Marketing?  Why shouldn't we unite 
sales and marketing functions?  I would wager the disconnect marketing 
often has is due to not enough POTENTIAL customer feedback.  They talk to 
consultants, they talk to well qualified custonmers, but rarely talk to 
those suspects that are not yet prospects because they feel Digital has 
nothing they would be interested in.  I would like to see marketers closer 
to customers.

I am very glad to see that at least one attendee felt that all the speakers 
were in sync.  That is great.  It is sad that the attendee had to comment 
on that, says a lot about the poor control and quality of the old messages. 
I hope the meeting creates a lot of managers who now understand the 
corporate messages, and will very publicly broadcast the information that 
should be shared.

I am going to a meeting being held by Mr. Dye here in the territory in a 
couple weeks.  I am really looking forward to hearing how we are going to 
improve the system.  I honestly think we are going th eright way, but I am 
concerned when I hear people not questioning some of our basic assumptions. 
I have a lot of faith in the new managers and the fact that Mr. Palmer 
brought in some new blood.  The mix of new approaches with old will help.

Matt

re Note 2543.84 by SDSVAX::SWEENEY:

>     are mere marketing units, and given the historical lack of impact that
>     "marketing" has had at Digital, it's amazing how little impact this
>     reorganization has had.  It's almost as if with each reorganization the
>     rhetoric increases and the tangible effects get smaller.
  
        You said it.

        It is hard to imagine that ANYONE who has been with Digital
        during most of the past ten years would sincerely believe
        that the solution to the company's problems could be found in
        yet another reorganization.

        Bob

    Between my last note (.36) and now, I made a major decision. I quit! To
    startup a sales territory for a software company. When I joined
    Digital, it was profitable. Then it started going down. Now when I
    leave, I'm sure it will start getting profitable again. I'm not joking!
    There are too many people like me - wrong person at the wrong place at
    the wrong time, in my case a software sales person trying to do
    marketing, and getting everybody confused. 
    
    So let's toast to the success of Digital sales people and Mr.Moderator,
    perhaps you can gently suggest that this topic be closed on a high
    note?