| Title: | The Digital way of working |
| Moderator: | QUARK::LIONEL ON |
| Created: | Fri Feb 14 1986 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 5321 |
| Total number of notes: | 139771 |
'Anorexia Industrialis':
Cost cutting, and/or lean management, and/or concentration on core
competencies, and/or down-sizing, and/or corporate rationalisation,
taken to the point were an organisation starves itself to death.
A newly recognised phenomena whose diagnosis is uncertain and whose
cure is unpredictable.
Questions:
1 - How can you tell when an organisation's got it?
2 - What would you recommend for therapy?
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2769.1 | POWDML::MACINTYRE | Wed Nov 10 1993 08:05 | 5 | ||
Actually I see it as a longer-term cycle of binge and purge. Digital's
recent history is more like that of a Bulimic Company.
Marv
| |||||
| 2769.2 | QUARK::LIONEL | Free advice is worth every cent | Wed Nov 10 1993 09:27 | 3 | |
A better term I have heard for this condition is "wee-ness envy". Steve | |||||
| 2769.3 | Does anyone understand downsizing? | FUNYET::ANDERSON | What chew lookin at? | Wed Nov 10 1993 09:41 | 17 |
Some believe that management at many companies don't understand downsizing enough to know when to do it and who to lay off. Downsizing is the "in thing" now and many companies are doing it because everyone else is. I have also seen a theory proposed that states that while initial downsizing may be beneficial, at some point its value ceases and becomes harmful to the company. After this point, it becomes impossible to save the company from eventual failure due to decreased morale, insufficient people to produce revenue, and so on. Unfortunately, no one knows where this point is. Many in this conference have expressed their opinions, but whether Digital has gone past the "point of no return" is up for debate. But please, let's not have Al Gore and Ross Perot debate it. ;�) Paul | |||||
| 2769.4 | Cost-Cost-Cost=Bankrupcy. | ELMAGO::JMORALES | Thu Nov 11 1993 11:44 | 41 | |
MY OPINION
==========
Cost Competitiveness alone will NOT yield the expected results
and will NOT give any company Global Advantages.
I have said this time an again, today's consumers are well read
and educated. They will read the Consumer's Reports and other
magazines before they buy non-perishable items. Therefore, things
such as:
1) Reliability
2) Maintenance & Service
3) Repairs (how often)
4) Timeliness
5) Cost (not the tag price but longer term).
6) Upgrades/Options
I've been doing analysis on several 'non-perishable' consumer
items. One example:
If you read the yearly Consumer's Report booklet in the
automobile section this is what you will find.
1) US Made Automobiles
a) cost: 99%++ are rated from average to much better than
average.
b) reliability: Over 90%++ are rated from Much Worst than
average to worst than average
2) Japanese Automobiles
a) cost: 90%+ are rated from Much Worst than average to
average.
b) reliability: 99%++ are rated from Much Better than
average to better than average.
The conclusion that I can draw for this is that the automobile
consumers are interested in reliability first then cost.
| |||||
| 2769.5 | irrelevant rathole | WRKSYS::SCHUMANN | Thu Nov 11 1993 13:28 | 7 | |
re .4 > The conclusion that I can draw for this is that the automobile > consumers are interested in reliability first then cost. Huh? If so, how come US cars outsell Japanese cars by almost 3 to 1? (That's in the US!) | |||||
| 2769.6 | What's your gauge? | 35405::MCELWEE | Opponent of Oppression | Tue Nov 16 1993 02:28 | 17 |
Re: .4-
The disparity with C/R is how many "recommended" new cars become
"used cars to avoid". The early 80's Rabbit had this happen.
I will agree that consumers are critical when evaluating a product
considered for purchase. The problem is that brand and traditional
accompanying reputation no longer mean much, and the data is still out
on "the new division that produces X product via subcontractor with the
original logo".
Marketinga product well takes time. Past pain effects progess . The
many mergers/ unstable companies in this economy make buying decisions
difficult at best. Digital is feeling all of the above.
Phil
| |||||
| 2769.7 | You can not argue against success !!! | ELMAGO::JMORALES | Tue Nov 16 1993 12:39 | 18 | |
>>> Huh? If so, how come US cars outsell Japanese cars by almost 3 to
1 ? (That's in the US!).
Absolutely right....that is in the US, we are not even close outside.
Why, we ONLY focus on cost.
Focus on cost is extremly easy.....just kick-out employees, cut travel,
cust benefits (medical, life insurance, etc.), cut equipment and
plant space. A single pen is the only thing needed, anybody can
do it, no science, no leadership, no nothing.
On the other hand to have Cost, Reliability, Quality, Delivery,
Services, etc. requires leadership, creativity that we are currently
lacking.
Why argue against success, we can not !!!!!
| |||||