Conference 7.286::digital

    Sure-when is this to be disseminated to the troops.Do you have a copy
    you could mail to me or post here?The central database is good and the
    tools we use may be good but so overburdened by administration as to be
    unuseable.If DC can be involved in the sales cycle from the beginning
    and if some of the squatters(ie people who NEVER leave the office to
    see clients)can be removed,then the future is rosy.
    All this leaves is training of our current employees since we can't
    have 100% new hires - or could we?

    
    With every new reorg comes new hope, doesn't it?
    My experiences with Digital Consulting have been very good.
    The people that work in that organization are top notch.
    However, there are a few things that need to get done before we
    even think of competing with the Andersens of the world.
    
    1. We need to get our people trained on a variety of platforms,
    not just VMS.
    
    2. We need to get the proper tools to our people so they can succeed.
    There are very few 3rd party hardware boxes in house either networking
    or OS. How we we be true integrators when we only have experiece
    on our own platforms?
    
    3. Our rates need to be competitive. We turn down many jobs under
    $130 an hour even though we have people sitting on the bench. An 
    inactive body is a waste of resources.
    
    4. There should be $$$$ incentives for project members that deliver
    their projects on time or for less cost to digital then expected.
    
    5. The delivery people should be treated as the professionals
    they are, not just delivery bodies.
    
    6. Many times delivery people go into assignments unaware of what
    the customer expects from them because sales has sold them a bill
    of goods. That has got to stop. Digital Consultants, as good as they 
    are, do not and can not know everything. They need to be fully
    prepped and backed up BEFORE they go into the wilds.
    			
    			-Jim-

Training...TRAIning...TRAINING!!!!

If DC is to be successful, they should have a standing policy for everyone to
get "knowledge-maintenance" training that keeps them up to date. Not everybody
can be on the leading edge all the time, but I often hear complaints that people
are feeling left way behind because they had to focus on billable time. 
Something along the lines of "My boss won't let me take a weeklong training
course that costs $1000 when I could be billing for $4000 (insert your favorite
billable goal)". Too bad that week of training might have helped qualify someone
for a $50k consult.

A simple formula: everyone gets alloatted 40 hours of training per fiscal year 
(or even better, fiscal half), to be taken at their discretion. If they don't 
take any training for two years, they're out. Any manager who loses more than 
two people due to this should also be out. I am not advocating pushing training 
purely for the sake of training; there are enough topics out there that everyone 
should be able to find something that can do them and their job some good.  We
need to emphasize up front that everyone should upgrade their skills. They
should be allowed to do it, and organizations should plan to accomodate it. None
of this "John's a critical person on the project, we can't spare him a week 
for training this year." That's a shortsighted view, and DC needs to be thinking
the next two to three years worth of projects and technologies they want to
target. They'll never hit those targets if their people are sitting back in
the stone-age (and high-tech skills fossilize pretty quickly).

Some observations regarding the replies:

TRAINING (replies 1,2 & 3):
   Amen! The plan recognizes the critical need to develop skills by training.
   A "good chunk of change" (I think I heard $35M) was being set aside for 
   training in critical areas (i.e. client/server).  I have seen an increase 
   in training emphasis during the past few months.

DISSEMINATION (reply #1):
   Senior D.C. management rolled out the plan to level 2 managers (& up) the
   week of Feb 14th-8th.  PSC (Professional Service Center) managers are 
   currently rolling out the plan to their PSC's.  I attended a local PSC
   meeting this past Friday (Feb 25th).

   I have a hard copy of the 140 page document.  I'll check on the existence
   of an Electronic version.  Inquire to your closest PSC manager and you 
   should be able to obtain one.  If not, send me your address and I'll
   inter-office mail you one.

TOOLS (reply #2):
   I agree with needing tools.  We are finally seeing field consultants getting
   tools such as the much needed laptops.  Regarding other platforms, I don't 
   know, but I guess it will be up to the PSC to decide what tools it will 
   need.  The PSC's are the main organizational unit.

RATES (reply # 2):
   I agree with competitive.  Our competition, however, will not be job shops, 
   but the major consulting orgs.  I have been seeing more agressive pricing 
   in project proposals of recent.

    re: .3
    
    80 hours training, not 40.
    
    Bob

    I have yet to see the 'Digital Consulting Looking Forward' document.
    I've badgered my boss about it and he's doing his best, but it appears 
    stealth-communications is doing its bit again from above.
    
    Without seeing the document, I hope DC is recognised and operates as
    the world wide organisation that is. A few twinges says it isn't...
    
    Regarding ISIS. Many DC operations groups outside of the US are finding
    it very difficult to gain information on this tool. I have finally got
    hold of an overview document of the application. It does not make for  
    happy reading e.g. the database techology is Ingres (!!!!), access to
    ISIS is assumed via PC (no talk of character cell terminals), the
    document is worded and framed in such a way as to presume a small,     
    localised consultancy installing ISIS from a clean slate i.e. no       
    integration with (country or worldwide) distributed legacy systems, the
    duplication of data and functionality in ISIS is mind boggling.
    
    
    Regarding provision of tools. Providing tools (aka PCs and
    applications) is a miniscule task. Providing and delivering the
    information for the tools and users is a more demanding task. Getting  
    users to use the tools in an effective manner can be a daunting
    proposition.
    
    Still, I have noticed a focusing of minds in the DC senior management
    of late. There is a more purposeful and assertive language in the memos
    trickling down to us.
    
    Angus
                                                                       

    as a member of one of digital's many training organizations... i don't
    see ANY indication that digital, as a corporation, is committed to
    training on anywhere near the scale y'all are talking about.
    
    tony

    I think we have a splendid opportunity to get things really sorted out. 
    We have so much that is good, very good.
    
    I have some concerns.
    
    I have seen appointments announced of people in an organisation I have 
    never heard of, well only by rumour. Not good communication. I just 
    hope that we manage a transition from the current way of working to the 
    new without dropping the ball, any more than we have already. I would 
    expect to feel confident that there is a plan which includes work to 
    communicate this change properly and then apply the change.
    
    
    I hope that in the design of the new organisation we have taken account 
    of the whole trading lifecycle with our customers, from initial enquiry 
    to a continual process of doing business with Digital. Have we designed 
    it so that there is an point of focus for a customer into the whole of 
    Digital. So that trade of all kinds can be done without the Customer 
    needing detailed map of how to deal with us. Or will customers still 
    need to understand our complexity in order to do business with us?
    
    How will DC relate in trading terms with our customers to the other 
    parts of Digital like the PBU's, MCS and DECdirect? If we do SI, how 
    does Digital Consulting work with the rest of the organisation.
    
    How will we plan to ensure we are aiming at the right opportunities for 
    sustained growth over the next 5 years. What is our market? What are 
    the forces of change and opportunity in the market segments? How will 
    we really add value? Where do our strengths line up with the market? 
    Which gaps should we fill? Will we use that plan to shape our skill 
    base and organisation to deal with the markets? 
    
    Can anyone enlighten me?
    
    
    Ken 
     
    

    It appears that the internal roll-out is in parallel with spreading the
    word externally.  The Globe carried a portion from the release.
    
    The following memo has been posted with permission from the author.  
    Forwarding headers have been removed.

    -- Kevin
    
                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M

                                        Date:     25-Feb-1994 09:20am EST
                                        From:     Mary Levensaler @PKO
                                                  LEVENSALER.MARY AT A1 at POWDML at PKO
                                        Dept:     Corporate Public Relations
                                        Tel No:   223-6177

TO: See Below

Subject: NEW CONSULTING BUS.UNIT RELEASE #380                        

THE FOLLOWING RELEASE WILL GO OUT OVER THE PR NEWSWIRE
AT 10:OO THIS MORNING.





Dick Calandrella
(508) 496-8626





               DIGITAL'S NEW CONSULTING BUSINESS UNIT

                 FOCUSES ON CUSTOMER SOLUTIONS NEEDS



MAYNARD, Mass. -- February 25, 1994 -- As Digital Equipment 
Corporation continues its evolution to focus on customer solutions 
needs, the company recently created a new global business unit 
called Digital Consulting.
     The unit is headed by Vice President Gresham T. Brebach, Jr., 
who came to Digital in April 1993, after serving as a director at 
McKinsey & Company, as well as the managing partner of the U.S. 
Consulting Practice at Arthur Andersen & Company. 
     "This new consulting unit already accounts for nearly $3 
billion in corporate revenue, vaulting the company into the 
forefront of the global consulting arena competing directly with 
IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Andersen Consulting, Electronic Data Systems, 
and Computer Sciences Corporation" Brebach said.
     "The practice has 15,000 consultants in more than 100 countries 
... provides services from 140 global professional service centers 
... has key alliances with strategic partners ... has a track record 
of thousands of successful client engagements ... and has an 
executive leadership team that rivals any in the consulting 
business," Brebach added. 


     In commenting on the role of the new business unit, Brebach 
stated that "our vision is to be the premier provider of 
professional services, helping customers understand, develop and
implement integrated solutions to their most complex business
problems.
     "Consulting and integration services have always been an 
integral and major portion of Digital's customer portfolio," Brebach 
continued. "The evolution of our global organization into an 
operational business unit sends a powerful message to the industry 
that Digital is strategically positioned to focus on its core 
competencies while significantly increasing the value it brings to 
customers.
     "This important new status provides us with the full scope of 
practice resources and industry expertise to achieve our vision for 
our clients and the marketplace," Brebach added.
     To capitalize on the many opportunities it faces, the Digital 
Consulting Business Unit has defined the scope of its consulting 
capabilities into three key business segments, led by an executive 
team with extensive experience in the field of consulting.
     Ronald Bohlin, Vice President of Strategic Services, came to 
Digital in September 1993 after serving as a vice president at 
Analog Devices, Inc.. He also spent more than 11 years as partner 
and leader of the Worldwide Computer Industry Practice at McKinsey 
& Company.
     Strategic Services includes consulting activities in operations 
and functional effectiveness, fundamental business transformation 
based on re-engineering concepts, IT strategy and planning, new 
organizational concepts and requirements driven by new processes and 
new technology. 



It also includes a variety of skill development programs from 
Digital's learning services operations.
     Richard Linting, Vice President of Integration Services, joined 
Digital in July 1993 after serving as president of his own 
independent consulting practice. He also served as a vice president 
at Computer Sciences Corporation, and spent more than 23 years with 
Andersen Consulting as a managing partner and director.
     Integration Services includes consulting activities in systems 
development, integration and implementation.  The integration and 
development capabilities in this area include software, custom 
hardware, networking and engagement management.  These activities 
cover the spectrum from full custom solutions to the implementation 
of pre-defined solutions in cooperation with key alliance partners.
     Robert McNulty, Vice President of Operations Management 
Services, came to Digital in June 1993 after serving as a vice 
president at The Equitable Life Assurance Society and CEO of Pathe 
Computer Control Corporation, a technology-based manufacturing 
consulting firm.
     Operations Management Services includes consulting activities 
in operations network and process outsourcing, information asset 
protection and security, disaster recovery and a range of related 
operations support services. 
     Digital Consulting is now one of six business units reporting 
directly to Digital's President and Chief Executive Officer Robert 
Palmer.



     The other five business units are: 

     * 	Personal Computers 
     	(Vice President & General Manager Enrico Pesatori)

     * 	Storage 
       	(Vice President Charles Christ)

     * 	Components & Peripherals 
        (Vice President Larry Cabrinety)

     * 	Multivendor Customer Services 
        (Vice President John Rando)

     * 	Systems 
        (Vice President & General Manager Edward Lucente)


     Digital Equipment Corporation is the world's leader in open 
client/server solutions from personal computing to integrated 
worldwide information systems.  Digital's scalable Alpha AXP 
platforms, storage, networking, software and services, together 
with industry-focused solutions from business partners, help 
organizations compete and win in today's global marketplace.
                                ####

Note to Editors:  Digital, the Digital logo, and Alpha AXP are 
                  trademarks of Digital Equipment Corporation

CORP/94/380
    

    I haven't seen this document yet.  What does it have to say about my
    pet question/peeve: Who is going to sell the services?  And if you
    mention "the sales force"...then, just don't.
    
    15,000 employees??  They must be including IM&T because five years of
    constant reductions doesn't add up to 15,000 consultants.
    
    /d.c. 

>> Who is going to sell the services?  

Brebach wants each and every consultant to sell him/herself once they're in the 
account.  The CSP will be responsible for generating consulting revenue at the
account level

If the electronic copy of the document described in the base note exists  
on the network it would be valuable to make it available.

Regarding .11 answers and possible others rules, where do they come from ? 
above document, DVN, other ?

Hcl

>>Regarding .11 answers and possible others rules, where do they come from ? 
>>above document, DVN, other ?


Well, for my part, the info I'm sharing comes from a variety of sources: the 
DC document, the DVN, my contacts in DC and knowledge of the Anderson 
Consulting-type model Brebach is attempting to emulate.  Also, you have to 
understand that this is all filtered through my own interpretation of the info.

    I would modify the answer in .11 a bit.  The source of the modification
    is a meeting Gresh held in NY attended by about 75 (I couldn't see
    everyone in the hall) people.
    
    The key pharse I got from the meeting was "Do what you sell and sell
    what you do."  The expectation is that ALL of Digital Consulting (DC)
    is responsible for selling AND delivering billable consulting to
    customers.  That includes management.
    
    CSP is a role that some of the staff will have where they are
    responsible for the DC business in a particular account.  This includes
    getting themselves billable as well.
    
    DC in general and the CSPs in particular will work with sales to sell
    consulting services.
    
    In answering a question about where the time will come from to do this
    selling when people have a high billable utilization metric; Gresh
    mentioned that he had become aware that some of the field metrics did
    not encourage what he called "practice development" (selling of
    services).  He mentioned that the consultants should have time to do
    practice development and that at Andersen Consulting 30% of the
    consultants time was spent in this way.  He said he did not support an
    organizational entity doing practice development (it violate the "do
    what you sell" part of his credo), but that PSCs should have a practice
    development budget.
    
    Peter Dillard

>Brebach wants each and every consultant to sell him/herself once they're   
>in the account. The CSP will be responsible for generating consulting     
>revenue at the account level

>I would modify the answer in .11 a bit.  The source of the modification
>is a meeting Gresh held in NY attended by about 75 (I couldn't see
>everyone in the hall) people.
    
>The key phrase I got from the meeting was "Do what you sell and sell
>what you do."  The expectation is that ALL of Digital Consulting (DC)
>is responsible for selling AND delivering billable consulting to
>customers.  That includes management.
 
If I were to only look at the surface I'd say that this is just a new
version of the old story of management laying the blame on the individual
contributors for not being billable, etc.  However given the information
from .14, I think that there may be a compromise view.  

I and other colleagues have never just sat back and waited for a billable
job to come our way.  Inside and outside the accounts we have pursued work,
sometimes successfully, other times not.  Does this mean that we can't
sell or aren't worth our weight as consultants?  Certainly not.  What I am
referring to in numerous ways both online and vocally, is the lack of "the
closer" in DC.  I'm not referring to selling once you're inside an account,
we know all too well the andersen method of ingraining onseself inside a
customer's woodwork.  The sales problem we have faced is closing the
initial "beachhead" engagement, and consulting firms have "closers" to do
that, we don't.  If you expect the digital sales force to be those
"closers" then we won't make any progress.  And it's unfair to make someone
who has to do certs-by-the-minute suddenly become a consulting service
sales guru on top of everything else.
    
>CSP is a role that some of the staff will have where they are
>responsible for the DC business in a particular account.  This includes
>getting themselves billable as well.
>DC in general and the CSPs in particular will work with sales to sell
>consulting services. 

Are the CSP's going to try to become the "closers"?  Then they'd better be
well trained and skilled, and realize what this responsibility is.   

/d.c.

    re.15 An excellent point-there are indeed three types of job and the
    'closer' is needed desperately.Some CSPs will do it themselves-a lot
    won't since the initial choice seems to have been based on hierarchical
    position and not on experience(unless driving internal administration
    counts).
    I think it will depend on metrics.CSPs should be goaled on account
    development and customer satisfaction,audited externally and each CSP
    should have his pet 'closer',which may and indeed should be the
    salesman.
    

    re. 'closers'
    
    Gresh did not mention this in his meeting.  From what I know of
    different consulting firms, there are different jobs that perform this
    role.  One sales exec. here left for a big 6 firm.  The way he
    described his job it was to get the door open so that a partner could
    get in to close the deal.
    
    I believe that CSPs are intended to fill the 'partner' role for Digital
    Consulting.
    
    I've been told that CSP's will be goaled on consulting revenue, margin
    and growth in the accounts for which they fulfill the role.
    
    The comment on the backgrounds and skills of people moving into CSP
    roles is interesting.  I know that the intent was to have these people
    be equivalent in every sense to a partner at a big 6 firm.  The comment
    makes me wonder about the implementation of the plan.
    
    Peter Dillard

    For once I feel that somebody actually understands the point that I've
    been vocalizing and writing about for the past few years.  I also hope
    that Brebach is educating himself to what it means to be a unit
    attached to a product vendor, and not a separate consulting firm.  In
    the U.S. part of our problem is that customers have a sometimes
    justified suspicion that we're just there to sell them a box. 
    Retorting by saying that a good consultant sells him/herself is not an
    answer to this.  Yes, we can sell ourselves, but we need the
    collaboration of qualified resources.
    
    CSP's based on hierarchy...hmmm...
    
    /d.c.

Re: .18

Digital Consulting can maintain a certain level of financial success by being
the consulting arm of a major computer manufacturer.  However, as the market
is moving more and more to "open" systems and multivendor environments, DC's
attachment to the hardware side will limit its growth.  Add to that the 
shrinking of the VAX market and the slow growth of the AXP market and I see a
limited future for DC unless it breaks the umbilical cord to the hardware side.

Ed Lucente has stated that the reason for Digital Consulting (among DEC's other
business strategies) is to "improve the demand for Digital products".  I wonder
if he and Brebach are on the same page.

Re: .19
    
    > ... I see a limited future for DC unless it breaks the umbilical cord
    > to the hardware side.

    There is no way to do this unless DC is set up as a separate
    corporation accountable to a separate Board of Directors and its
    separate shareholders.

    Whether DC is a function / business unit / daughter company of Digital
    Equipment Corporation makes no difference, since the influences from
    the area of product marketing and account management can not be
    avoided. The management links are there whether at SLT, country or
    account group level and those links will be and are used to influence
    the behaviour of Digital Consulting.

    Mike

>>                      -< Umbilical cord is there to stay >-

I suppose you're right, at least under the current structure.  So, given this,
do you see a future for DC in the open systems, client server market?  Why
would a customer engage DC in this space?

Bob

    I can only write from my limited experience of selling Digital
    Consulting in the open systems and client/server market into discrete
    manufacturing industries, but we are, believe it or not, having
    success.

    I sell both consulting (either per day or for a agreed result), which
    is typically a k$10 sale and integrated solutions (systems integration)
    that so far has been somewhere on the scale between k$500 and M$6.

    The consulting we are doing revolves around training or assisting
    End-Users or OEM's to use Digital's open systems products which are
    relevant to the factory floor. These are BASEstar Open (considered open
    because of its use of OSF/1, MS-Windows, TCP/IP and MMS), DEComni (open
    because of OSI and MMS) and DECosap (open because of Siemens H1/AP -
    Siemens has such a high market share of shop-floor controllers in
    Europe that they are a de-facto standard). These products all use
    client/server implementations.

    The systems integration extends above the products we consult on and
    usually includes third party application software.

    At most customers, it is not an issue to be proposing Digital hardware,
    since we bring value above the hardware. Provided the hardware (these
    days usually Alpha AXP or DOS PC) passes the test of running an open
    operating system and network (i.e OSF/1, MS-DOS, TCP & OSI) and being
    approximately competitively priced, it's just one component of a
    solution and the customer is quite happy for Digital to be supplying
    it.

    I am however dealing with one VAX/VMS End-User whose computing
    operations have been taken over by an IBM outsourcing deal. For the
    next year we will continue to make revenue with them based on our
    VAX/VMS product set. After that time, we hope to have the above open
    systems products running on IBM AIX, which will give us continued
    consulting revenue, but the hardware revenue will drop.

    Another potential OEM customer is firmly locked into HP. Significant
    opportunities for Digital (Consulting) will come when the above open
    systems products are available on HP-UX and Windows-NT, which is
    already planned. Note though that we are able to help them with some
    minor PC MMS integration problems, so sometimes you just have to start
    small in the open systems market.

    So in summary, in discrete manufacturing in Europe, I am seeing real
    opportunities for Digital Consulting in the open systems area both
    today and in the future. There is however a risk that the consulting
    revenue will be impaired if other vendors' UNIX systems are not
    covered. Not going through with the ports for foreign hardware will not
    save us any hardware revenue though. Just how tight the umbilical cord
    is between hardware revenue and open systems software investment in
    Digital remains to be seen! I also have not gathered any experience yet
    in selling consulting or solutions on non-Digital hardware through the
    Digital account organisation.

    Mike

Mike 

I'm a sales exec in the New York FPPS district, leading a team of consultants
selling application integration into the New York Financial marketplace.  I
sell, amd am measured on, consulting services only.  The mission of my team
is to shore up our eroding customer base and penetrate new account by providing 
high-end open client-server solutions to business problems.

Now, I appreciate your comments regarding your experience in Europe, but they 
tend to prove my point.  Regardless of the differences between the US and 
European markets (I DO believe the Europeans are more open-minded regarding 
their systems partners), we have somewhat different definitions of "open 
systems" as respects the consulting business.  Your note indicates that we're 
successful in selling consulting where there is a Digital solution involved 
(BASEstar Open, DEComni, etc.):

	"The consulting we are doing revolves around training or 
        assisting End-Users or OEM's to use Digital's open systems 
        products which are relevant to the factory floor. These are 
        BASEstar Open (considered open because of its use of OSF/1, 
        MS-Windows, TCP/IP and MMS), DEComni (open because of OSI and 
        MMS)...."
  
And you are discussing an opportunity with an OEM currently locked into
HP, but only when DEC's software products are ported to HP-UX and NT: 

	"Another potential OEM customer is firmly locked into HP. 
        Significant opportunities for Digital (Consulting) will come when 
        the above open systems products are available on HP-UX and 
        Windows-NT, which is already planned."

While these are laudable efforts and vitally important to Digital's financial 
well-being, I would maintain that if DC only operates in environments where 
there is a Digital hardware or application software solution involved, we will 
never realize the kind of growth we're capable of.

"Open systems", at least to me in this context, means the ability to add value 
to customers who have NO Digital content today, and have no current reason to 
BUY Digital products.  My own view is that Digital Consulting has enormous 
potential in the open client-server market, where platform and operating 
systems are, if not irrelevant, certainly not the prime consideration.  If 
Digital is to expand its customer base, we need to find ways to penetrate into 
new accounts, not with hardware but with open solutions (you have the benefit 
of industry accepted solutions like BASEstar.  We're not so fortunate in the 
Financial space).  In our experience in NY, this means means vendor-independent 
enabling tools like ObjectBroker, DMQ, DCE, etc.  It is important to us that 
customers believe that we add value, and not be shills for Digital's hardware 
sales.  The reality is that if we're successful in penetrating these accounts, 
it will be easier for the account manager to sell hardware, etc.  But my team 
will not propose or recommend a hardware solution; we make it clear to our 
clients that we are truly "hardware-independent".  Now, some buy into this and 
some don't because we wear a DEC badge.  However, the more successes we can 
generate, the more credible we become.

What will kill us are statements from people like Ed Lucente who maintain that 
the ONLY reason for organizations like DC is to help the sales of Digital 
products.  If prospective (non-DEC) clients really believe this, why should 
they engage us?

Bob

    Re .22 $.23
    
    I'm not sure you're not really saying very similar things...
    
    
    The way we'll really grow the DC business is by expanding out of our
    base...very true.  It's not clear to me, though, that without the use
    of Digital products, that we really CAN add value for our [potential]
    clients. With one or two exceptions, it is our technologies, and
    experience with them, that can give DC a competitive edge.
    
    Note that by our technologies, I mean ObjectBroker, DMQ, RTR.
    Linkworks, etc, SW that can run on many platforms. Repeatable solutions
    built on these frameworks ARE our edge (at least, that's what I'm
    selling/trying to sell and deliver to my CPT client). Else, what do we
    have that isn't readily available elsewhere.
    
    FWIW, I HOPE we can expand our expertise and association into the WNT
    space, because I THINK in a 12 - 24 month timeframe WNT will be the
    platform of choice for infastructure, and the firm that can deliver the
    best solutions on it will be able to reap tremendous rewards IMHO.
    
    

>>          <<< Note 2919.24 by PARVAX::SCHUSTAK "Who IS John Galt!?" >>>
                              -< Same difference >-

>>    The way we'll really grow the DC business is by expanding out of our
>>    base...very true.  It's not clear to me, though, that without the use
>>    of Digital products, that we really CAN add value for our [potential]
>>    clients. With one or two exceptions, it is our technologies, and
>>    experience with them, that can give DC a competitive edge.
  
The difference in Mike's note and mine is that Mike provides consulting in 
conjunction with DEC applications such BASEstar and DEComni.  If the customer
hadn't bought into DEC's product strategy he probably wouldn't use our
consulting.  

I use (but don't sell - the account manager sells) DEC's enabling technologies
(ObjectBroker, DMQ, etc) to solve business problems.  The customer need not
have or buy DEC hardware or operating systems.  Subtle difference, but different
nonetheless.
   
>>    Note that by our technologies, I mean ObjectBroker, DMQ, RTR.
>>    Linkworks, etc, SW that can run on many platforms. Repeatable solutions
>>    built on these frameworks ARE our edge (at least, that's what I'm
>>    selling/trying to sell and deliver to my CPT client). Else, what do we
>>    have that isn't readily available elsewhere.
  
>>    FWIW, I HOPE we can expand our expertise and association into the WNT
>>    space, because I THINK in a 12 - 24 month timeframe WNT will be the
>     platform of choice for infastructure, and the firm that can deliver the
>>    best solutions on it will be able to reap tremendous rewards IMHO.
    
Agree 100%.
    

    Re Subtle difference...
    
    
    We talk to our clients to uncover their business issues.
    
    AC (EDS/ISSC/CAP/Etc) talks to that same client to uncover their
    business issues.
    
    The business issue is the same (let's ASSUME for a moment that we are
    as good at uncovering the issue, and dealing at the same levels).
    
    We propose a business solution that is "Open, client-server" that JUST
    SO HAPPENS to use our products which is what enables us to deliver
    effective solutions better/faster/cheaper/higher margin.
    
    We sell the solution...does the client buy into our product strategy?
    Nah (my client is not convinced we HAVE SW strategies that extend
    beyond the next funding review cycle ;-). We deliver  a solution built
    on it, and (hopefully) defacto standards develop in the infrastructure,
    and we establish credibility on the delivery side.
    
    Perhaps the European scenario IS different in that the sale of DC is a
    follow-on, so-to-speak, in support of a product sales success. The
    difference is not in what's delivered, but based on the account
    situation, the sales/positioniong tactics.
    
    Steve

    > Perhaps the European scenario IS different in that the sale of DC is a
    > follow-on, so-to-speak, in support of a product sales success. The
    > difference is not in what's delivered, but based on the account
    > situation, the sales/positioniong tactics.
    
    I don't think the European situation is different in this respect.
    
    I've just sold to a customer in Europe who was a pure IBM shop up until
    now. We sold them a solution including our hardware and software and
    third-party hardware and software, plus services. If there hadn't been
    any product content coming from Digital I'm sure we would have had no
    chance.
    
    My other type of consulting business is as a follow-on to an existing
    Digital customer who is using Digital's hardware and software products.
    They are almost always using other vendors' hardware at the controller
    level (Programmable Logic Controller) on the shop-floor. Digital does
    not sell PLC's, so it's quite natural for us to be working in a
    heterogenous environment.
    
    Mike

    I think the CSP concept is a good idea...but the applicants that I am
    aware of are all internally-fucused unit managers that don't even like
    customers.  They see the CSP position as their only hope of survival. 
    Their goal is to sit in their office and converse via e-mail and phone
    with other Digital managers - push the responsibility of dealing with
    customers down to their grunts.  As for "looking" billable...all they 
    need is a fixed-price project to charge their time against.
    
    Seems to me that we should have our best and most experienced
    consultants in the CSP positions if anything is REALLY going to change.
    

Several headers deleted...

 


                  I N T E R O F F I C E   M E M O R A N D U M

                                        Date:     23-Mar-1994 11:57am EST
                                        From:     GRESHAM BREBACH
                                                  BREBACH.GRESHAM AT PNDVUEA1 at MLMAIL at MLO
                                        Dept:     V.P. Digital Consulting
                                        Tel No:   223-9360

TO: See Below

Subject: DIGITAL CONSULTING ORGANIZATIONAL ANNOUNCEMENT              

   **********************************************************************
          THIS ANNOUNCEMENT IS FROM GRESHAM BREBACH AND RUSS GULLOTTI
   **********************************************************************
   
   We are pleased to announce the Digital Consulting Organization and 
   appointments for the Americas and some resulting new appointments in our 
   worldwide Industry and Integration Services organization.
   
   Richard Linting assumes responsibility as the Vice President of Digital 
   Consulting for the Americas reporting directly to Gresham Brebach.  In 
   this role he is also a member of the Management Team for the Americas led 
   by Russ Gullotti.  He will work with Kannankote Srikanth to transition 
   full business responsible for Digital Consulting in LACT and Canada, 
   effective July 1.  Effective immediately, Rich assumes full 
   responsibility for the U.S.  
   
   We would like to take this opportunity to thank Max Mayer for his 
   significant contributions as Vice President for Digital Consulting in the 
   U.S. and to congratulate him on his new position as Vice President of 
   Software Alliances in the Systems Business Unit.
   
   The Americas Management Team for Digital Consulting, headed by Rich 
   Linting, will be structured and staffed as described below effective 
   immediately.
   
   	- Vice President Canada - Eric Lawrence
   	- Vice President LACT - Open
   	- Vice President Western U.S. - Jim Collora
   	- Vice President Southern U.S. - Rick Distasio
   	- Vice President Central U.S. - Jay Norman
   	- Vice President Eastern U.S. - Bob Griffin
   	- Vice President Operations Management Services - Terry Theret
   	  (Reporting directly to Bob McNulty, VP, OMS)
   	- Vice President Strategic Services - Open
   	- Vice President Integration Services - Bob Burke (Acting)
   	
   New appointments to our Worldwide Digital Consulting Organization are:
   
   	- Ruth Gaines replacing Jim Collora as Vice President,
   	  Worldwide Industry Practices
   	- Bob Burke replacing Rich Linting as Vice President,
   	  Worldwide Integration Services Practices
   
   These organizational changes reflect the continued implementation of the 
   Digital Consulting strategy and business direction as described in the 
   "Looking Forward" document.  Digital Consulting is fortunate to have such 
   talented and experienced individuals assume these new responsibilities.  
   Please join us in congratulating and supporting each of them.
   



Distribution:
 
HENRY ANCONA @MLO
BOBBY CHOONAVALA @AKO
CHARLIE CHRIST @MLO
DICK FARRAHAR @MLO
RUSS GULLOTTI @MKO
WIN HINDLE @MLO
John Klein @MRO
PAUL KOZLOWSKI @MLO
ED LUCENTE @MLO
FRANK MCCABE @MLO
ED MCDONOUGH @BXC
Robert McNulty @OGO
VIN MULLARKEY @MLO
BOB PALMER @MLO
ENRICO PESATORI @MLO
Lucia Quinn @MLO
JOHN RANDO @OGO
BRUCE RYAN @MLO
Tom Siekman @MSO
ADRIANA STADECKER @MLO
BILL STEUL @MLO
BILL STRECKER @MLO
*_ROYALT::CABRINETY AT PNDVUEA1 at MLMAIL at MLO
Deb Bergevine @OGO
Ron Bohlin @OGO
GRESHAM BREBACH                      ( BREBACH.GRESHAM AT PNDVUEA1 at MLMAIL at MLO )
Bob Burke @OHF
Jim Collora @LAO
Rick Distasio @DCO
David Fritts @OGO
Ruth Gaines @COP
Sergio Giacoletto @GEO
Bob Griffin @MRO
Ian Hickson @OGO
Eric Lawrence @ZZO
Rich Linting @OGO
Dick Loveland @MKO
Bob McNulty @OGO
Jay Norman @OGO
William J Obrien @MSO
Dick Scarborough @OGO
Anita Slater @MLO
Kannankote Srikanth @AKO
Dan Thatte @OGO
Terry Theret @TKO
Cathy Welsh @OGO
*_STOWOA::SHARMA AT PNDVUEA1 at MLMAIL at MLO
 


    

    
    
        RE:  .29
    
        Question to the VP-watchers:  is this more or the same number 
        of VP's as before?  Doesn't seem to be fewer.
    

    Most of these people were already at VP level, it's just part of *the*
    reorg in DC.
    
    /d.c. 

During the past 2 weeks, I have taken a hard look at Digital Consulting to see
how "real" these changes are.  I spoke to several individuals at various
levels and asked some rather blunt questions.  I will convey some of what 
was shared with me.


REAL      These changes are quite substantive and real. We are 
CHANGE:	  definitely changing from an inward to outward perspectiive.  Our
	  D.C. "corporate" staff is shrinking from approx. 80 people to 
	  12 v.p.'s.  Many of the former corporate staff are finding
          homes in PSC's.

NOWHERE   In the new org., contribution to customers and customer engagements
TO HIDE:  will be both vital and visible.  Long term relationships and the
          success ($'s) of those relationships will be key indicators to how
          well individuals will do (and how long they will last).
          
SENSIBLE  The metrics are changing!  The "insane" behaviour created by 
METRICS:  counter productive-metrics will be corrected at the root.  Revenue
          will follow individuals.  The "do whats right for me at 
          the expense of the company" should be eliminated (or at least
          greatly diminished).

"READI-   There is a realistic sense of where D.C. technology "readiness" is 
 NESS":   and where we need to be.  The knowledge and technology gap is 
          acknowledged and correction plans are being implemented. The bad 
          news is that it exists.  The good news is that the competition (i.e.
          the EDS's and Andersens) are no better off and may be worse (as in 
          client/server technology).

In summary, I found that there is much substance to the Looking Forward
document and it is being implmented.  My hat is off to those who have brought
this together and are driving us to success.

I wish all my colleagues in Digital Consulting all the success in the world.  
I hope things do turn out as they appear they are heading.

-- Kevin Phillips