Conference 7.286::digital

    Whoever you are, you said a mouthful, and I'm not at all afraid to say
    I agree with you wholeheartedly!  It is amazing to me that we have 125+
    full VPs, probably another 250+ semi-VPs, and no one left to sell what
    we produce and service what we sell!
    
    Disillusioned, discouraged and depressed in SoCal,
    
    M.

    Does anybody know the ratio of MGR's vs Grunts being TSFO?
    
    Is this information Available? 
    
     

I remember that HP restructured their management a few years ago. It was proposed
by the President of HP.

The goal was to support NO MORE THAN FOUR OR FIVE LAYERS OF MANAGEMENT
between the President and the lowest worker.

Management was in an uproar, said it couldn't be done, found that they had to justify 
their jobs... and then management was cut without affecting the workers.

I believe that the goal was almost achieved.  I think they missed by one.

Dave

    The base note is very accurate.  It is interesting to me that American
    Express approached the reduction in this manner:  First, lay-off 25%
    of management. Next, re-organize.  Finally, lay-off the individual
    contributors.  This meant that the managers selecting the people were
    those that were going to work with thos individual contributors, and it
    also meant that there would not be the old "bumping" routine of higher
    rated workers displacing lower rated.  This approach could have helped
    Digital.  Of course, a goal, focus, objective or direction known by the
    employees could allow us to contribute more... 

        Re:                     <<< Note 3181.0 by QUARK::MODERATOR >>>

        I haven't  heard  about  getting  9 months if you make over $70K.
        I'll know on Tuesday, but I'll be very surprised if its true.  To
        my knowledge I'll get what everybody else gets!
        
        Anker

.0>  And what what about the people who already slipped by to become
.0>  individual contributors while maintaining their exorbitant salaries.  

  Yep, I've seen that done more than once.

         1)  Lay off a few real Individual Contributors (read: grunts)
         2)  Re-title a few managers, calling them 'Facilitators'
               or some other meaningless title
         3)  Higher-level manager now claims s/he cut a few managers.

  And so it goes..

-Vin

    The following reply has been contributed by a member of our community
    who wishes to remain anonymous.  If you wish to contact the author by
    mail, please send your message to ROWLET::AINSLEY, specifying the
    conference name and note number. Your message will be forwarded with
    your name attached  unless you request otherwise.

    Bob - Co-moderator DIGITAL

================================================================================
    In Information Design and Consulting, the budgeted headcount was 912
    individual contributors, contractors, management, and overhead.
    We participated in the last round of TFSO, described in a memo 6/6/94:

    LAID OFF/CONTRACTS TERMINATED		POSITIONS LEFT UNFILLED

    85 			individual contributors		25
    24			contractors			 ?*
     2			management			 3
     4			overhead			 1

    This leaves a budgeted headcount of 768.

    IDC structure is hard to explain to outsiders, and "overhead" positions
    are hard to fit into the manager:worker ratio, but it seems we TFSO'd:

    	6 manager/overhead bodies and 109 worker bodies
    	4 manager/overhead reqs   and  25 worker reqs 
       --			      ---
       10 manager/overhead heads  and 134 worker heads*

					*Not including contractor slots)

    Situation normal, big surprise.  
    M.

    re: .7 - by GNPIKE::SMITH 
    
    Two points about this and other previous notes:
    
    1. "out with the managers!" - hey, I was managing 28 people directly
       before this last/coming TFSO. And trying to keep technical, and
       trying to keep the group focused and funded. Managing all those
       people (all software engineers) directly was difficult. Having to
       make decisions about who will be TFSO'ed was damn awful. Trying
       to keep people focused today is impossible. Being a first line
       manager is one of the most thankless jobs at Digital - we're
       in the middle - and people are shouting for our heads. Give me
       a break.
    
    2. the $70K limit and high paid managers....I won't complain about
       what I get paid, from looking around it's okay. But there are
       several (5-6) people who work for me who get paid very close
       to what I do (within 5%), or get paid quite a bit more. And I
       don't disagree with this - these people are some of the best in
       the business and we should be paying them well. But it is not
       the case, here or in other jobs I've had at DEC, that managers
       always get paid significantly more than the technical folks.
    
    I'd say we need more leaders, rather than managers. I'd absolutely
    agree that we should reduce the numbers of paper pushers - but at the
    same time Digital should make it easier for those of us trying to lead.
    
    Tim

    .0
    
    I wish I had said that.  I wish I had the guts to.  No, make that, I
    wish I felt SAFE ENOUGH to!  (Now THERE's the saddest commentary of all
    on this once great company!)

    The following reply has been contributed by a member of our community
    who wishes to remain anonymous.  If you wish to contact the author by
    mail, please send your message to ROWLET::AINSLEY, specifying the
    conference name and note number. Your message will be forwarded with
    your name attached  unless you request otherwise.

    Bob - Co-moderator DIGITAL

================================================================================

The group I left (in disgust) not too long ago looks like this:

1993: Total = 35. 3 supervisors, 4 supporting staff and 28 IC's. 
      Staff = 19%

1994: Total = 27. 3 supervisors, 5 supporting staff and 19 IC's. 
      Staff = 42% 

    
    	.8
    		My first impression is shock. If one can't explain his own
    work organization, I question even having it in existence at all. To
    quote Fidelity's Peter Lynch "if it can't be explained with crayons,
    I don't invest in it." He was talking about companies, but 912
    employees doing virtually anything should be looked at as one would a
    company. 
    
    	As for previous discussions over TFSO in these files - most of you
    need to understand the facts surrounding what is going on here. So pull
    up a chair, relax, smoke 'em if you need 'em and please, pay attention.
    
    	When KO put Digital on the map in the mid-60s, we moved from an
    interesting start-up into the bigtime. We had no competition to speak
    of...no H-P, no IBM Rs/6000s or AS/400s, no SUN, no PCs. It was like
    taking candy from babies.
    	Because we had no competition, KO "invented" it internally. The
    unstated deal with employees was that "losers" did not get terminated.
    This worked great, and spurred even more growth, which created more
    internal competition, etc.
    	Pretty soon we were real big ($5billion worth), real profitable,
    and competitors started coming after us (this is the early 80s). This
    is called the entry of capital into high margin markets. At this point,
    we should have trimmed our sails and refocused the company. But we were
    on the proverbial roll, and missed it. The markets everyone points out
    that Digital missed are all the 80s products - PCs, Workstations, Rdb
    on other platforms, etc.
    	But we did nothing about stopping the internal competition. It
    continued unabated and without justification. Enter turf wars, multiple
    accounting of the same sale, empire building. Right here in River City,
    folks.
    	Now, today, we are in deep sneakers. The external forces are eating
    our lunch. We are top heavy, in serious margin decline; we have an
    overpaid workforce for the most part; a sales organization that thinks
    selling is answering the telephone; a support force that has to be
    begged to talk to a customer/prospect; engineering that is too often
    late to market with a "me-too" look about its product output; a
    marketing organization more byzantine than the Balkans and no more
    organized than that; and a management structure that long ago lost its
    "ear to the ground" and became just a bureaucracy focused on command
    and control.
    	So we go reactive instead of proactive (hence TFSO ad nauseum).
    
    	What can we as grunts do? Well it ain't wringing our hands, and
    crying "Woe is me".
    
    	When your customer/prospect calls - DO THAT FIRST.
    
    	Do the very best job you can do each day.
    
    	Accept this is an imperfect world, but you yourself are perfect.
    
    	Create change yourself - Make anything happen - Remember we all
    represent Digital. We may be screwed up right now, but as far as I'm
    concerned that's family business. And family business does NOT get
    discussed outside the house. Period. 
    
    	This may not change Digital, but if it cahnges you - THAT will
    change Digital.
    
    			the Greyhawk

RE: "greyhawk"

 >   ...we have...a sales organization that thinks selling is answering
 >   the telephone; a support force that has to be begged to talk to a
 >   customer/prospect...

Where in the HELL do you GET OFF tossing off remarks like that???

(YES, I *AM* SHOUTING!)

I am not in sales or support but I work in a small field sales office. 
The deadwood was gone long ago. The merely mediocre were gone not long 
after that. And some valued people have left at every step. What is left 
are people who are LOYAL, DEDICATED, PROFESSIONAL, and among the TOP
people Digital has ever had. 

The people who are left are doing an excellent job with the crappy 
resources they have left, with less and less as each day passes. I see 
it every day. And failure for the sales guys now means a cut in pay to
boot. 

DESPITE being kept in the dark, DESPITE being asked to do more and more
with less and less, DESPITE having 9 bosses in 45 months, DESPITE having
no job security, DESPITE the likelihood of being laid off anyway, and
DESPITE the attitudes of people like YOU, these people go out and sell
DEC products to unwilling customers, with insane internal bureaucratic
hassles and obstacles, no real corporate marketing, and the most intense
competition this company has ever seen in its life. 

THEY are the ones who bring in the bulk of the revenue in this company. 
One by one and day by day. They are going far beyond what anyone in the
company has a right to expect. Most of the IC people who are left,
including sales people, are the cream of the crop, working harder than
ever under the worst conditions ever. They pick themselves and each
other up when they're down, and go on anyway. 

And anyone who doesn't know it DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.

What is wrong is not the people who are left rowing the boat.  It's the
CAPTAIN and his OFFICERS who keep running us up on sandbars and into
rocky shoals. 

Kevin R. Ossler

    250 + vice presidents and climbing ! Every time I log onto the system,
    there's another VP being named.
    Sad to say, I have never repeat NEVER received a single bit of
    assistance from a Digital VP which contributed a whit towards customer
    satisfaction or profitability.  This is not true of other companies
    where REAL managers exist who do positively contribute.
    Assume each VP earns $150K and we fire them all.  That contributes 37.5
    million to the bottom line profitability of this company.  Not only
    that, getting them out of the way so that real productivity can occur
    would probably save ten times as much.
    Anyone else agree with this idea ????
    

    .14 - Amen!  I am a sales/sales support person, and I talk to more
    customers each day than many full sales reps, and bring in more than my
    fair share of revenue, mostly on my own.
    
    .15 - Pat, great idea.  On the other hand, at least a few (say about 20
    or so) would have to be replaced -- who the heck would *want* their
    jobs?!
    
    m.

Re: .14

FWIW, Corson IS in sales.

 >   ...we have...a sales organization that thinks selling is answering
 >   the telephone; a support force that has to be begged to talk to a
 >   customer/prospect...


    i used to laugh off such ridiculous statements like these. still do
    mostly. but i just wanted to add a simple description of those
    making such statements today:
    
    
    
                FOOLS!!

    
    	Good. We have some noters getting on me, instead of Digital. I feel
    better already.
    
    	But some cold hard truths still remain. Our yield per sales person
    is the lowest in the industry. Most sales focus is on existing
    installations of Digital gear. A vast majority of our sales force is
    not current on the core technologies of networking, UNIX, the
    convergience of voice, data, and higher bandwidth technologies, and
    the software "middleware" necessary to achieve interoperability.
    
    	I do not blame the sales force for this lack of knowledge, except
    where blame can be directly noted. It is the individual's
    responsibility to make sure he/she is current with the rapid change
    taking place in computing today. Digital should be doing more to help,
    but since it isn't, the individual must assume that responsibility.
    
    	Sorry if people do not like to hear this. But the cold truth can be
    bitter. Tough.
    
    	It has always been my contention that selling into our install base
    is a complete waste of expensive resources. Sales focus must be new
    accounts and new business. Selling VAX upgrades to Alpha OpenVMS is NOT
    the best use of field resources.
    
    	Unfortunately we compensate of field sales force on doing just
    that. Sales people should have base salaries no higher than the
    industry average which is less than $50K. Additional comp should come
    from their MARGIN contributions, not gross $ revenue. Commissions
    should be paid based on $1, not a bonus system that is meaningless
    until one achieves 100% of a number arbitrarily set by management with
    very little input from the IC (or the reality of the marketplace).
    
    	Sales support should also have a vested interest in this game with
    bonuses based on the overall success of their respective sales
    organizations.
    
    	Today, we are so busy reacting that we are not proacting. I'll
    venture very few salespoeple working Monday June 20th are doing work
    that is focused in the second and third quarter of FY95. Yet
    prospective customers are out there in abundance and that is when the
    business will be awarded.
    
    	I am not the least bit cowed by any comments to my writings. My own
    performance in 8 years of sales at Digital stand for themselves. And
    the past two years I have always finished above 200% of plan. I will
    next year also. But my focus is new business. The distributors and
    Master Resellers can have my install base. The big $$$ are the first,
    second, and third transactions in this industry. After that it is lots
    of effort and very little return since pricing, support, and other "I
    have to have, or you don't get this order now" considerations take
    over.
    
    	As my old college hockey coach said, "If you want to win you better
    be willing to hit." 
    
    	One does not hit an install base, one hits the competition in the
    game of new business.
    
    	Please continue.......
    
    			the Greyhawk

	Greyhawk,

	  I don't think that anyone will disagree with your comments
      in .20 regarding new business. But your "blanket" statement regarding
      sales and sales support in general and "how they respond" to customer
      calls, I will take issue with. This may true in the area where "you
      work", but not in mine. Today, I came in at 3:30 am, why? Because 
      of customer "related work", last minute customer demands and deadlines.
      I'm not complaining, its part of the job and I accept it, as do others
      in my office. You painted a picture of a "lazy", "unresponding sales
      and sales support force", not true, simply not true. 


      Rick

 

    When you paint with a broad brush... you are bound to run over the
    edges.

    SO how can we hit these new markets with tremendous growth potential,
    like Virtual Reality and Home Multi-Media, which by the year 2000
    will experience a revolution not unlike what we saw in a similar
    way with the advent of the VCR, CD,etc in recent years...except this
    time, the computer will be an integral part of the equation (read 
    AXP and 64-bit architechture).  Virtual Reality will, once the cost
    comes down, be as commce as your Sega Genesis, but with far
    more meaningful potential than just game-playing.  Same goes for
    multi-media (TV/Computer/Telephone/Videophone/Fax/Stereo/etc all-
    in-one.  The information appliance!  These coming technologies
    NEED 64 bit to succeed and we've got it NOW.  So why aren't we
    tapping these markets is what I can't understand....
    
    Bob

    	When I joined DEC, one of the salesmen to whom I was technical
    support had the following as his target for the year :- $200k equipment
    sales, plus sign up 5 new OEMs (ISVs). His hardware sales target came
    to not much more than selling one machine each to each new customer - 5
    systems per year, but he had to work hard to sell each of those 5
    systems. That was when DEC was planning for a future. Some of those
    customers would have been buying hundreds or thousands of our machines
    per year a couple of years later.
    
    	How many salesmen do we have who are given that sort of target
    these days?

    greyhack:
    
    Hubris.  Pure an simple; on a very larg scale....
    
    And if you are doing better than 200% of your budget consistantly,
    then your management is not doing their job....
    
    Parvenu

    re:  <<< Note 3181.23 by SUBPAC::MARTEL >>>
    
>                                         These coming technologies
>    NEED 64 bit to succeed and we've got it NOW.  So why aren't we
>    tapping these markets is what I can't understand.... 
    
    There's a simple answer to this question: Long-term investment.
    The companies (mostly Japanese) who have succeeded in the past
    have done so because they were in for the long haul. How many
    years did it take for VCR's and CD's to really catch on?  It 
    takes patience and commitment to triumph, and that's something
    that Digital doesn't have.
    
    We're in a bind:  We invested billions in Alpha, with no clear
    goal other than to create a new general-purpose microprocessor,
    mainly for our own use. Five years ago, it made a little sense
    because we were the world leader in selling microprocessor-based
    computers, and it looked like we could dictate to the market.
    
    Now our company is suffering because those billions weren't used
    to engineer products the market demanded, and because we didn't
    follow through with the final steps of marketing what we *did* have.
    So, depending upon your point of view, we either invested too much
    in Alpha (starving other development) or we didn't invest enough
    (in marketing and OEM development). Take your pick.
    
    Geoff

    
    	I love it!!!
    
    	Imagine considering my preformance, that someone notes my
    management is not doing its job. Not that I am, but that they aren't.
    
    	For the record, I began each fiscal year with no accounts and a
    multi-million $ budget. In FY93 it was $1-million. I did $2.4 million
    and added 15 new resellers to the Digital stable. In FY94, my budget
    was $2.3-million, again no accounts, I will finish this year at $5.2-
    million with eight new accounts.
    
    	I think management is doing its job considering my skills. What it
    is not doing is making the rest of the sales force focus like myself.
    
    	We continually create paperwork for sales managers instead of new
    account goals; we create additional labor for sales reps that are not
    sales focused - chasing shipments, world's most screwed up sales crediting
    system, improper invoicing, collecting due bills - you name it.
    
    	Digital has had more US sales Managers in the past five years than
    I can name. Every DEC 100 and COE plaque I have has a different name on
    it. This is ridiculous. Get organized and get focused. This is basic
    stuff.
    
    	Goals should be established by the SLT and every goal sheet from
    the head guy to me should be the same.
    	Budgets (revenue projections) should be bottom up, not top down.
        Every rep should be required to sign 5 new accounts per year.
    	Compensation should be based on margin $ contribution by IC and
    MANAGERS.
    
    	This is all basic sales 101, folks. But we have developed a
    cultural bias against sales. This must end now. Without a sale, you got
    nothing. I am.....
    
    			the Greyhawk
    	

    re: .27 Greyhawk
    
    In general, IMHO, you are very correct.  I would like to point out
    that, again, IMHO, one of the MAJOR reasons for the lack of focus is
    the constant 'musical chairs' being played out at your local Digial
    office.  It is not possible, in my mind, for that required focus to be
    acheived until we have a stable Digital management.  Managers should
    expect a multi-year stay in their respective positions.  Likewise, a
    manager should have sugnificant experience working in the area they are
    selected to manage.
    
     rww

    Hmmm.. $5.3m of what and at what discount.  I distrust gross numbers
    grossly........
    
    If PC's, then at what margin?  What is the contribution to bottom
    line?  Does it warrant the pay out you'll get at 183% of budget.
    
    Bob, who spent the last three weeks doing 20hr/days for fy96 business
    proposal.  With my sales support guys and gals (all of them). 
    
    
       

    
    	:-1
    
    		Those numbers are net shipments. I'm channels. Total
    allowances given this year to my resellers is less than $10,000.
    That's right $10K.
    
    		Already had someone send me a VMSmail saying I'm tooting
    my horn. Au contreur. What I'm trying to accomplish is using me as an
    example, what our whole salesforce should be doing. I dislike the
    End-user vs. Channels sales set-up. Everywhere I've worked in this
    business you sell. Everything to everybody. An order and its
    installation are the touchstones. We add so much bureaucratic CR*P to
    this process as to make it virtually unmanageable.
    
    	Success in business is executing the basics. Vince Lombardi said it
    best - Winning isn't everything, it's the ONLY thing.
    
    		the Greyhawk
    
    

    The note seems to have drifted off base, but what the heck...
    
    In the UK, we are actively pursuing the channels focus and I beleive
    that much of the cr*p in the computer comics about firing the sales
    force comes from this. We have a very few large accounts managed
    directly with the balance run by channels. What we are now working
    towards is the geographic, small(er) account sales people running
    channels not accounts.
    
    Personally I hope we go further in the large accounts too. My concept
    and the way I work is to allow channels/sales specialists/DECdirect
    (which ever is in fashion) to manage the installed base in an account
    to allow me time to go after the competitive stuff. I would also favour
    goaling with mandatory new business elements, and with higher
    bonus/commission payments for getting it. We have let sales people sit
    in existing, safe Digital accounts churning the base for too long. We
    need to grow market share on both new name accounts and new divisions
    of users.
    
    I get the sense that it is worse in the US than elsewhere, but sales
    are still viewed as a necessary nuisance who get all the kudos. People
    don't see the lousy systems we have to put up with and the petty
    beaurocracy (Director level sign off to get an customer account number
    allocated back to me when the account is a wholly owned subsid on my
    ONLY account???!!).
    
    Keep going Mr Corson, So long as they keep doubling you goal year on
    year, and you keep doubling the performance, I've got no qualms with
    you getting the commission you've earned, but then I'm a peddlar like
    you.
    
    Paul

    and *I've* no problem with hearing him tell us about them!
    
    If that's tooting your own horn, then lets hear a SYMPHONY!
    
    tony
    

    re. Greyhawk (The Great One")
    
    
    I suggest you remove the top hat. Selling to resellers is the least
    challenging of all the tasks charged to DEC sales reps.  One of our
    biggest problems in sales, is that too many have survived on these 
    "Email wins" for years.

    Hey, Greyhawk.
    
    You sound like you walk around with your chest puffed like a peacock.
    Great, I'm glad you're successful, the role model that all of us should
    strive to emulate. But,
    
    I just don't happen to subscribe to your theory that what you do is
    wonderful, and that "churning the installed base" doesn't "count".
    
    I've prospected (here and elsewhere). I've sold direct/end-user,
    volume/channels, and what we used to call TOEM (here and elsewhere). I
    "take care of" a single "installed" account. I've never had a more
    challenging assignment. 5 years ago we were doing $500k. 3 years ago
    $2M. This year, $4M.
    
    No, I don't want to be just like you (and I don't expect anyone wants
    to be just like me either). We're all supposed to be selling
    (profitably), whether we're coded sales or not, if we're to succeed in
    some very tough markets.
    
    You've made some good points in some notes, but sometimes you get REAL
    tiresome to read.
    
    Regards,
    Another peddler
    

    
    	I don't mean to be tiresome, just cranky so times. We all have our
    days. But I'm very worried that our days are passing rapidly. We all,
    in sales especially, feel unappreciated. So excuse me if I appear to be
    using this forum to hype me. That is not my intent.
    	What I'm driving for is to get us to all think "beyond the dots".
    'Cause quite truthfully we are the only ones today who seem able to do
    just that.
    	And yet I cannot shake this juxposition of we engineer and
    manufacture the best technology in the marketplace, and we are losing
    the war.
    
    		the Greyhawk

    Just found out that a sales rep in our office got the boot. Not that
    that is unusual. What _is_ a little unusual is that he was at 300% of
    budget. Go figure.
    

Re: .37

Makes perfect sense - he set a bad example for the mediocre majority - made
them feel inadequate.  (I'm joking - sort of.)

I'm reminded of a scene near the beginning of Terry Gilliam's wonderful
film "The Adventures of Baron Munchausen".  A soldier (played by Sting in
a brief cameo) is presented to the town's mayor with explanations of his
bravery and success in killing dozens of the horde invading the town and
how he rescued six of his fellow soldiers.  The mayor looks at him, pauses,
then says "Have him executed immediately.  Can't have him setting a bad
example for the others."

					Steve

Ohhh! I GET IT!  "_Pay_ for performance"!!!

    Some sales insiders have presented the opinion that "volunteers" were
    being taken for this TFSO.  That may be why so many successful people
    are leaving this week.  After all, someone who is doing well is ever so
    much more marketable on the outside...
    
    M.

    Observation:
    
    It wasn't all that long ago that folks TFSO'd from this (once) great
    company were truly sad to go.
    Something has caught my attention...  folks in the cafe who have been
    TFSO'd congratulating each other with big smiles of relief and
    excitement, sharing stories of what their next adventures will be,
    people openly helping each other out with resum� writing, boasting of
    interviews lined up OUTSIDE of these four walls;  came upon a bunch of
    folks laughing and talking, after telling them that no laughter/levity
    are allowed with mock sternness, was informed that the happiest one of
    all was "taking the package" and couldn't wait...  "I was just
    jealous..."  you can tell who's going, they are the one with years
    miraculously falling from their faces, and who's staying, we're the
    ones with all the pain and worry etched in our faces...
    
    Does anyone "up there" notice, or care?

    Greyhack:
    
    Your management is screwing up because they can't read your market and
    they believe you when you sell them it's potential (or lack).  They 
    should know how wonderful you are and how wonderful your terrritory is and they
    should budget you accordingly.  For you to acheive 200+ % each year is
    a badge of incompetence on your managements part.  
    
    I love the comp plan too.  I'm doing well this year and I am glad you
    are doing well too.  BUT: Your arrogance is making me puke.  Using
    yoursel as an example of what the entire salesforce should strive for
    is hubris ......
    
    You make some good points.....
    
    regards
    
    Mark another peddler..... 

    Greyhair,
    
    I have to agree with the opinions expressed of your management. I've
    seen TOO many succeed at 200%+ year over year based on "cozy" relations
    with management re budgeting. Well????
    
    Anyway, I'me glad you're successful. I own LOTS of shares of this
    company. I've contributed LOTS of gross margin $ to this company. I
    think we need people out selling to new accounts. I think, tho, if we
    neglect our large clients, and the volume/marginal revenue they
    represent, we're missing a WHOLE LOT.
    
    I'll take the rest of this off-line, as some of what WE (yeah, you and
    I have very similar objectives!) can discuss how to recoup the 20% -
    40% of our income we must earn back (personally, this represented a 20%
    - 30% raise), but please, if you must slam sales
    
    
    			DON'T

RE: Has anyone noticed... folks TFSO'd from this (once) great company 
	were truly sad to go. [Now they are...] congratulating each other
	with big smiles of relief and excitement.


	At the risk of being labeled a defeatist, it sounds like pretty
	reasonable thinking. There is a growing perception within the
	corporate "self" of Digital that we *are* going to go down and
	that will probably become self-fulfilling. 

	Although we keep calling for leadership and direction, the cynical
	feeling that "they don't know what they're doing" helps to insulate
	us from feeling culpable for the continued downward spiral. There
	isn't anyone on this planet who can motivate you except yourself.

	When this all started the "troops" cared ... they loved DEC.

	As someone mentioned earlier ... this "Digital" place isn't the
	same thing. This allows rationalizations like: "Giving up on
	`Digital' doesn't mean you gave up on DEC."

	So when the cheerleaders/generals shout "Over the top lads!" the
	resounding "yea, rah..." is deafing. At this point very few of us
	haven't said "it's just a job." That's really when DEC died; we
	now have a very limited amount of time to do CPR - extensive
	damage is being done with every passing day, and at some point
	BOD has to start salvaging what they can. They may have already
	started to pull the plugs.

	Larry

    
    	Isn't it all somewhat sad. Like watching a truly great movie, and
    then it ends, just when you want more.
    
    	As said many times before - we have really GREAT technology. Our
    problem is twofold - one we can't market and sell it worth a **** , and
    we create such business hurdles for our customers/prospects to jump
    over to acquire our technology that they get mad at us.
    
    	So where's the beef? I'll tell you - it is in solving problem #2.
    Eliminate the hurdles, and the race gets easier. All my ruminatings
    are the same. Fix our business practices. I'm successful basically
    because I'm breaking most of Digital's rules (which are shortsighted
    on a good day, stupid by most). I'm signing resellers who do not fit
    our narrowly defined niches, so I stretch the verbage, etc.
    
    	Is this right? Hell, is this wrong? I don't honesty know. But I do
    know that without sales Digital has got nothing. 
    
    	A toast to all sales reps who keep fighting, and dying, in this
    environment. It's to you a pledge not quitting the fight. If Digital
    will change so we can succeed all - we will again see a $100/share DEC
    stock price.
    
    		the Greyhawk

   Old chinese wisdom says:

   "If rules help you in getting your job done, well. If they prevent you
    form doing your job, to the hell with the rules, and get the show on
    road".

    Nino

    
    RE: .46  I like it.
    
    
    
    RE: .45  You think that sales reps are the only ones in the company? 
    Pretty short sighted if you ask me.  
    
    
    
    Mike

    One of several probles that might araise from breaking the rules is
    setting unrealistic customer expectations. If you tell the customer it
    will be delivered in two days then your setting us up for failure and
    giving us a back eye at the same time.
    
    just my.2 cents worth.

   I agree with .-1. I use the following scope:

   laws: general rules set by the country: always abide them
   ethics: personal choose amongst various possibilities which will more or
           less create a positive effect or bad effect
   policy: internal general behaviour rules, aimed at reaching the company's
           goal. Follow them.
   rule: practical behaviour guideline (like: fill that form before making
         something else, etc.).

   When I say to the hell with the rules, I mean the last definition, not the
   first 3. Your example is breaching ethics, not rules.

   Nino

    .greyhawk
    
    Wow you really started a large rathole - this was an excellent note.
    
    I'd like to bring the discussion back up to the level it started, that
    the layoffs are being handled poorly.
    
    What kills me is that it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see it.
    Everyone knows it, but...'the emperor has no clothes' - thus the
    anonymity of this note.
    
    The layoffs in our group are based on a Workforce planning model that
    states Core Skills (project mgt, high level consultants, managers) are
    the skills we need, and Commodity skills (engineering,
    programming,course development, graphic design) we can OUTSOURCE. 
    
    This outsourcing strategy is defined by the upper echelon whose
    motivation is to save their skins. So, let's outsource workers who are
    contributing to the bottom line and who make 1/3 the combined income
    as the managers/higher level consultants. Incredible.
    
    So what do we gain by outsourcing (my perspective):
     - a workforce who can do nothing but manage projects (no direct $$
    contribution)
     - a loss of control over the quality, reliability and effectivness of
    the work that is being done
     - no dollar savings
    
    FYI, my husband and I both work for DEC, and we forwarded the base note
    to Bob Palmer. We love this company (how corny) and watching this
    happen, is killing us.
    
    phew~ I feel 10 lbs lighter.... 

    
    	To those who question rules vs. ethics the answer is quite simple.
    Do what you can control. ie. Giving someone a credit when Digital
    screwed up (I'll do that on the spot and fix it internally myself);
    telling someone something will ship before you know what the deal is
    is sales suicide, same with allowances (make it easy on yourself -
    don't give 'em) for "competitive" reasons.
    
    	As for the original base note, our layoff policy is bassackwards.
    Two years ago the stiffs got lots of money, early retirement packages,
    etc. Today we get one month/one week per year - wooptedoo. Again it is
    being done (like virtually everything here) in reverse. Unfortunately
    there isn't a thing anyone can do, including RP. The fact is we got no
    money anymore.
    
    	For the record, I really like Digital. The logo is great. And it
    looks terrific on a PC. However, the base (read: core) problems are not
    being addressed. 
    
    	Saw MicroAge's REALTIME publication today at one of my VARs. In it
    MicroAge listed its top 100 selling products for the month of May. We
    had just one product in that list - it was our DECpc 486/66 340Mg drive
    unit - it was ranked 81st. H-P had 17 products, including the top
    three; IBM had 19 products, and COMPAQ had 24 products, including 6 in
    the top 20. Now you tell me.....
    
    	As for me I may be an SOB, but I'm not really arrogant. My
    management will all tell you no one works harder and smarter than I do.
    Yes, I have an ego - so what?
    
    	But I am in touch with the marketplace, as many of the rest of our
    "grunts" at DEC are. I think Digital's SLT ought to gettogether with
    six or seven of us representing the entire field structure and listen
    to what we have to say. I am confident I could come up with a better
    focused, and more rewarding, sales plan than these guys. For example,
    I sure wouldn't keep everyone on pins and needles as to what the sales
    world is going to look like in July (which is just seven business days
    away).
    
    	But I'll tell you all what - as long as we keep our sanity, it's
    OK.
    
    			the Greyhawk

 re: .41  "It wasn't all that long ago that folks TFSO'd from..."

        This phenomenon is not unique to Digital, so please do
 not interpret it as an omen.  When layoffs started in big US
 corporations a few years ago, the reaction was shock and surprise.
 The trusting relationship had been broken.  The remaining
 employees questioned, "am I next?", or, "when will I be gone?".
        As a rule, it takes longer for something not to happen
 than to happen.  The suspense grows, and grows until the
 expectations are realized.  The relief of being TFSO'd is certain
 and tangible, but the lack of TFSO just breeds more suspense.
        This is a natural series of events.  A solid profit would
 help rebuild the belief that hard work and contribution to
 profitability leads to continued employment.
        Worry and fear accomplishes little.  Prepare, and if it
 happens, it happens.

 -Austin W

    re .50
    
>    So what do we gain by outsourcing (my perspective):
>     - a workforce who can do nothing but manage projects (no direct $$
>    contribution)
    
    It's worst than that.  You can't manage what you can't understand.
    So unless you're qualified to do it, you're not qualified to
    manage it.
    
    Heresy?  Hardly.
    
    Who does the work breakdowns?  Who does the estimates?
    What are the pitfalls?  How can you quantify risk if no one 
    involved has a strategy for providing the solution?  Or
    even any recent experience in building something similar.
    
    Read Dilbert.  I used to laugh since it so eloquently described
    our competion.  Now I just grimace.
    
    

    .52
    
    Don't see as any omen, more a statement of sadness.  Who would have
    thunk that anyone would be _glad_ to leave DEC, oops, make that,
    Digital?
    
    That's all, a simple expression of grief.

    .54
    
    Well, since Friday is my last day, I have to admit, 
    I'm glad to be leaving Digital, and very sad to be leaving DEC.
    
    take care
    Frank
    

    The following entry has been contributed by a member of our community
    who wishes to remain anonymous.  If you wish to contact the author by
    mail, please send your message to QUARK::MODERATOR, specifying the
    conference name and note number. Your message will be forwarded with
    your name attached  unless you request otherwise.

				Steve






			Questions about the Workforce Plan

		The intent of the Workforce Plan for SES (Shared 
	Engineering Services) is to outsource the "development and 
	delivery" of manuals and training for our customers and retain 
	the core services that "will revolve around definition,  design,  
	and  project management."  In the near future for example SES 
	will no longer write user's guides for our products but will 
	instead supervise contract writers.  This approach brings to 
	my mind the following questions:

	Does this make sense?

		Is project management a key area where SES adds 
		value to Digital's products?  Is this one of our 
		"core compentencies"?  Couldn't this result in a 
		smaller organization with almost the same overhead?

		Doesn't this idea of temporary,  contract workers preclude 
		the self-managed team concept that was the goal of the last
		re-organization?  What about the benefits of "co-location" 
		of a product team?  Do our customers (internal funders)
		want this type of organization?  Were they asked?

	Has this worked in other companies?

		In what other companies has this management-of-contractors
		approach proved successful?  Microsoft?  Novell? 
		Other knowledge industries?  

	Will this model be expanded throughout Engineering?

		Is this the way of the future throughout Digital?  Will 
		engineering be outsourced and project management be 
		retained?  

	Doesn't this lengthen the chain between customers and developers?

		Won't this add one more layer of interpretation between
		what our customers ask for and the people actually 
		developing the products?

	Are writing and course development skills commodities?

		Is project management really the key to information 
		that our customers find helpful and easy to use?   
		In any book store,  there are large numbers of books on 
		software and hardware.  People buy these books in
		addition to whatever manuals they get with the products
		they use.  Do people buy these manuals because 
		they are well written?  If so,  should we consider good 
		writing an important skill that we want to retain within
		Digital?  

			 	
	Can we do this in a professional manner?

		Downsizing and re-organizing require a great deal of time
		and effort that has to come from somewhere.  Isn't there 
		a danger in attempting both simultaneously that it 
		will be months before we get up and running again?

>		"core compentencies"?  Couldn't this result in a 
>		smaller organization with almost the same overhead?
    
    Wow, now THERE's a great idea! Smaller organizations with the same
    overhead! 
    
    ...tom

    
    I think there's a couple of different replies in here on the
    same subject. Mods, does it make sense to consolidate
    into one note?  The SES reorg note or something?
    
    Glenn

    rep ;-1
    Glenn,
    	not being a regular to the digital notesfile, I see SES's reorg
    has attracted somewhat more than [they] expected. I'll opt note 3209 
    as focus for SES reorg
    
    /Dean
    
    
    

    re .60 -< Why not outsource management? >-
    
    It would never work!  That would be a real Alice in Wonderland
    scenario.  Visualise a group of designers, programmers and documenters
    sitting around, saying
    
    a:	We need some management around here.  Let's ring the agency and get
    a few CV's in.
    
    b:  Yes, good idea.  However, some of the old ex-Digital guys sure
    charge a lot.
    
    a:  Yes, but they're worth every penny.  How else are we going to get
    this product out the door without them?
    
    b:  Of course, as we get further into the project, we're going to need
    more than one manager.  When in the project are we going to need a full
    committee, do you think
    
    a:  Straight away, I should think....
    
    
    At this stage, the alarm clock goes off and I awake, in a cold sweat. 
    it could never happen......
    
    Martin