Conference 7.286::digital

Yep.  On a semi-related note, I've always thought the way capital equipment
was handled around here was a joke.  (If we had a supplier as unreliable
as the internal equipment flow to produce things, they wouldn't be a supplier
very long.)  The crux of the situation there is somewhat similar - cost
center managers should get a budget and other than perhaps some very broad
rules to prevent some particular types of behavior, it should be presumed
the person is responsible, and they should be able to spend the budget.
In particular, it shouldn't be possible to have things like:

    - Try to get capital equipment, have it come in 9 months later

    - Have allocated budget go away at the end of the year because someone
      failed to deliver to you

    - Have someone say "no, you can't spend on x", when x is reasonably
      necessary to get work done

The particular fix to this would seem to me to be to have internal orders
go in the queue with external orders, with the purchase price setting
queue priority.  (e.g. if the cost center really needs something, they
pay full price and it goes in the queue with customer orders.  If they
can wait for a while, they get a discounted price, which roughly corresponds
to the current situation.)  This should have several beneficial effects,
including hardware not showing up internally only at end-of-life (unless
you can get enough "special signatures"), requiring too many people whose
job is to "just say no", etc.  Anyway, this was mostly a digression, but
it's another symptom of the same problem.  ("Re-engineering" should
ideally fix the problems like .0 and this first...)

As a related topic/question for discussion. Does anyone know what is being
done in the space of internal systems overhaul, re-engineering effort, the
famous supply chain ? Is there any progress sheet on these things? We do
have a CIO (Chief Information Officer), any communication available from his
office? Any benchmarking?

Avinash

    
    	-1
    
    	Enrico noted in his DVN of 19 Dec 1994 that CSD was working hard
    to get this "systems problem" resolved by the end of CY95. He noted
    that the SAP implementation would begin in the US in Feb. 95 and that
    Max Meyer was the *lucky* guy.
    	Stay tuned.
    
    		the Greyhawk		

    RE: 0  I am a member of one of those groups that happens to be made
    up of "little clerks" and "little schedulers" and "order fulfillment
    folks."  I am one of those little people that receive DEMANDS to ship
    an order that got lost in the back of "somebodys" briefcase and it
    came to their attention when the customer started asking questions.
    I'm one of the little people that have to patiently explain that the
    material on the order has a 90 day LEADTIME and then I must take the
    time to explain what is meant by LEADTIME.  I do all that I can to
    expedite an order that won't have a FRS (First Revenue Ship) for at
    least 45 days but someone in the field REALLY doesn't care about a
    little thing like that, it's not their problem.  You say we have no
    idea what we are trying to do as a company?  I disagree.  We are the
    little people that have to cover for ones that don't care about
    process.  Unrealistic expectations are given and WE are the ones that
    are charged with carrying through on those commitments.  We do NOT
    view field people as being "lower than snake slime."  We have never
    questioned the commitment and dedication of any of our brother and
    sister DECCIES.  Please don't put words in our mouths.  We try to
    have a little more compassion for EVERYBODY that is making an honest
    effort to get this company back on it's feet.  It would appear that
    you were trying to get an order to ship for a demo and it didn't 
    happen in a time frame that pleased you.  I'm sure the reason isn't
    because someone in this group or any other order fulfillment group
    didn't try.  I would guess that something was handled incorrectly when
    the order was entered, just a guess but I'll bet that if all procedures
    were followed the order would have gone on time. Oh yes, there MUST be
    procedures in place weather we like them or not.  Working together to
    iron out any rough spots will smooth out the path that will lead us
    back to profitability anything else is a waste of time.
    
    	                   Proud to be a
    
                        NEW ENGLAND PURITAN
    
                          SEASONS GREETINGS
    
                             Art

    RE: 3591.4
    
    Greyhawk, you and I have been around long enough to have heard that old
    "the checks int he mail and we're working on the systems" hack every year
    since forever. It's not just the sytems, which mostly don't work, it's
    all of the processes which are totally broken. We aren't doing any real
    re-engineering and we're not even doing much of a triage job on the
    bleeding and dying. All that is happening today is that a form of
    street vending, similar to how Russia's economy is running, is going
    on. Folks are striking deals directly with plant managers, product
    managers, or others, on a personal favor level to get things done.
    There is no system, ther is no strucuture. No one is really sure who
    has any authority to approve anything. No one has any money or any
    authority to spend. The pricing system is not necessarily accurrate.
    The order fulfilment system people openly admit that we have no commit
    or re-commit system at all. We have plants idle part of the time
    because they can't be properly scheduled. It's a friggin' mess! 
    
    Just after I posted the base note in this string, I hit another pet
    peeve, so I might as well get it out in here as well.
    
    I was trying to get an archive version of some software, because my
    customer has to continue to run on VMS V5.5-2 for a while due to
    application software constraints (real world stuff). The person that I
    happen to get hold of at the SW Loan of Products group gave me the all
    to familiar "Well, why don't they just upgrade to the current product"
    answer. After FLAMMING her into a pile of quivering ashes, I tried
    explaining how the real world behaves...time for layered application
    development, regression testing, all that stuff. They don't have a
    clue! These people actually believe that our customers shoud drop
    everything, stop production and upgrade their systems everytime that
    we introduce a new version. She even stated that the old version had
    been "obsolete forever...at least 1  year". What planet do we get these
    folks from? Isn't there anyone back there who ever had a real job in
    the real world? 
    
    -OFWAMI-
    

    Oooo.  Guess that .0 hit a raw nerve, huh?  Both .0 and .5 have
    defensible positions, so I am not going to agree or disagree with
    either of you.  I will say that I run into lots of "just say no" folks,
    but they aren't always "little people".  They are the ones whose 
    permission you need to do business that's a little unusual, not quite
    "standard", but neither unprofitable nor risky.  Often, these people
    like to say "no" just because we've never done it that way before. 
    
    Names and situations withheld in order to protect the innocent.
    
    M.
    

    RE: -1
    
    HEY ART.......GO FOR IT!!!!
    
    I'm one of those in the field that gets the same s*it you guys in order
    fulfillment get when those orders get left in those briefcases...
    
    I'm with you.  90% of our issues (around ship dates and deliveries,
    whether product, invoices, or anything else for that matter) are
    because someone made a committment they SHOULD NOT have made.  They
    didn't ask the person that was responsible for the delivery.  AQS
    quotes lead times.  DAH can we count 10 business days???? Our systems
    can't generate an invoice overnight for product/services that haven't
    been shipped/delivered, but we're (admin/USLS/COM etc.) expected to
    deliver one..... and on, and on, and on, and on....
    
    If the RIGHT people were involved in the process UP FRONT like they
    should be, we wouldn't overcommit ourselves and put Digital in the
    light that some of our customers see us in currently.
    
    Just mine.....
    
    Toodles.....JP

    
    re.0
    
    Sure there are those in our company that are 1st class jerks.
    But most of those down the line are dealing with systems and processes,
    and policy that are outdated and inefficient. So the people down
    the line become nothing but "bearors of bad news" And you know
    how that role plays out.
    
    If you want to blame anybody for your grief. Blame the management
    from past years that did nothing to invest in our internal systems.
    Although all of us associated with the systems were screaming for
    improvements.
     
    
    And try to have a Merry Christmas will ya.
    
    Dave
    

    RE:  3591.6    Geez, you ARE having a bad day aren't you????  FLAMMING
    a co-worker into a pile of quivering ashes really shows a lot of class.
    Oh well, we all have THOSE days every now and then.

    .0, lost out on that holiday commission hey, for committing to something
    that YOU should'nt have committed to, and it's the little peons faults,
    right??
    If there was enough material available, we peons could ship out
    whatever anyone wanted, whenever they wanted it.  But like you said,
    it's the processes in place and little peons that just like to say NO.
    
    
    Happy Holidays,
    Garry
    

    Time to re-read DEMING's 14 points in running a successful system.
    It was on educational TV last night.  Dr. Deming died with his
    boots on it appears.

    justme....jacqui

    Well, we've had an exercise in blaming the other person, haven't we.  I
    completely understand both sides, having sold and been in consulting.
    
    The issue is, that people have been allowed to grow up in Digital with
    one of two mindsets:
    
    1.  "Here are the five reasons why you can't do what you want to do 
    Knock these down, and I'll give you 5 more."  This is frustrating, and
    is very dangerous to those who want to help customers do business with
    Digital.
    
    2. "I want what I want, and don't try to tell me anything".  
    
    When these mindsets meet, it's interesting and entertaining, but
    doesn't help Digital at all.  In my view, both need to be surgically
    extracted, and replaced with a mindset that says, "Interesting idea, I
    need you and you need me, so that we can see if there's a way to make
    it happen."
    
    So, can any of you help?
    
    Rgds
    
    Don Randall
    Seattle

    
    re.0
    
    Rather fooish of you to alienate "all" those that support you based
    on what is most likely some bad instances.
    
    For every complaint about the those down the line in the cycle, there
    is an equal number of complaints for those at the beginning ie:sales.
    
    Would you like to hear 11 years worth of some great experiences of 
    dealing with sales people that couldn't configure themselves out of
    a paper bag. Or thought that price they dreamed up could be just
    forced into AQS. Or that a specal system from CSS could actually
    ship in 1 week.             
    
    In other words, some people create their own problems.                                
    
    I mean it's quite astonishing.
    
    

    I must say this was more fun than some of the more boring topics that
    have filled this Notes conference lately. I certainly didn't intend to
    open the choke on the old flame thrower up all the way in either the
    base note or my later entry. There have been and still are many very 
    dedicated and helpful people all up and down the line and I certainly
    have had to clean up after my share of field idiots who should have
    never been turned loose with a price book and an order pad. The point,
    if any, of .o was that today it is often harder to find the people who 
    can and do say YES than those ready to essentually do nothing and say NO. 
    
    I have had the interesting experience today of having several folks
    E-Mail me with combinations of "I agree with you and I'm out of here"
    messages. That's sad. Personally I want DEC to succeed and I think it
    is right on track in the product space. If we can just get the
    organization and process side straightened out, maybe there's hope yet.
    After all 'tis the season of eternal hope. Merry Christmas to all!
    
    -OFWAMI-
    

   The symptom of the problem is that people are running around trying to
   find ways around the order-fulfillment process.  The root cause is that
   the order-fulfillment process is too long.  The solution is clearly to
   reduce the time for order fulfillment.
   
   Now, I personally believe the Supply Chain Re-Engineering people who say
   they're trying to do just that.  I am willing to accept that it takes
   time and effort, and throws off collateral heat and chaos, to change a
   system without shutting it down.  But keep your eyes on the prize!  We
   have to become a better business partner.

    .12 
    
    RIGHT ON!   Demings rules worked for Japan - maybe it would help
    Digital to take a second look at his 14 points!

    
    re.12
    
    Didn't they already cycle quite a few people through these classes in
    his teachings. Didn't the employees learn everything they could based
    on what was presented.
    
    Yet it turned out to be another passing fad, just as many figured it 
    would.
    
    And management made it into nothing more than something to make 
    ones job more difficult. Which is missing the point entirely.
    
    So fine do it again, But don't waste my time.
    
    

    The point that Deming was making was that TOP MANAGEMENT has to
    buy into the change and that change takes TIME.  You are right
    when you say that some programs are fads because that is what
    TOP MANAGEMENT sets them up to be.  If only the ground floor
    practices what is taught with no buy-in from management, VOILA!
    one has instant loss.  Deming was looking for a WIN/WIN program
    and found it!  It is continuous improvement of the PROCESS.  It
    also involves everything as well as everyone.  

    justme....jacqui

    Deming is not "another passing fad."  He only has to point to Japan,
    Inc. for the proof.  Otherwise, he only has to point to Ford Motor Co.
    
    If Digital has tried to implement Deming's philosophy, it has certainly
    not reached the IC level anywhere that I've heard of.  I have tried to
    proselytize for documentation quality, but with the chaos around here
    there's no point in trying 8^(

    
    Oh I give up.
    It was a passing fad at Digital.            
    It's a great thing that has worked wonders elsewhere.
    It just wasn't done right here.
    And my entire group went through one week of training in it. 
    And then it  vanished when all the big time layoffs started.
    
    So...like so much at Digital. It ended up as just another 
    poorly managed, time consuming excercise in futility.Cause it 
    didn't accomplish anything.
    
    
    
    

    re:0,6
    
    	I have refrained from responding to this note all day, but cannot
    any longer. I am the Manager of one of those "Fulfillment" groups you
    refer to as having small people who only know how to say no.
    	These people you call little are the ones who work 10 hour days,
    who are at work on Saturdays and Sundays at the end of fiscal quarters
    trying to get the orders you sent in on Friday of week 13 out the door,
    who give up their earned days off at Thanksgiving, Christmas, 4th of
    July because those holidays always seem to fall at quarters end.  The
    plant these people come from my friend is call plant "DEDICATION".
    
    	We process thousands of orders per week, most with positive
    results, however problems do occur. The people that try an do solve
    those problems (many of which are created up front) do all they can.
    If you really believe that someone out of their own perversity would
    intentionally sit on that "one component" thats holding up your order
    then I would like to know what plant your from...
    
    	After reading your notes and seeing you negative and caustic choice
    of words it is obvious to me that you would prefer to finger point and
    name call rather than offer suggestions or solutions.  I can only
    imagine if you interact with fellow digital employees in the same
    negative and caustic way in which you write, that it would be no
    suprise to me at all that you might be getting lots of "NO's". People
    will treat others in the same manner they are treated.....
    
    	I suggest a human relations adjustment, You might find more yeses
    in your future.....
    
    			Real people, with real jobs, in the real world...
    
                                                            KRE.

    I know what we need. Some more of those "New Age Thinking" courses...
    
    Laurie.

    I've seen this sort of folks in all places, at all levels, of the
    Corporation.
    
    I call them, collectively, the Product Prevention Process.  
    
    It is my fond hope (despite the pain of TFSO, which is hard on anyone)
    that more of "them" lost their jobs in the recent downsizing than of
    "us."
    

    drdan:
    
    I call them the Order Prevention People...guess great minds think
    alike... :-)
    
    Seriously, the problems go back to Digital management cutting human
    resources BEFORE modern systems were in place to make the survivors
    more productive employees.  The manufacturing folks have their own set
    of problems from the field and these are separate from sales.  
    
    At a Fortune 100 Company I worked at prior to Digital, they had about
    85% less stovepipe processes and legacy systems and 3 people doing the
    work that Digital needs 7 people to do.  That's the Problem!

     <<< Note 3591.23 by PLAYER::BROWNL "Three out of six ain't bad..." >>>
    
    I know what we need. Some more of those "New Age Thinking" courses...
    
    Laurie.
     
    
    
    	Laurie, did I miss the smiley?  Or did you leave it off for some
    real purpose?
    
    
    
    				Malcolm.

    Laurie,
    
    Just gaze into your "Nine Dots" puzzle until you see the image of a sea
    gull...  :-)
    
    Mark

RE: .18 

>>   Yet it turned out to be another passing fad, just as many figured it 
>>   would.

Don't mistake a "poor implementation of a good concept" with "a concept not
being implemented because the concept is bad."  Deming, Juran, Shewart, and
Crosby all have good ideas.   It was a passing fad because that's all
senior management wanted it to be.  Over the last few years Digital was too
focused on stopping the financial hemorrhaging to even begin to truely
focus on long term improvement efforts.

Changing a corporate culture to a point where it is ready and able to
accept a new way of doing things is a huge task: requiring patience,
perseverance, systematic planning, and a strong genuine commitment from
senior management.  Thinking these concepts will be implemented "after a
few classes" is a common mistake made by people who have only superficial
knowledge of these concepts.  

The problem often lies in that it is senior management who must change the
way _they_ do things.  They think, "Oh, well have some of our people learn
this stuff:it sounds pretty good.  But, I don't have to change."  It's
particularly difficult in the U.S., which has a culture of rewarding and
promoting people who are particularly good at firefighting.  This means
your asking people to abandon what made them a "success" in the first
place.  The people who plan and avoid problems before they happen almost
never receive the limelight.

>>  And management made it into nothing more than something to make 
>>  ones job more difficult. Which is missing the point entirely.
>>  So fine do it again, But don't waste my time.

This is also very typical of failed improvement/TQM programs.  Because,
management didn't have the commitment, people expected the program to
fail and it did.  It also makes any future efforts just that more difficult
to implement.  People think, "Oh, I just have to put up with this stuff
for a few months then I can go back to business as usual.  It's another
one of _those_ improvement things we did last year."  These uncommitted    
are a waste of time. And are in fact much more detrimental than leaving
things as they are.  

Significant long lasting change occurs only in two situations:

1. There is collective will and commitment to plan for a better future (rare).

2. The pain of not doing it becomes critical (common).

For organizations, "pain" generally means it is clear the organization will
cease to exist unless they change.  Unfortunately for many, by then it is
too late begin a change that will take 7-15 years to implement.


Dave

    
    	WOW - What a string. As the old Greyhawk noted in 3520. while
    setting his prescription into print, it's not the people, it's the
    process.
    
    	Look, the reason everything is broke is that we (DEC) designed
    systems across the company to support *just* our stovepiped
    organization. In order to interface with other stovepipes we put
    "little people" (I have to admit I hate that termonology) between
    each organizations systems so that output from one became input into
    another (after "proper" massaging), etc. Then came the layoffs, and who
    got waxed first - you quessed it!
    
    	So now everything is broke - wonderful. So each employee in the
    field at Digital has to call "contacts" to make each transaction
    happen. And we are frustrated, tired, and plain mad that over the past
    three years not a damn thing has been done to correct the problems
    except to layoff more ICs while management collects its paychecks and
    says it is our employees fault, let's go get people from outside
    Digital to fix the problems. Which we all know is cka-cka.
    
    	Here's the rub. Since Digital is now moving to become a products
    company (as opposed to a SYSTEMS company), all our moaning and groaning
    is meaningless. Why? Because products are distributed, not sold one at
    a time. That's life. Will we succeed? Probably. We still have
    world-class design and engineering. We are still the best in class at
    manufacturing computers and associated peripherals. 
    
    	This is a transition period for Digital. It is painful, and very
    frustrating for all of us at, or near, the bottom of the pile. But that
    is the direction, and we have no choice but to go bravely forward into
    the new, or leave.
    
    	Please be of good cheer, smile at each other, and let us all know
    you care about each other's success in life - we really have no other
    options. Have a very happy Holiday season, and kiss your kids from
    the Greyhawk. I do care about you all.
    
    		MERRY CHRISTMAS, ONE AND ALL -
    
    			the Greyhawk

    RE:.2
    I would just like to add a bit to the comment on the Internal ordering
    process that might shed some perspective on things.  It was suggested
    that internal order perhaps should be combined with external orders
    and let them get in the "queue" for deliveries.  Many, many years ago,
    this is exactly the way it was handled, and guess what, when it came
    down to material competing for external or internal delivery, the
    internal request was constantly being pushed out so as not to sacrifice
    revenue.  This, in most cases, is the right choice.  Even though there
    is now a dedicated group to handle internal requests, there are still
    exist many constraints that keep the business from being all things
    to all people.  We too have a dedicated group of folks doing our
    best to accomodate a whole company of not so always competent people
    trying to get equipment.  I think people need to realize that it
    takes cooperation and understanding to make the best situation
    prevail.  When this works there are satisfied customers - inside
    the company as well.  We're all in this together and we're all
    Digital - we strive to do our part to make this company strong
    once again.  At times it's overwhelming, but that doesn't get in
    the way.  We continue to work until the best result is attained.
    It would be good to see some recognition for the clear majority
    of the transactions that go right versus being slighted for the
    small number of situations that may not work out exactly as one
    thinks it should.  Let's work together for a stronger company,
    not at odds to totally frustrate everyone.

    
    	Sorry, that should be NOTE 3480. I must be slipping.
    
    		the Greyhawk

	  Greyhawk's noting that Digital is moving from a systems company
     to a products company, and thus will have no need to cut across its
     stovepipes, finally put something into focus for me.  Digital found
     its internal processes were incompatable with being profitable in its
     markets -- and responded in the "obvious" fashion, by bailing out of
     those markets.

	  While perhaps many of us would have chosen a different response,
     it actually does make sense.  If the voltage selection switch on my
     electric shaver happens to be set for 220 V and my bathroom is wired
     for 115 V, rewiring the bathroom is a perfectly valid method of
     removing the incompatability.  Differently clued, perhaps, but valid.

				     Brian

RE:  <<< Note 3591.26 by SUBURB::POWELLM "Nostalgia isn't what it used to be!" >>>
�                         -<     No smiley Laurie?     >-
�
�     <<< Note 3591.23 by PLAYER::BROWNL "Three out of six ain't bad..." >>>
�    
�    I know what we need. Some more of those "New Age Thinking" courses...
�    
�    Laurie.
�     
�    
�    
�    	Laurie, did I miss the smiley?  Or did you leave it off for some
�    real purpose?
�    
�    				Malcolm.

    Hmmm, how do I put this? Malcolm, I was taking the... no. Erm, I was
    pulling your collective... no. Ah! It was ironic.
    
    Laurie$Acre_Rd_1986_NAT_courses_all_around_me.

    
     I often read in these notes that "we are all in this together" ...
     (WAAITT)
    
     [ To anyone who has written such as a note, please do not take 
       these comments personally. ]
    
     Somehow the evidence around me, ( you can supply enough examples to
     choke a horse ) suggests that this is not true. I think that at best 
     we might say 'some of us are in this together.'
     
     Greyhawk's analysis a few replies back is spot on and unfortunately,
     since we are not 'all in this together', we never collectively fix
     the very things that dominate and consume so much time and energy.
    
     jc 

OFWAMI,

	As manager of the U.S. Software Loan Program you can image that
	I found your notes entry (3591.6) of extreme interest.  This is a 
	group which prides themselves on providing a high level of service 
	and support to all of our selling partners with an objective to 
	drive and close revenue for the company.  The goal is to accomplish 
	this with the best interest of both the end-user customer and the 
	company in mind.  

	The response which you received from the Software Loan Support 
	Specialist when you requested an archival product was appropriate.  
	As a standard business practice, it is not in our best interest or 
	the customers to provide products which are no longer available and 
	which have been replaced with newer functionality.  The cost of
	producing an archival kit to fulfill an initial non-revenue loan 
	order is not the business model we would like to maintain.  We deal
	with hundreds of requests on a daily basis, many of which are not
	evaluation related at all.  We employ a very specific criteria to 
	maintain consistency and control with regards to who gets what,
	when, for how long and for what purpose.  We are here to drive
	revenue and it is not unreasonable to push back on requests that
	are inconsistent with our practices and try to encourage alternatives 
	(ie upgrade, purchase product, etc.)

	We DO, however, understand that there are circumstances where 
	the request does not meet the established criteria BUT IS 
	CUSTOMER SAT RELATED.  We support a number of these requests as
	exceptions to the process, even if they are not revenue generating, 
	as they support the overall well-being of the customer and the 
	company.   I can assure you that "FLAMMING her [whomever you 
	spoke with] into a pile of quivering ashes" will not help you,
	the individual, the customer or the company accomplish anything 
	productive.   It is truly unfortunate that you had to resort to 
	derogatory name calling and insults to make a point.  We are not 
	oblivious to the needs of our reps and customers and we certainly 
	are not ignorant or unresponsive.  We are, however, hard working 
	professionals, doing our very best to accommodate the needs of our 
	field sales reps and our customers while maintaining integrity in 
	the program offering.

	If in the future, you should have a concern regarding the criteria 
	which we have employed, please feel free to contact me personally 
	and we can discuss.


	Sheila J. Soucy
	U.S. Software Loan Manager

        Sheila:

    I've worked with "Uncle Hormoz" and Lisa Olen for years and they have
    "saved my proverbial butt" on many occasions by simply responding to a
    customer need and putting in place the proper exception documentation
    in the file.....

    I've said it before and I'll say it again, your group is one of the
    very few that remains customer focused with whatever it takes but still
    reminds those of us in the field of that questions we all used to ask,
    "is this the right thing for us and the customer?".
    
    You've got a great team.... Your lucky, and so am I for having their
    support...
    
    Toodles.....JP

    
    Your customer to be assisted...Digital's DecDirect ordering line,
    can help with archive software ordering assistance.
    call 1800 Digital, press 1 for ordering, ask specifically for 
    the Archive software group.
    The Ordering Folks will transfer :)
     

    My, My, My, this has certainly been an interesting and active
    string...one of the most fun in a while. 
    
    I responded to 3591.35 directly, but the gist was that perhaps some of
    the policies, procedures and business models that provide the "cover"
    for the type of activities that have been discussed here need to be
    reviewed. There is a real world out there that has somehow gotten out
    of step with the Digital models. Try as we might to tell those folks to
    get with the Digital program (let's see now, did Ken ever get them back 
    in step with VMS and off that crazy UNIX stuff), they just keep going
    off in their own direction. I tried to tell my customer that his out of
    date VMS V5.5-2 system violated our business model and that he needed
    to get up to date ASAP if he wanted further service from us. But you
    know they just don't listen sometimes. Customers do the darnedest
    things. 
    
    But, I digress. Greyhawks last note is perhaps a good breakpoint for
    this string to take off into a whole new direction. What happens when
    Digital becomes a product delivery company. I'm sure that one immediate
    consequence is yet to come...another major league rightsizing and an
    even more drastic break from the "old Digital". There may be one or two
    really old timers who remember back to the days when Digital started as
    a product delivery company and can comment. We were a systems and
    solutions company when I got here a little over 16 years ago, so I
    don't have any history of Digital's days of delivering modules and
    "raw" system components. what's it gonna be like? Your opinions please.
    
    -OFWAMI-  
    
    

re.23:

>    I know what we need. Some more of those "New Age Thinking" courses...

The NAT courses taught tried and tested techniques which, if put into 
practice, could dramaticaly improve your quality of life as well as your
productivity at work.

I learnt a lot from the NAT course, and as a result, did enjoy the some
benefits.

Where Digital UK went wrong is in making them compulsory for all to attend.

Thanks for reminding me, I think I'll go and dig out those old course books 
and tapes and re-live the late 1980s.

Dave.

    
    .39
    
    I'm still not sure what I learned from running around the woods
    carrying a tractor tyre.  Apart from the fact that tractor tyres
    are a lot heavier that they look.

    re: .30
>    I would just like to add a bit to the comment on the Internal ordering
>    process that might shed some perspective on things.  It was suggested
>    that internal order perhaps should be combined with external orders
>    and let them get in the "queue" for deliveries.  Many, many years ago,
>    this is exactly the way it was handled, and guess what, when it came
>    down to material competing for external or internal delivery, the
>    internal request was constantly being pushed out so as not to sacrifice
>    revenue.  
    
    	I have seen this, and mentioned it earlier in this notes file,
    where a DEC manager couldn't persuade DEC to sell him a large computer
    system, so he bought from IBM instead. DEC is in the Fortune 500, and
    is a major user of computer equipment. If we can't get good sales
    and service from our current supplier then the only way for us to stay
    competitive is to find a better supplier. It is no wonder we are in
    trouble if the supplier of one of our major needs is continually
    putting us to the bottom of his priority list. For how much longer can
    we tolerate this shoddy service when we could use other suppliers for
    general administration systems and demo equipment? If I was Bob Palmer
    DEC would *not* be on our preferred suppliers list until they changed
    their policy!

RE: .30

Note that when I said in the queue I said *by purchase price*.  If a cost
center (for example) gets a budget that is basically sufficient to deal
with everything at low priority, but can chose to forgo some total to get
high priority, they should be ABLE to.

The process is broken if:

    - Internal groups can't get work done because they can't get few
      a few priority systems (or they have to go through an approval
      process that probably costs more in salaries than the equipment
      does in many cases)

    - Customers see bad lead times

    - We can't forecast correctly because internal orders don't get
      put into the normal systems

    - We cause other incidental supply problems because of internal
      order handling

The "obvious" solution is to simply use "market forces" (the cost center's
available budget) and simply let them make decisions based on their needs
and costs.  REMEMBER - MOST COMPANIES THAT ARE PRODUCING THINGS THAT HAPPEN
TO NOT BE IN THE BUSINESS OF BUILDING WHAT THEY USE PAY FULL PRICE TO OTHER
COMPANIES AND GET REASONABLE DELIVERY TIMES.  CURRENTLY, WE DO NOT GENERALLY
HAVE THAT OPTION.  If we're building a PC, and we're going to buy a PC, one
might thing that NORMALLY it would be just as efficient to transfer the result
as to SELL one and BUY a different one from a competitor.  The problem we
have at the moment is:

    "We're in the computer business so we don't want you buying from
    competors - BUT - since we sell the things we produce from others,
    we don't want you taking ANY output either."

Going unchecked, this results in a CONSISTENTLY BROKEN "internal supply
chain".  The right fix is to recognize that internal consumers need
a consistent supply, and TO THE DEGREE POSSIBLE it is desirable to utilize
internally produced goods.  It seems like the right thing using "market
forces" is to let "discounts" (below market) apply to things that are
not long-lead-time, and charge full price to get normal queue entries
(recognizing that if we didn't produce what we use, these types of orders
would normally just go outside and be filled in the normal course of events
WITHOUT special delays.)  (Consider that a group that does a lot of Alpha
compiler work still has ~50% VAX desktops >2 years after Alpha FRS, and
this is a case where the development environments would likely be better
if compiler developers actually were using them on a day-to-day basis...)

My suggestion is simply that both internal orders and EPP should be handled
in the same conceptual "market forces" fashion - use *standard* channels
to avoid any "distorting" behavior, and determine the absolute minimum
addition to get the desired effect.

e.g. IEG - orders go in queue, priority as today (very low) for cost as
today, with full cost resulting in a standard queue entry (but once ordered,
the order can't be "flushed" for some artificial reason like a fiscal year
boundary, someone decides there should be a "blanket" hold on internal
orders, etc. - an order should be just like an order from anywhere else.)
(I've heard arguments in good times and bad times - "our production is
capacity limited - ship to customers" - "we need to keep costs down -
ship to customers".  Yes, I agree that these are important, however,
the decision on the *impact* should be localized.  e.g. DEC can't deliver
for 4 weeks - fine we go outside.  e.g. cost need to be minimized - reduce
the *whole* cost center budget and let the *cost center manager* determine
how to take the cuts - e.g. fewer systems in a timely fashion, more later,
etc.)  However, for development "we'll get you a system in 9 months" when
you're trying to reduce development time and make sure expensive salaries
are being spent on what they should be, this is plain broken.

e.g. EPP - let employees buy through normal channels (Sam's, direct, whatever).
Purchase would get a "rebate" on the purchase price (e.g. 20%) after the fact.
This means no competing with channels, lets channels see full demand, etc.,
and lets employees get a discount.  No artificial "we're dumping this" or
"you can't buy the latest models".

Anyway.

> ... an approval process that probably costs more in salaries than the
> equipment does ...

I'd love to see what the process costs.  Based on the hourly rate of people
here, the number of them involved in buying anything, and the amount of
time spent on the "decisions", we might do better just to let anyone buy
anything they want, and skip all the "decisions".  It'd be less expensive.

Assuming people then did something better with their time.

___Pete (whose 6-year-old system is about to be replaced with a 5-year-old
system)

    
    	re .42
    
    	Excellent, excellent note. Should be required reading for all cost
    center managers with a senior management focus "on getting this done".
    Couldn't have said it better myself.
    
    	...Now, if we all make a wish....
    
    			the Greyhawk

    
    
	OFWAMI, I have held my stomach while I read your note and replies.
    	My impression is that you are from an area of the US outside of New
    	England. I also get the impression that you don't like us New
    	Englanders very much, as evidenced by your comments that I've 
    	underlined. And you and Greyhawk may have been around for a long
    	time, as you stated( uh..so what? remember where Digital was born?)
    	but you, OFWAMI, obviously feel that it is OK to trash an entire
    	region of hard-working people just because you had a bad day. We
    	may have some broken processes, but the bigger problem is attitudes
    	like yours towards your fellow workers. You owe an apology to all
    	of us.
    
    	Your replies I've entered are out of context and incomplete but I
    	believe they capture the essence of what you've said.
    
    	Stu
    
         <<< HUMANE::DISK$CONFERENCES:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                        -< The Digital way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 3591.0                       Just Say NO!                        44 replies
GLDOA::WERNER                                        40 lines  20-DEC-1994 08:50
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    These people all have one thing in common. They have absolutely no idea 
    what we're trying to do as a company - they laugh in the face of the 
    slogan "Whatever it takes". They have absolutely no concept of the term
    commitment. Customers represent an irratant to these folks and field
    people are apparently lower than snake slime to these New England
						     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^	
    Puritans. What they have are prim and proper little sets of rules.
    ^^^^^^^^
    Their bibles are the policy and procedure manuals which have codified
    and calcified Digital over the years into one of the most difficult
    companies int he business to do business with. Creativity is a sin best
    avoided in the minds of these folks and to them 'Whatever it takes" is
    doing business exactly by their rules. These folks have always been
    there, but in he past there were enough other, willing and courageous
    folks to overcome them and still do business. Now these are the only
    folks left in many keys positions and they are having a field day - NO,
    NO, NO!
    
    -OFWAMI-

     
         <<< HUMANE::DISK$CONFERENCES:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
                        -< The Digital way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 3591.6                       Just Say NO!                           6 of 44
GLDOA::WERNER                                        38 lines  20-DEC-1994 12:00
                             -< Earth to Digital >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    RE: 3591.4
    
    Greyhawk, you and I have been around long enough to have heard that old
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
				   
 "the checks int he mail and we're working on the systems" hack every year
    since forever. It's not just the sytems, which mostly don't work, it's
    all of the processes which are totally broken. We aren't doing any real
    re-engineering and we're not even doing much of a triage job on the
             
    Just after I posted the base note in this string, I hit another pet
    peeve, so I might as well get it out in here as well.
    
    I was trying to get an archive version of some software, because my
    customer has to continue to run on VMS V5.5-2 for a while due to
    application software constraints (real world stuff). The person that I
    happen to get hold of at the SW Loan of Products group gave me the all
    to familiar "Well, why don't they just upgrade to the current product"
    answer. After FLAMMING her into a pile of quivering ashes, I tried
    explaining how the real world behaves...time for layered application
    development, regression testing, all that stuff. They don't have a
    clue! These people actually believe that our customers shoud drop
    everything, stop production and upgrade their systems everytime that
    we introduce a new version. She even stated that the old version had
    been "obsolete forever...at least 1  year". What planet do we get these
    folks from? Isn't there anyone back there who ever had a real job in
		^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    the real world? 
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    -OFWAMI-
    

    RE: .45
    
    Stu is correct and I do apologize to the great many folks back there
    who are as dedicated and hard working as anyone in the field. It is
    releatively easy to over-generalize about "back East", since most of
    the folks that I seem to run into who are "in the loop" of getting
    things done with order sceduling and the logistics process of getting
    stuff delivered are in the MA/NH complex that we lovingly refer to as
    "back East". 
    
    So, while not everyone back there is a member of the evil empire, I
    stand by the original frustration (reinforced by many replies, both
    here and directly) that there seem to be many more folks in positions 
    today who can only say no, rather than having the authority or the
    imagination and guts to be helpful at getting something done.
    
    I started another string called "Whatever it takes...", which has
    elicited some of the same reaction. Folks must realize that, even if it
    is just an ad campaign, it sets some level of customer expectations. If
    we say in our ads that we'll do whatever it takes, but then continually
    fail to deliver because we have processes and procedures that have no
    bend or give in them for compromise, then we fail to meet customer
    expectations. It doesn't take a Taguchi Method genius to figure out
    that we lose, if we keep doing that!          
    
    So, if you're working hard to make a difference and do "Whatever it
    takes" to get Digital back on track, profitable and a fun place to work
    again, keep it up. If at every request for some extra effort or some
    effort that is outside of the six dots (the process, the policy, the
    procedures, etc.), you find yourself mouthing the words "that's just
    how it's done or that's the process or we never do it that way", then I
    would suggest that you examine whether or not you are a part of the
    problem and not a part of the solution.
    
    -OFWAMI-  

Re:  The string...
There are really two cases here:

One case is where there is a fairly reasonable case which requires
exceptions to current policies and extra legwork for one or more
folks in the chain.  In this case, we should salute the folks who
regularly go above and beyond, encourage those who have gotten tired,
and blast the roadblocks.

The other case (often indistinguishable from the first at initial glance)
is the case where "doing whatever it takes" is in the long run, a 
fundamentally bad business move.  Such cases might be:

* Succeeding in winning business that will lose money for Digital (I've seen
  it over and over and over again!!)  Sometimes we really are farther ahead
  being honest about our capabilities and walking away.  I've seen customers
  really respect us for telling them we'd both be better off if we did not
  supply their needs this time.  Often this builds credibility even if it
  goes against the grain.

* Supplying customers with special copies of obsolete software which the company
  has no intent of supporting further.  This just sets up expectations in
  the customer that we will continue to support them with this product.

There are many others, but these came to mind quickly.  Try to listen to the
reasons behind the resistance before you start pushing.

Kevin Farlee

    How about this NO...
    
    From a manager:
    
    Is it our responsibility to sell Digital products?  NO!
    
    You can't imagine how that made and makes me feel!  A manager who told
    me that it is not our responsibility to sell Digital products!  What
    company do we work for anyway?
    
    As for the comments about the east coast folks.
    
    In having been around different geographies in this company I can say
    that attitudes and ways of doing business are vastly different in
    different parts of the company!
    
    My favorite though is sitting at the old Network U's...you walk into a
    room and you watch...you don't even have to wait two minutes to figure
    out which side of the room holds the New Englanders and which side has
    the "others."
    
    Then throughout the entire conference delivery you hear the non-New
    Englanders asking when products will be shipping on ULTRIX and OSF/1.
    Then you hear some mumbled answer of "never ... or years from now..."
    
    Then the room errupts into chaos on the New England side of the room
    yells the equivalent of "VMS RULES!"  And the "others" (myself
    included) conceding that while that may be true in the greater New
    England area, the rest of the country uses other systems, such as
    ULTRIX...
    
    I think there is a different mentality in the greater New England
    area...I remember during the COD moves getting a few people who had
    been in the corporate loop cycle...for about a good year after the move
    all I  heard was, "Back in New England we did it like this..." over
    everything from the way they got their paychecks to the way business
    was done.
    
    So if the people outside of New England feel a certain way about the
    attitudes of some of the people from the east coast, it could be
    justified just on the count of the differences in the way the two do
    business and attitudes.  We've all heard the phrase the "glass (ivory)
    tower syndrome" which basically refers to people in corporate not
    having a clue as to how the field...the real world...works...
    
    So I think there are arguments for both sides here but I agree with the
    basenoter in that we hear NO more often than yes.  I hear, "We don't do
    it that way."
    
    Or something to that ridiculous effect.  Daily I feel more and more
    frustrated running into the brick walls which stand in the way of
    helping a customer ... 
    
    But I do know that I am no worse or better off than most of us in the
    company today.  There are many times when the "little people" did their
    best to help get around these "NO'S" ... about as many who didn't have
    the time to be bothered...
    
    As for the reference that sales reps are at fault for making
    unrealistic commitments...HEAR! HEAR!  Out here I get sales reps
    committing my time to a customer without checking with me first!  Then
    when the customer is angry  because I can't make it...the sales rep
    gets angry!  Seems to me in this case they have no one to blame but
    themselves.  This happens rather frequently...but I don't think ALL
    sales reps make unrealistic committments and thus, the base-noter has a
    legitimate gripe!
    
    Hopefully something will give soon...
    
    

    sometimes no means:
    
    "Go away, don't bother me"
    
    "I don't understand"
    
    "I don't want to..."
    
    "I don't care anymore"

                  <<< Note 3591.48 by ROMEOS::TREBILCOT_EL >>>
                -< Hey we don't even sell DEC stuff anyway... >-
    
    I think there is a different mentality in the greater New England
    area..
    
    
    >>No, I think it's quite pervasive and not restricted to NE.
    >>Your note itself is an excellent example of how prejudice,
    >>inconsideration, and veiled self-righteousness extends well
    >>beyond the MA state line.
    
    >>bk

    I don't have a taste in my mouth from any foot...what I was trying to
    say (and obviously you are in the NE area because you took such
    offense)
    is that people behave differently in different parts of the country. 
    I've lived in New Orleans, Tampa, Los Angeles, Detroit, and San Jose,
    so I can tell you this from experience.  Californians have a different
    qattitude than the mid-west folks, haven't you heard them called "left
    coasters?"  But you don't see them getting bent out of shape about it.
    
    I've heard it said that people from the midwest are extremely uptight.  
    I've heart it said that people from the south are very slow in their
    methods (not in their intelligence) and I've heard it said that people
    from New England are snobby.  I've heard it said that people from New
    York are rude.
    
    NOW...
    
    with so many people coming from such diverse backgrounds, don't you
    think they'd look at a situation differently?  Wouldn't they approach a
    business opporunity differently?  
    
    My point was that people view the population from different parts of the 
    country we all work in differently based on their own personal
    experiences.
    
    I am not saying New England people are bad or naive...just that they
    seem to have a different outlook than the people in the midwest and the
    people in the southwest, the people in the west...
    
    If you take offense that is up to you...it wasn't meant in that way
    
    But what I said about Network Academy is 100% true!  The New England
    area probably has more VMS customers per area than anywhere else in the
    country, which stands to reason considering VMS is headquartered there. 
    They, in that case, are very pro-VMS (remember KO saying VMS is the
    end-all...in other words) and are happy with the fact that all our
    products ship on VMS first.
    
    Others, like when I was working the GM/EDS account in Detroit, don't
    like the fact that they have to go back to their customer, which is
    ULTRIX and OSF/1 and tell them their product release is being delayed
    because of the os they are running.
    
    So you usually had an erruption at Network U (what else is new) and it
    became apparent New England people were on one side of the room (they
    sat near people they knew I guess) and the other side had everyone else
    from the field and then the shouting would begin.  Anyone who has been
    there knows what I'm talking about.
    
    So no, my foot is not in my mouth. I stand by what I say.  In my
    experience it is a valid statement that people from different parts of
    the country are going to handle things differently based on their own
    upbringings and the demographics of the area in which they live.  Just
    like people who live in New York, Washington DC and California
    generally earn more money than their midwest counterparts to offset the
    cost of living.  Does it mean they are better people?  Noooooooooo
    
    

    
    
    ....welcome to rathole city.
    
    

    ...and a welcome rathole it is.
    
    re -.2.  Y'all mean to tell me people in New Yawk and Cally-forny are
    *different* in their attitudes and culture than me?  C'mon, you funnin'
    me, or what? :^]
    
    								Tex

    	I was once involved (a long time ago) in a sale where it was Ken
    that said "No".
    
    The reasons :-
    1) Even if we diverted the whole of our PDP-8 manufacturing capability
    to satisfy this customer's shipment schedule there was a chance we
    wouldn't make it.
    2) If we did divert manufacturing capability as above then we would be
    unable to ship any PDP-8s to other customers for a year, so we would
    upset a fair number of other customers world wide.
    
    	I have no idea whether the decision was correct in the long term
    for DEC, and I was rather upset at the time that the work I personally
    had put towards the sale was being wasted. The result of the decision
    was that that customer's management congratulated us on being honest,
    and many other customers world wide were not disappointed.

                  <<< Note 3591.51 by ROMEOS::TREBILCOT_EL >>>
                              -< oh please...... >-

    I don't have a taste in my mouth from any foot...what I was trying to
    say (and obviously you are in the NE area because you took such
    offense)
    
    
    >>Obviously....
    
    >>I didn't take offense. I was just pointing out to you that
    >>we're all bozos on this bus. May I suggest you look into a
    >>refresher course in logic?
    
    >>bk, in Colorado.

    
    	You mean people on the coasts (pick either) make more money than
    me?
    
    	And all this time I thought it was the compensation plan...
    
    	Tex, save me a horse; or was it the late, great W.C. Fields who
    noted "Don't invest in anything that eats."?
    
    	Yes, it's true - Midwesterners firmly believe they are the only
    intelligent life on THIS planet.
    
    
    		the Greyhawk

    Hey Greyhawk...
    are you from Illinois?  One of those MIDWEST states???
    
    ;)
    
    This is actually getting REALLY funny now...as the sarcasm just DRIPS
    off those keys...
    
    (by the way, midwesterners are sun-deprived in a BIG way...)
    
    

    Typical regional responses to hearing a line of BS:
    
    Northeast: I'll have my management team perform a feasibility study on
    that one if you can have your people get the figures to my people.
    
    West Coast: Wow, I see where you're comin' from, man!  But what
    about...
    
    Texas: Y'all just see a turnip truck drive by aforen I got here, or
    what?
    
    Midwest: Really?
    
    								:^] Tex
    
    (C'mon, Greyhawk, regionalisms ain't nice.  Hope everyone takes the
    above in the spirit it was intended.  One thing I *do* enjoy about the
    NorthEast is the majority of folks watched too much Mayberry when they
    were growin' up!  Makes it a *lot* of fun playin' Andy so they aren't
    disappointed!)

    
    	Now, Tex; everyone knows without regional differences we would all
    be forced to eat strange foods, drive funny little vehicles with things
    hanging from the mirror, or accept the fact that only New Yorkers know
    how to *properly* cross a street.
    
    	Given that only you and me are normal, that means the rest of them
    are .....
    
    	Normally I'd do the tongue in cheek thingue, but really, folks,
    Midwesterners do do it longer ;-)
    
    
    		the Greyhawk

    
    You sure you aren't confusing the 'northeast' with Corporate?????
    
    
    just a thought.
    
    chet

    
>    	You mean people on the coasts (pick either) make more money than
>       me?
    
    Greyhawk, what do you mean pick either? We've only got one....

    I've had the chance to live in NY (upstate) Minnesota, the Boston area
    and now Chicago.  It's interesting how people are different in the
    various regions.  I must say, that for even a large city as Chicago, it
    is still very midwest. (which I like)  I was downtown  just before
    Christmas and as a large group of people stood on the street corner
    waiting for the crosswalk like to signal "walk," I overheard a man
    nearby say, "If this was Boston, we'd have been crossing by now." 
    Everyone just patiently waited until the signal changed.
    
    
    Spud                                                  

    light/like... it's early.
    
    :*O
    
    
    Spud