| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 67.1 | Never Afraid to appear ingorant... | MADWT::HENDERSON | Another Casualty of Applied Metaphysics | Wed Jan 22 1992 15:49 | 8 |
| but I am unaware of an organization like this in the Central States Region.
It is also difficult to tell from he brief memo what this group really does.
Maybe someone with some direct experience as a user of their services would
care to comment.
Chaz
|
| 67.2 | | JMPSRV::MICKOL | Greetings from Rochester, NY | Thu Jan 23 1992 00:13 | 11 |
| There is an option on the AQS menu called HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. That will
run the quote through XCON and/or submit it to your local CTS Specialist who
will review the quote and revise it as necessary. You may not know who that
person is, but you might try to have a quote reviewed and see what happens.
Regards,
Jim
Sales Support
Xerox Account Group
|
| 67.3 | The Functions Highlighted! | SAHQ::MULLINS | | Thu Jan 23 1992 10:15 | 44 |
| re: .01
I can only speak on behalf of the Southern States Regional CTS team and
give you what exactly we do:
TECH EDIT all system orders based on manufacturing system
"buildability" and software licensing rules.
VALIDATE SALES QUOTES prior to customer review to prevent mis-quote
allowances, tech edit failures "after the fact" and customer
satisfaction issues. QUOTE VALIDATION is done in areas of hardware,
networking, software licensing, mandatory services and other "value
added" areas.
TECHNICAL RESOURCE for OMS, Sales and customers in resolving post
delivery problems, mainly for MRR's.
TECHNICAL CONSULTATION with Sales Account teams in areas not covered by
other support groups. These areas include:
5 year hardware capacity planning for the customer.
quote creation and various solutions scenerios.
Cost of Ownership analysis
Hardware and Software Optimization
Customer Presentations.
PROJECTS include training of Sales Development Specialists on DEC
products. Training for OMS on Sparing rules, new product introductions
and manufacturing contact for southern states region.
PROACTIVE role in enhancements and development of manufacturing
automated tools, field test, XCS, Stars, S/W configurator, Xnet and
AQS. (all associated expenses are paid by the development cc).
Again, I can only speak on behalf of the SSR CTS team. There are
pockets of CTS reps country wide, but the SSR team is the only one
which is centralized. As pointed out in reply -.02 there is a flag on
AQS which automatically sends any system quote to CTS for review. Our
two main functions are QUOTE VALIDATION and TECH EDIT, followed by
CONSULTATIONS.
Drew Mullins
SSR CTS team
|
| 67.4 | | MADWT::HENDERSON | Another Casualty of Applied Metaphysics | Thu Jan 23 1992 12:07 | 28 |
| With all due respect to the hard working people in these groups it sounds like
overhead to me. If our systems weren't so easy to *mis*configure then we
wouldn't need to have expensive resources consumed catching the mistakes.
This is the same as "inspecting in quality" in a manufacturing operation. A
large portion of the improvements in manufacturing quality and cost improvement
have come from the change in focus from inspection of the products to control of
the process. This eliminates problems before resources can be expended in the
production of a defective unit. This is what Demming taught the Japanese.
I have recently returned to direct sales after spending 2 1/2 years on the local
workstation team. During that time I had very little contact with the day to day
configuring, quoting, certing process. On my return I expected to find vast
improvements in productivity in these areas. I am sad to report that while all
of the tools show marked improvement in performance, features and usability,
the net improvement in productivity is small. The fault is not with the tools
but with the fundamental process that they implement.
AMS and NMS have changed our business model, the next step should be a similar
large scale restructuring of our business processes to streamline them, match
them to the business model and eliminate "inspections" and other non-productive
resource consumption.
This cannot be achieved by adding features to our existing tools. The *best* we
can hope for would be 10 or 20% improvements when what is needed is 200 and
300% improvements. AQS, XCON and their brethren have had long and productive
careers but they are now ready for retirement. We must now find their
replacements.
|
| 67.5 | Please note my context | MADWT::HENDERSON | Another Casualty of Applied Metaphysics | Thu Jan 23 1992 12:11 | 2 |
| Please note that 67.4 is a reply to 67.2. 67.3 was entered while I
was editing my note.
|
| 67.6 | | RIPPLE::NOLLRO | | Thu Jan 23 1992 22:02 | 14 |
| I am a CTS person. When I was offered the job (two years ago?)
I was told that the position wouldn't be around for long because
XSEL/XCON would be able to do our job. I nodded and accepted.
As long as we have packaged systems/custom systems, field/factory
installed options, same families with DECnet/without DECnet,
with keyboards/without keyboards, large SCSI connectors/small
SCSI connectors ---I better stop--
Anyway, I agree that CTS's shouldn't be necessary.
But I sure save a lot of allowances. If you don't know
who your CTS is, ask your OMS/CAS person. Try us.
|
| 67.7 | U.S. CTS LISTING | WMOIS::LEBLANC_SCOT | | Fri Jan 24 1992 11:15 | 183 |
|
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
Date: 24-Jan-1992 11:07am EST
From: SCOTT LEBLANC @WMO
LEBLANC.SCOTT
Dept: PRODUCT INTEGRAATION
TECHNICAL SUPPORT
Tel No: (508) 874-3321
DTN: 241-3321
The following is a list of Configuration Technical Support Specialist
(CTS) for the U.S.. They are a great resource of valuable technical
information
Scott
-6-
CONFIGURATION TECHNICAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST
--------------------------------------------
EASTERN STATES REGION
---------------------
NORTHEAST AREA
ROCKY HILL,CONN. ED BALDYGA 320-5453 RCH USWAV1::
CTOAVX::
BURLINGTON,MA. JACQUI KEIRSTEAD 274-6668 OFO USWAV1::
WALTHAM,MA JOHN CAHILL 221-5130 WAO USWAV1::
MON/THURS
BOSTON,MA. JOHN CAHILL 224-7434 BXO USWAV1::
TUE/WED/FRI
* MERRIMACK,N.H. CATHY KITTS 264-3191 MKO CIVIC::
ROCHESTER,N.Y. ALLYN WAGNER 252-7259 RCO UNYEM::
WAGNERA
NEW YORK/ NEW JERSEY
PARSIPPANY,N.J. CRAIG SMALLEY 335-6810 NJO KYOA::
SMALLEY
PISCATAWAY,N.J. BOB CALLAGHAN 323-4438 KYO KYOA::
CALLAGHAN
BOB YORKE 323-4511 KYO KYOA::
ALBANY,N.Y. JIM ALHEIM 344-7217 ALO ALBANY::
NEW YORK,N.Y. MICHAEL LONDON 352-2681 NYO NYEM1::
KEN FRANKEL 352-2686 UKO
TOM HAMMEL 352-2680 NYO NYEM1::
MELVILLE,N.Y. BRAD SMITH 331-2303 NYO NYEM1::
BSMITH
* SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT
-7-
CONFIGURATION TECHNICAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST
--------------------------------------------
SOUTHERN STATES REGION
----------------------
MID-ATLANTIC AREA
LANDOVER,MD. LINDA BRIGGS 341-2476 DCO GRANPA::
LBRIGGS
DAVE GREEN 341-2853 DCO GRANPA::
DGREEN
BOB GODDARD 341-2528 DCO GRANPA::
BGODDARD
BRUCE MURRAY 341-2262 DCO GRANMA::
BMURRAY
SOUTHERN AREA
ATLANTA,GA. CAROL THOMPSON 385-2774 ALF SAHQ::
CHRIS BOND 385-2974 ALF SAHQ::
BEVERLY STURTEVANT 385-2280 ALF SAHQ::
DREW MULLINS 385-2220 ALF SAHQ::
CHARLOTTE,N.C. TOM FLACK 367-5529 CEO AUNTB::
-8-
CONFIGURATION TECHNICAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST
--------------------------------------------
CENTRAL STATES REGION
---------------------
CENTRAL AREA
MINNEAPOLIS,MN. PAUL MARCOTTE 442-2095 MPO MUSKIE::
ELK GROVE,ILL. LARRY OBERMEYER 474-2468 ACI POBOX::
ST. LOUIS,MO. PATRICIA BOOTH 445-6295 STO MDVAX1::
KANSAS CITY,MO. TONY MARTIN 452-3561 KCO MDVAX1::
EAST CENTRAL AREA
CINCINNATI,OH. ERNIE KNOWLES 432-7701 CYO CSOA1::
DETROIT,MI.
PITTSBURGH,PA. RICHARD JONES 422-7427 PTO CSOA1::
(RICK) RJONES
SOUTH CENTRAL AREA
DALLAS,TX. ART ARAKELIAN 486-6146 DLO DISNEY::
ALBUQUERQUE,N.M. DPDMAI::
HOUSTON,TX. JOHN STEVENS 441-3612 HSO
DENVER,CO
-9-
CONFIGURATION TECHNICAL SUPPORT SPECIALIST
--------------------------------------------
WESTERN STATES REGION
---------------------
WESTERN AREA
* PORTLAND,OR. ROBERTA NOLL (503)691-3411 PDO RIPPLE::
SEATTLE,WA. NOLLRO
* SALT LAKE CITY,UT. SANDY BRUSO (801)565-3010 SLO RIPPLE::
SEATTLE,WA. 544-3010 BRUSO_SA
SANTA CLARA,CA. CONNIE NICHOLAS 521-6621 WRO WR2FOR::
NICHOLAS_CO
SOUTH WEST AREA
TUCSON,AZ. JEFF BLUNDELL (602) 721-6808 TUO LAGUNA::
530-6808 BLUNDELL_JE
COSTA MESA,CA. BOB JOYCE (714) 850-3112 CWO LAGUNA::
533-3112 JOYCE_BO
* LOS ANGELES,CA. GLENN MATHISEN (213) 417-4467 LAO LAGUNA::
531-4467 MATHISEN_GL
* SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT
|
| 67.8 | | MADWT::HENDERSON | Another Casualty of Applied Metaphysics | Fri Jan 24 1992 14:36 | 21 |
| Re: -.1
How about that? There's one in my office. Guess I'll go introduce myself.
Re: -.2
I have had a number of discussions in other notes files about why I feel that
XCON/SXEL/AQS/focus/wargames... are inadequate to the task.
My thesies in a nutshell is that the tools are not integrated (i.e. any
communication is through interfaces)and they apply themselves to the wrong
point in the business cycle (i.e. XCON verifies configurations AFTER the fact,
what is needed is a tool to generate ACCURATE configurations in the first place)
Making improvements to them will not solve these basic problems. We made massive
investments in manufacturing in the 70's and 80's to properly implement the
new business philosophies (loosely called CIM) we need to do the same revamping
of the customer contact systems in order to effectively implement the
business philosophies of the 90's.
|
| 67.9 | Configurability = Freedom of Choice | BUZON::BELDIN_R | Pull us together, not apart | Fri Jan 24 1992 14:51 | 31 |
| re <<< Note 67.4 by MADWT::HENDERSON "Another Casualty of Applied Metaphysics" >>>
The situation appears to be thus:
Computer (hardware + software) systems are all similar in that they
manipulate information in some way, but there are so many degrees of
freedom that we have to negotiate arbitrary limits on this freedom.
That's what standards committees are all about.
The original form and the final form of the information provide no
real constraints on the form of the hardware or the architecture of
the software. Thus the hardware and software engineer are completely
free to partition and organize the functions of the system in
accordance with the principles dictated by efficiency of the hardware
and/or software disciplines they use.
Configuration is difficult precisely because the standards that are
being developed are not yet in place or do not "cover the waterfront".
While it is tempting to think that this results from a failure to
design an adequate customer need fulfillment process, that is not so.
The configuration problem is indicative of a marketplace that has room
for more arbitrary constraints as well as plenty of creativity. Our
job has to be to provide the customer with satisfactory service in
spite of this obstacle. When the configuration problem disappears,
the freedom of choice (and potential creativity) of our engineers will
go with it.
fwiw,
Dick
|
| 67.10 | | MADWT::HENDERSON | Another Casualty of Applied Metaphysics | Sat Jan 25 1992 12:40 | 60 |
| RE: .9
I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say. My point is not that the
problems that each of the individual tools address are not difficult to solve
or that the need for a solution has diminished.
My point is that, as a collection, the tools that are used by the Digital
employees who are in customer contact jobs (sales, support, delivery, contract
admin...) are detracting from our ability to deliver a quality relationship to
our customers. The current scheme of things also requires large investments in
"support" and "administrative" jobs that essentially serve only to catch errors
that shouldn't be made in the first place.
If we change our business philosophy, and our business model then the underlying
business process AND THE TOOLS THAT IMPLEMENT THEM must also change. The good
news is that, just like the revolution in manufacturing in the 80's, it is
possible to achieve both apparently conflicting goals of quality improvement and
cost reduction. And it IS a revolution, evolutionary change will not achieve the
vision, no more than evolutionary change would have resulted in AMS and NMS.
We have "Class A" manufacturing plants and "Class A" computing facilities. Both
of which we promote to our customers. Why not define and implement a "Class A"
customer relationship ???
A quick example before I go back to my proposal ( I must be done before kick-off
tommorow :-)).
I appologize for picking on XCON but it is the most universally understood
problem. XCON is a manufacturing system. It's goals were to eliminate a function
that used to exist in manufacturing called FA&T (Final Assembly and Test) whose
function was to physically test the systems that were built to make sure that
they would work. It accomplished this goal by examining orders prior to assembly
to establish completeness and then generated a very detailed "system map" that
told the assemblers what the "best" way to assemble the system would be.
Before long someone figured out that, with relativly little work, XCON could be
made available to sales so that we could verify our configurations prior
to delivery to the customer thus reducing the need to get change orders. Thus
was born XSEL (about 1985 I think) which is a simplified way to get data into
XCON.
The problem here is that while they both continue to solve the problems they
were designed to solve they do not address the real underlying problem! They
check configurations for errors, they DO NOT GENERATE CONFIGURTATIONS or manage
them over time.
Sales reps and customers do not think in "PART NUMBER" any more than the average
software developer thinks in Assembly Language. Yet our cost of sales is high
(or our productivity is low) for the same reason that development costs would be
high if we still did all of our development with TECO, MACRO and LINKEDIT.
The software industry no longer requires SW engineers to know assembly language.
They have CASE Tools that not only integrate the individual steps in the process
but they are integrated to optimize the WHOLE process. What the field needs is
a set of integrated CORE Tools (Customer Oriented Relationship Engineering)
that automate the mundane, the tedious and the error prone so that we can be
left to do what we are really paid to do, be creative, spend time with customers
and SELL MORE! And this does not just apply to sales or to configurations
but to the WHOLE organization and processes that interact with our
customers.
|
| 67.11 | Random Quoting Comments | KAHALA::KLIGER | | Mon Jan 27 1992 11:35 | 52 |
| While the majority of field use of the XCON system has been
to create a quotation in XCON and then send it to XCON
for validation, that was not the initial design nor sales
strategy for the use of the tools. XSEL was intended to
provide part number selection assistance and configuration
creation functions, while AQS was intended to be used
subsequent to the configuration creation. Thus assumptions
were made that when quoting, part numbers and configurations
were already known. Clearly, these assumptions need to be
revisited.
It would be nice if we had an updated business sales tools strategy
that defined which tools should perform which functions and how
they should integrate. That way we will not be wasting time and
money developing duplicate functionality in many systems, and we
could do a much better job of responding to issues and problems
because we would know who is responsible for resolving which issues.
As far as AQS goes, we have been funded at a maintenance level for the
last 10 years. With 3 programmers for support and development of
US AQS, we essentially do little more than respond to constant
business program changes. While we are well aware of IM&T efforts
to promote the use of current tools and technologies and the business
demand to create a 'seamless' interface of tools to support sales,
the reality is that very little is being done with AQS. Unless
people are willing to:
1-Slow down business changes in our environment
2-Live without business changes being added to AQS for
a period of time while AQS is redesigned.
3-Fund an effort to redesign AQS while maintaining the
existing support level.
You cannot expect to see major tools integration changes from
the quoting perspective. Unfortunately, all 3 above the above
scenarios are unlikely in today's environment without high level
management support.
Recent efforts (read that funding) to improve sales tools
useability and integration have not focused on AQS. Therefore,
I believe that you can expect to see the minor improvements of
AQS to continue, but the dramatic tools changes which you are
asking for appear to be in the distant future for quoting.
For specific AQS issues, there is a Notes Conference on
FDCV14::AQS.
- Hal Kliger
US IM&T AQS Development Manager
|