| Here are a few representative replies: enough, I hope, to serve as a
summary of the issues and a basis for further discussion. Carry on...
================================================================================
Note 51.3 SYS/NET I ADMIN NOTE 3 of 19
SAHQ::HAY 25 lines 13-JAN-1992 13:21
-< Marketing Problem >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having just completed teaching SYSNET I, I ran into a situation where a
number of students were expecting more material than offered for
VAXcluster and Network Management. Consequently their EXPECTATIONS
were nor met.
I offer the following MARKETING suggestion. Refer to page 18 of the
current "Digest" (Jan 92 - Jun 92). Take a close look at the
description for SYSNET I. The use of the terms refering to VAXclusters
and Networks are not misleading in the introduction. However, the
highlighted area specifically mentions "VAXcluster System Management I"
and "Network Management I". If you read further you will find that
VAXcluster System and Network Management skills are not mentioned in
either the "Master These Skills" or "Detailed Outline" areas.
Note also that SYSNET II does not refer to either VAXcluster System or
Network Management.
In view of this I recommend a choice of actions:
1. Remove all reference to VAXcluster System Management and Network
Management fron the "Digest", or
2. Rename SYSNET I to "VMS for System Managers". This would provide a
complete set of "VMS for ..." courses. Renaming of SYSNET II and III
would be optional.
================================================================================
Note 51.5 SYS/NET I ADMIN NOTE 5 of 19
SONATA::SADLER "Change for a Flainian Pobble Bead?" 107 lines 23-JAN-1992 16:50
-< An attempt at the Ultimate Answer... (not 42)! >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry I haven't been able to reply before - I've been trying to fix some of the
issues...
This reply is intended to address the preceding replies in this note plus the
other similar ones on Programmer etc. I'll try to hit all the issues here, if I
miss any let me know and I'll backfill later. I'm not going to try to directly
address all the individual instances, but will try to cover everything in one
shot so you may need to think about the application to your specific input...
It seems to me that we have several problems to fix:
1. People getting on the wrong course
We're revisiting the training and materials that we provided to the registration
and sales folks to make sure that they're sufficient. All the specific instances
of misplacment are being investigated to determine the cause. It looks as if
they're teething troubles but we're watching very carefully. If you have other
instances in the US, please send them direct by mail to ESMAIL::TOWNE and
CC me (you can also post them if you wish).
2. Marketing Materials (Digest, Catalogues, Flyers etc)
We're going to rework all the materials in the light of the feedback we're
getting here - I agree with some of the points. In our zeal to make the courses
attractive we've maybe overstated some stuff. We'll try to ensure that there
is no possibilty of people being misled. In the meantime you can help by making
sure you go over the objectives and course description at the start of the
course.
The other issue here is caused by the level of detail that the Digest
descriptions allow - some items that show up in the general descriptions are not
sufficiently large to show up in the highest level of topics, which is all that
show in the Digest. The problem won't appear with the Catalogue. We'll try to
make the Digest stuff more internally consistent. We'll also look at removing
the references to other old courses as this seem to have to potential to
confuse people (which is the opposite of why they were included)
3. Course Titles
Thanks for the suggestions - however I don't think we can change the title again
so soon. Ultimately I'd like to change the Sysnet titles to System and Network
NODE Management, but it will have to wait a while - at least till after we
remove the old courses, otherwise the confusion in the customer base will kill
us.
4. General Overall Issues:
- The restructuring is not yet complete - most of the topics that seem to be
missing at the moment will show up either in the Troubleshooting course or in
the 'specialist' VAXcluster, Security, Performance or Programmer II courses
later this year.
- The new curriculum takes a completely different approach to the subject
matter. We're trying to inculcate job-related skills and info in a phased
just-in-time fashion. This will, of necessity, tend to fragment the existing
material and some people will react against this - however it is our belief,
based on the Task Analysis that we did and on experience in Germany and field
inputs, that these will be in the minority, and the most of our customers will
be pleased with the new approach.
As an example - it's true that you now have to take 3 classes to learn to
install VMS - the survey indicated clearly that this task is not carried out by
system managers until they are quite experienced, while installation of layered
products is important much earlier in their development. (Ref: System and
Network Management Job Analysis, Table 5 on Page 63)
- There seems to be a misapprehension that a goal of the restructuring is to
lessen the total number of classes that someone has to take. This is not quite
right - the goal is to reduce the number that they take to GET STARTED, and we
have achieved this. The real goal is to decrease the number that they HAVE to
take, but to increase the number that they WANT TO and DO take. This is how we
will stay in business!!!!!
- The other issue is the confusion as to what's happening with the old
curriculum, what's going away and when...
The idea is that we will eventually replace almost all the existing courses, and
that this will be complete by the end of next fiscal year (93). we will be doing
a Task Analysis for the Programmer audience, starting in February, and we'll
rework the Programmer piece once we have the results of that.
The existing 'back-end' system management courses (Performance, Security...)
will be replaced as soon as we can get them done - by the end of Q2 next fiscal
at the latest, in the meantime we'll keep them around for the people who've done
their 'basic training' and want to progress.
The 2 that are causing the most confusion seem to be U&C II and Sysman II.
The vast majority of the material in U&C II is all covered either in Programmer
I or in the Sysnet string, so it should go away very soon. We've defined
cross-over paths for eveyone who's taken U&C I and nothing else so there should
be little need for U&C II to survive long.
Syman II, on the other hand, will survive longer as we're recommending that
people who've done Sysman I and now want to progress should stick in the old
curriculum as the cross-over paths are too messy.
That's it for now.
Cheers,
Andy
================================================================================
Note 51.8 SYS/NET I ADMIN NOTE 8 of 19
MELKOR::SWIERKOWSKIS 28 lines 11-FEB-1992 20:18
-< one more time?!? >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> From what I have seen in the notes files and memos going back and forth
> between managers and registration, there is definately a problem here
> and what instructors are hearing is that it is registration that is
> telling them wrong. On the other hand, registration is saying that all
> of the registrars are trained and they are not telling customers wrong.
>
> We are in a vicious circle. Let's hope for all of our sakes that this
> gets settled soon.
We HAVE to settle this soon. I find it absolutely impossible to believe that
all of our customers are lying about what central registration is telling
them. I'm certainly not going to suggest it to them when they start griping
about it on Monday mornings. Have we forgotten that the customer is why we
are and that the customer is "always right?"
I would like to suggest that the registrars start doing what one of our local
did years ago. She would ask whether they met the pre-req's for a course.
If they elected to take a course without the pre-req's, she told them that she
would make a notation on the enrollment form to that affect so that if there
were a problem later on, she would have a record of it. She also made notes
indicating that she had asked what classes they had previously taken. She
accomplished two things: customers tended to do the right thing when they
knew it would be documented and she had proof that she was doing her job.
Simple? Yes!
Susan
================================================================================
Note 51.12 SYS/NET I ADMIN NOTE 12 of 19
CGVAX2::FERREIRA 36 lines 9-MAR-1992 16:59
-< A word from a Registra pull together >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK folks... We're still working for the same company with the same set
of goals, customer satisfaction and company growth. Call it flag
waving if you wish. I have been fully trained in System Management,
old curriculum. The decision was made to re-structure the VMS
curriculum. It was well known by the decision makers that this would
create some level of confusion to the customers. Well it's happened.
I'm currently on assignment with Central Registration and have been
since October '91. Each and every member of their registration team
does their best to help place/advise/consult each customer to the best
of their ability or advise them to speak with one of the Training
Consultants in OFO. Every Registrar in Central Registration has been
trained on the content of the "VMS Mastery Series". This does not make
them systems managers, magician or VMS Specialists. There are NO
Crystal Balls, so the best they can do is ask the customer to evaluate
their own comfort levels and tell us where they need to be. We do make
suggestions based on the career paths the customer have told us but the
customer has ownership beyond that.
I can speak for most of the Registrars. I/we do offer to fax full
course descriptions to any customer who sounds confused concerned or
undecided. We often make follow-up calls and know most of our larger
customers on a first name basis. We always treat them with courtesy
and respect. Simply said we do the best we can to provide accurate
information from which they must make their own informed decision. It
comes as no surprise there's an occasional mis-placed student, I don't
have the numbers to present percentages, but my guess is we(DECys) are
doing quite well... (FLAME OFF)
I would be receptive to any and all critques you as Instructors have.
Along with those, please send me or post suggestions you may have to
improve on our joint success in this space.
Regards
Frank (SCARGO::FERREIRA) dtn 264-6620
Graduate System Management Training Program (SMTP) class #3
================================================================================
Note 51.13 SYS/NET I ADMIN NOTE 13 of 19
NITTY::THORNE "Department of Redundancy Department" 26 lines 10-MAR-1992 10:31
-< Wait a minute... >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
re: .12
Well, in the good old days, when the registration was handled in the
training centers, a registrar could always call on an instructor to
answer technical training questions. We still occasionally found
misplaced students; but, not like what is being reported in this
notesfile. The fact is that customers calling in are going to need
technical advise that simply cannot be furnished by anyone other than
people who teach the course(s) in question. FAXing a course
description? These people are trying to do business with us! They're
spending money to learn our products! Why are we making this a
difficult exercise for them? There are plenty of competing training
establishments that will spend HOURS with the customers to ensure that
they are getting what they need for their training dollars. I
understand that the author of .12 isn't to blame for the present
arrangement, I understand that we all work for the same company, and I
also understand that we, as a company, MUST become more profitable.
We're not going to do that by making it more difficult for people to
select which of our products to buy, and we're not going to do that by
making it more difficult to do business with us. People buying these
services need technical support that goes beyond someone looking at a
curriculum chart and FAXing course descriptions. Having taken the
courses and TEACHING the courses are two very different things.
Mark Thorne
Chicago Training Center
================================================================================
Note 51.18 SYS/NET I ADMIN NOTE 18 of 19
SCARGO::GREENWALD 64 lines 19-MAR-1992 17:09
-< Response from Centralized Registration >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let me share with you what is happening here. I welcome your response
via notes or calling directly. I can honestly say that Registation is
doing everything possible to place people in the proper courses. There
are problems that are much greater than Registration i.e., the mass
misinterpretation of course content and level from what seems to be a
result of the write-ups in the Digest as well as even our Dec Sales
people misunderstanding and misrepresenting the curriculum to our
customers. It is quite typical for a student to call and request a
course and the following scenario exits. Let's say the course is
SysNet I. Registsrar: Do you realize this is an entry level course?
Student says yes. Registrar: Have you taken Utilities and Commands.
Again, student says yes. The Registrar now has to explain to the
customer that this is not the appropriate course. The student is
usually baffled. He did not percieve the course in that light from
what the read.
We are lucky if it's as simple as the scenario I described above: one
student, one course. It's easy enough to make the switch.
Unfortunately, more often than not, we are speaking to training
coordinators. Just the other day, I spoke to a coordinator who was
ready to register about five students for courses that were entirely in
the wrong order including overlapping courses. Needless to say, he was
quite frustrated that he misunderstood the write-ups to such a degree.
We had to rework the entire schedules. I faxed approximately 15 pages
of cours flow maps which he appreciated. Unfortunately, it is not an
exaggeration to say that customers are more frequently than not
calling and wanting to register for the wrong courses and Registrars
are continuously put in a position to "talk them out" of these courses.
Sometimes, believe it or not, they insist on taking the courses despite
the recommendations.
As you are aware, another problem that exists is that a Customer
Service Rep does not have anyone to pass a call to that has technical
expertise. The best a Registrar can do is fax a description of the
course to a customer or pass the call to a Sales Consultant.
The kinds of efforts that we have put in place include having one of
our Reps enroll in the entire mastery series. We are filling the
business gap by putting in place our own course adviser. We have
developed our own training for Registsrars which include small
group training and one-on-one. As I noted above, we are so concerned
about the confusion regarding these courses that we not only ask if the
student has met the prerequisites but we probe further with two or
three additional questions. Again, one of our dilemmas is that we
often speak to the caller who is not the student himself. Usually when
we ask if the student has met their prereques, the caller is unsure but
"believes" the student has. Rather than accepting this we have now
learned to tell him that we will hold on the line while he contacts
the student or we will call the student directly but, for the students
sake, we need to be sure that this is the right course. However, even
with these efforts there will still be some misplaced students. The
problem is much greater than Registration.
I don't blame any of the instructors for their frustration in trying to
teach a class with students who are inappropriately attending that
class. Please understand that Registsration is doing everything they
can do to help assure that students are placed in the correct courses.
Behind the scenes, we have been actively interfacing with those who we
have identified can provide the support and changes we need so that
students properly understand the curriculum and make the correct
choices. I cannot stress enough that we all share the same goal--we
are committed to satisfying the student and providing them with the
training they deserve.
================================================================================
Note 51.19 SYS/NET I ADMIN NOTE 19 of 19
NITTY::THORNE "Department of Redundancy Department" 13 lines 19-MAR-1992 17:56
-< One instructor's response >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RE: .18
Thank you for replying in this forum. I see you are facing the
same kind of problems we faced when the registration effort was handled
in the field. I have dealt with the very scenarios you outlined in
your note, as well as others. Perhaps we need to provide an avenue
between the instructors and the registrars that could supplement the
support you are already putting into place. You are welcome to call me
with technical course questions in the areas of VMS, networking, or
languages at DTN 474-5331.
Mark Thorne
Chicago Training Center
|