Conference 7.286::digital

    I believe that for the last several years Digital has been an exhibitor
    at the Paris Air Show. To a very large degree, many of the people in
    attendance are current, future, or potential customers. The Aerospace
    segment is a significant component of the AGD CBU. A couple of years
    ago we exhibited a major documentation tracking system built with and
    for Air France.
    
    I have no first-hand information, but on the premise that people are
    indeed innocent until proven guilty, maybe these people are taking the
    least cost alternative. It just might be less costly to
    rent a chalet than to pay per night for attendees in a geography which
    has outrageous hotel costs. 

    
    
    re .1
    
    The Corporation's Dow Jones listing, A TLA for the Corporation's full
    name. 
    
    Consider identifying the following:
    
    General		(GM)
    International	(IBM)
    American		(AT&T)
    
    Does "Digital" make sense or does DEC? Sigh...
    
    Carl

	It may not only be cost effective to rent a chalet, but it may
	be customer effective as a place to wine/dine/inform customers.
	Alot of that seems to go on in the Aerospace world.

	I've been on alot of trips for DEC/Digital that one would consider
	"junkets". (DECworld '88 in Cannes, numerous DECUS symposia,
	customer trips, etc..)  Many were to either exotic or "cool"
	places. I caught alot of grief from friends "who wished they could
	go".  When I told them that it frequently meant working 12-18 hour
	days and rarely ever seeing anything other than the place of work,
	my hotel, and a place to grab a bite to eat, then backed off.

	It's not all what it may appear to be. One mans junket may be that
	mans nightmare.

							mike

    re: .0
    
    Don't get so uppity and sensitive just because of the locale of the
    trade show.  The chalet is not being used for housing employees, they
    are staying at a hotel near the airport.  You may also be interested to
    know that the Paris Air Show is open 7 days a week, and so you have to
    work every day.  Don't know how much sightseeing one can get in on that
    schedule.
    
    You're focusing on the wrong issues vis-a-vis TFSO and "numbers". 
    Digital's participation in these trade shows is not the reason for the
    downsizings.  (Of course who goes to the shows, and what they do there
    is another issue)  Ask yourself in which areas can DEC/Digital be
    successful, and how many people do we need to do them.
    
    /d.c. 

    Re:  .1 . . . You ARE kidding, aren't you...  aren't you?  Of course, I
    don't see a smiley face...
    
    If your point is that the term "DEC" is politically incorrect, I say, get a
    life.  To those of us who have been around a few years, it may ALWAYS
    be "DEC", and us poor remaining slobs, "DECies".  Would you really
    begrudge us one last vestige, memory, of the glorious old days???
    
    Bah, humbug!  :^}  

    
    Can't speak to the air show, but the CAD conference I've attended in
    past years, until I moaned enough so they stopped sending me.  What
    a perfectly AWFUL way to spend several days !  If you want to do that
    lousy job, I bet several of those going would gladly let you replace
    them.  The only good thing about it is that it's a great way to switch
    companies if you're willing to move.
    
    It may have changed since I stopped going, though.  I guess us CAD
    types prefer to work on our code or our problems or our users'
    problems.  The proceedings look nice in a row on your bookshelf, too.
    

RE: .6

	Have you ever done a large tradeshow like a DECUS or a DECworld?
	If not then let me tell you that during the 6 weeks of prep and
	3 weeks of a show at DECworld '88, I had ONE afternoon off. Yes,
	ONE in 9 weeks. I had to be there regardless of things working or
	not. And believe me, I had to practically beg to get that
	afternoon off. I'm not complaining, it was part of the job, but
	don't anyone tell me that the job of tradeshows is a cake walk and
	that one can come and go as they please.

							mike

>I have to ask: how many DEC people who went at company expense to the Paris Air 
>Show can discuss the implications of rivetless design; can explain the 
>    similarities 
>between an AI and an HSI; or can distinguish between interference drag and 
>induced drag when designing an airplane? All the above are integral in 
>intelligently discussing aerospace concerns with potential customers.
    
    Guess this demonstrates your extensive contact with aerospace
    customers.  Digital is I.T. vendor, and as such we sell and deliver
    I.T. solutions to the aerospace industry, design data management,
    product data management, data integration, etc.  In short solutions for
    those business problems that face discrete manufacturers, such as
    aerospace companies.  Digital/DEC doesn't design airplanes, but those
    who do use out hardware and software to design on, and we'd like a
    larger share of that market.
    
    Perhaps "uppity" was a poor choice of words in my original reply, but I
    do detect an air of self-righteousness.  Do all of the people in the
    greater Maynard-Marlborough area presume to know what the interests of
    all Digital/DEC employees are?
    
    People who abuse trade show trips for junkets should be disciplined,
    and be held accountable for their actions.  I have no problem with
    this, what I don't like is all-encompassing attacks on everyone who
    goes to work at trade shows.  
    
    I think your problem is in the locales, but I don't think that the
    organizers of such events will elect to go to Muskegon, Mich. over a
    sun belt location.
    
    /d.c.

    Re:  Paris
    
    At least one of the people attending the Paris Air Show
    for Digital will be demonstrating a repeatable solution
    my Professional Service Center delivers.  The event in
    Paris is the best-attended, most prestigious show for
    the world's aerospace community and hence is a rather
    effective medium for selling our solution, the Logistics
    Engineering Workbench.
    
    My assumption is all attendees in these times were
    subjected to the ROI test on their involvement.  I for
    one hope the engineer demonstrates his heart out so
    perhaps our PSC might survive another month or two.  The fact
    that he had to go to Paris to do it doesn't make much
    difference to me.  Sitting on another gd airplane for
    seven or eight hours each way, staying in another hotel 
    for a couple of weeks and working twelve hour days is no
    longer my idea of a "junket," whether it's Paris or
    Peoria.
    
    IMHO
        
    

Paul Collins
(508) 467-5164

                                               
                           Booth #1160, Dallas Convention Center...



              DIGITAL LEADS DAC '93 PERFORMANCE PARADE

          WITH ALPHA AXP, OSF/1, DATA MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS



DALLAS, Texas -- June 14, 1993 -- Digital Equipment Corporation is 
highlighting the world's fastest workstations using the company's 
superfast Alpha AXP microprocessor technology and showing popular 
UNIX applications for electronic design automation at the 1993 
Design Automation Conference, today through Thursday at the 
Convention Center.
     Digital is also featuring its newly announced, multiplatform 
Integrated Product Data Management Architecture (IPDMA), which 
comprises the OpenDATA family of standards-compliant, data and 
document management solutions (see separate release).
     The DEC 3000 AXP workstations are demonstrating top design 
applications under the DEC OSF/1 operating system from Mentor 
Graphics Corporation, Cadence Design Systems, Inc., Viewlogic 
Systems, Inc., Synopsys, Inc., and i-Logix, Inc.  In addition, the 
recently announced DEC 2000 Model 150 PC is running applications 
from Masstek and PADS, Inc., under Microsoft's new Windows NT 
software.
     "This is the strongest combination of hardware and software 
that Digital has brought to DAC in some time," said Don Jenkins, 
Digital's Worldwide Electronics Industry director.
"The AXP workstations are the undisputed performance leaders 
throughout the world, as every accepted set of benchmark comparisons 
bears out."
     "In addition, the DEC OSF/1 operating system incorporates the 
industry's most desired programming and user interface features.  It 
is truly the 'unified UNIX' that users want, and it is available 
now."
     The theme of Digital's exhibit at Booth 1160, "Imagine Working 
Faster Than You Ever Imagined," expresses point-blank the message 
that Alpha AXP systems are the industry's leaders in price and 
performance at all levels.  Their superior performance is being 
demonstrated in the Digital booth in direct competition, pitting the 
DEC 3000 Model 500X AXP workstation against Hewlett-Packard's 
HP9000/735, while the DEC 3000 Model 400 AXP takes on Sun 
Microsystems' SPARCstation 10/30.
     For software vendors, Digital's exhibit also includes a 
demonstration of the EB64 Alpha AXP Development System.
     In addition to the Alpha AXP workstation and PC exhibition at 
Digital's booth, visitors to DAC can see Alpha AXP demonstrations at 
the following organization and vendor booths:  CAD Framework 
Initiative, Integrated Silicon Systems, Meta-Software, Quad Design 
Technology, the University booth, and Viewlogic Systems.
     Alpha AXP is Digital's 64-bit RISC computing architecture, 
design to support fast, uniprocessor and multiprocessor 
implementations that are scalable from palmtop to supercomputer.  
The architecture is built to endure for the next 25 years.  
The Alpha AXP architecture supports multiple operating systems 
including OSF/1, Windows NT, and OpenVMS to provide a wealth of 
applications to a broad range of markets.
     Digital Equipment Corporation, headquartered in Maynard, 
Massachusetts, is the leading worldwide supplier of networked 
computer systems, software and services.  Digital pioneered and 
leads the industry in interactive, distributed and multivendor 
computing.  Digital and its business partners deliver the power to 
use the best integrated solutions - from desktop to data center - 
in open information environments.
                                 ####

Note to Editors:  Alpha AXP, DEC, OpenDATA, and OpenVMS are 
                  trademarks of Digital Equipment Corporation.

     		  HP is a registered trademark of Hewlett-Packard 
                  Company.

     		  SPARCstation is a trademark of Sun Microsystems, 
                  Inc.

     		  Windows NT is a registered trademark of Microsoft 
                  Corporation.

     		  OSF/1 is a registered trademark of the Open 
                  Software Foundation, Inc.

     		  UNIX is a registered trademark of UNIX System 
                  Laboratories, Inc.

CORP/93/191


    

> recently announced DEC 2000 Model 150 PC is running applications 
> from Masstek and PADS, Inc., under Microsoft's new Windows NT 
> software.
    
    Huh? Did they change the name of Jensen *again*? I thought the machine
    in the Starburst box that runs Windows NT was the DECpc AXP/150 or
    something like that.. The DEC2000 Model 150 is the same (exact) machine
    running OSF/1 or OpenVMS.  I think. The marketeers were convinced the
    distinction was important not so very long ago, so it's a bit strange
    to hear this in a press release..
    
    (Not that, as project leader, *I* thought the distinction was
    important..)
    
    But I'm glad they seem to have a decent showing at DAC. As a cad *user*
    I've found DAC useful in the past; but I haven't been in years..
    
    ...tom

Of all of the bad things happening to our company these days, TFSO, negative
income, stock price dropping, etc.  the thing that bothers me most is the
ascorbic divisiveness that hard times seem to be engendering.  Armed camps
appear to be forming:  there is a lot of finger pointing, faction X vs.
Management, faction Y vs. Sales, faction Z vs. Engineering, a rising
sentiment of "your job is easier than mine and you're not doing even that
very well".  There is possibly some truth to all of this, none of it is
completely so.  There is no one person, group, policy or lack of policy that
is responsible for our predicament; any more than a single element causes
the weather to be what it is.  It is the result of a conflagration of a
myriad number of things, many outside of the control of anyone.

I'm not an idealistic sentimentalist refusing to believe that there are any
bad things or bad people in the world, however I do believe that the vast
majority of people try to do as a good a job as they possibly can.  This has
definitely been my personal experience for over 18 years in the software
industry with 6 or so different companies.  For every one person who I
thought might be a slackard there were at least 20 or 30 who I knew worked
hard and diligently.

Questioning procedures is definitely a good thing.  There is always
some level of waste which can be reduced, things can always be improved.
However dissension is most likely to be productive if it is done in a
constructive and amicable spirit.  I think that in most instances the
fault lies in the system rather than in the people.

    George

    George,
    
    I hear you, and agree somewhat.  What if we closed down this notesfile? 
    Would that stop the griping?  Maybe, maybe not.  Would it stifle
    people's incentive to be a whistleblower?  Yup, it sure would.
    We don't need gripers, but we sure do need whistleblowers.
    
    Whistleblowers care more about others (including DEC) than themselves.
    It's tough to be a whistleblower.  Those that choose to do so will not
    receive praise and well-wishes.  In some cases, they may receive
    retaliation for their efforts.
    
    Mark

I'm generally a RON in this file. But to answer the question at the end of .19
yeah I think that the initial note was off base. It targeted
one particular event and I didn't see any kind of proof offered that there
was waste going on. Having done the trade show circuit I know first hand that
they are not junkets. Sure the locales are nice; if you ever have time to
actually do anything!

Of course asking someone at the Air SHow to print out this thread is truly
absurd.

    I too usually only read this notesfile but, since you want input...
    1. Don't delete the base note.  What purpose does that serve?
    2. The base note(when it was available)pointed a finger at unknown
    people in a rumored situation without any proof.  The irony was that
    the site was in France where under the Napoleonic Code you are guilty
    until proven innocent.  I frankly was disappointed in that type of
    accusation.
    3. I thought the tone of the base note was argumentative and
    destructive.  We need constructive criticism and I encourage that from
    all Digital employees.
    4. I sure as hell hope  we have an impressive display and strong
    presence at all trade shows.  And I hope the people working those shows
    have and opportunity to tour the locale as a reward for the hard work
    they do to try and sell our wares against the wares of our competitors.
    
    Ken, don't stop being critical.  Just, be able to back it up a bit more
    and please do it with a little more feeling for those people that may
    be on a 'junket' busting their tails to impress our customers.
    
    Bill 

    Most people are sensative to being accused of traveling or working
    in a wasteful manner.  Before you wrote this note, I think it would
    have alleviated a lot of hassle and speculation if you had taken the
    time to find out who in DEC was attending the Paris show, and ask them
    directly what the ROI would be.  I'm really sick of people sounding
    off in these notes files about so-and-so's expenditures before they
    really know what they are talking bout.
    
    KB
    

    On behalf of the Discrete Manufacturing Defense CBU, we can confirm
    that we are participating in the Paris Air Show and the Design
    Automation Conference this week.  These major industry - focused trade
    shows provide excellent opportunities to meet with our customers and
    promote our products and services.  These activities were designed upon
    a fundamental marketing rule - go where your most influential customers
    & prospects congregate to make your case.
    
    We have also tried to make sure that our efforts are cost-effective. 
    The people involved have clearly defined responsibilities and are
    working 12 hour days.  We are spending much, much less on the two shows
    combined than Ken's rumor of the PAS cost alone.
    
    In this era of intense competition and open systems, effective
    marketing and communication are critical to success.  We are
    participating in these shows to increase our revenue and preserve jobs
    in our business unit..
    
    Diane Albano                
    Worldwide Aerospace Business Segment Manager
    
    Don Jenkins
    Worlwide Electronic Business Segment Manager

    Ken,
    
    A suggestion. If you're going to accuse people of wrongdoing then be
    VERY specific. Name names, explain why. I fall into this trap too. It
    is very easy to make generalized statements. If you're going to accuse
    people of being on a junket make sure you are RIGHT first. For instance
    with this air show thing if I was the one making the accusation I'd
    have made sure I knew who was there and what their job codes and
    responsibilities were.
    
    Learn from Paul Kinzelman. When he went after people he went after them
    with facts, dates, places etc. When you're fighting a bureaucracy you
    have to be 200% sure you're right because if even a bit of your
    accusation is incorrect those accused are going to use it to show
    they're all lillywhite even if they aren't.
    
    Dave

Ken,

>Now, to other Noters: am I off base here? Please let me know.

no, you are not off base.

I've traveled to DECUS a few times, done booth duty, given presentations...
It is a lot of work.  It takes a lot of preparation.  It drains a lot
of energy.  And I believe it does more good for the company that it
costs...

Having said that, I also know that not all the people who are paid to
go to these events return the company's investment.  I've been with
employees who demanded setup badges (allowing off hours access to
the 'show room') who also refused to help with setup or tear down,
or booth duty.  They were there to 'attend a specific meeting' or
'meet selective customers' or 'circulate a limited questionnaire'...

There was always a reason these people couldn't help with the real
work of running the show.  But they could tell you where the good
restaurants were, where the best side trips were...  These people
were on junkets.  Maybe they were justifiable in the eyes of the
managers that sent them.  Maybe sending these people was the best
investment of the company's money for the group that paid for it.
Maybe not.

I viewed this string of notes as asking that question.
'Was the money spent on sending n people to Paris for the Air Show
as good investment of the company's money?'


there is a *LOT* of 'emotional venting' in this conference - it is annoying to
read everyone's gripes, when what I come to this conference for
is information.  However, everyone needs to vent.  More so when times
are bad, and decisions seem arbitrary.  Venting doesn't solve the
problem, but it releases the stress - when others vent we feel better
knowing we are not alone.  But venting doesn't solve anything beyond
that.

this string of notes wasn't totally venting.  Ken was asking if the
cost of sending the number of people we sent to the Air Show was a good
expense.  Some people responded with good reasons for attending shows
in general, some for this show in particular.  That is useful information.
But we still haven't discussed things like:

	How many people did Digital send?

	Of those people, how many traveled cheaply, how many first class?
	How many had reasonable accommodations, how many had luxury
	suites?  How may dined within budget, how many feasted with
	friends and let the company pay for it?

	How many actually WORKED at the show and returned value to
	the company, and how many were on a junket?


I'm *NOT* saying that I know ANYONE we sent to Paris, nor do I know if anyone
that did go was on a junket or not. 

And having someone's chain yanked while the are at a show is also a knee
jerk kind of reaction that should have been avoided.  Whomever did the
yanking obviously felt that the decision to send people needed to be
defended, and didn't want to put themselves in the middle of the discussion;
so they put someone at the show in the middle of it.

I don't know that we sent *ANYONE* to Paris on a junket.  I know I've seen
some people sent on junkets in the past.  I know I've seen other people
complain about it.  I know I've seen those people punished.  And I know
I don't have any proof.

I don't feel that Ken was out of line for asking the question.
And I don't believe there is anything to be lost by discussion the question
(other than time), and I believe there is something to be gained.

I don't believe that the majority of people that travel to shows are on
junkets.  I do believe there are some.  I have no idea how to identify
them, I have no idea what should be done with them if they were identified.

Is the fault of the person on the trip for taking a junket?  or is it the
fault of their manager for sending them?

Big shows are easy targets.  There is lots of money flowing.  
That doesn't make it a bad investment.  But it doesn't make it a good
one either.  I thought we all came to this conference to discuss
issues like this...

	Joe

    There are times when the information that one gets must remain
    anonymous, but the information still needs to get out.  An example of
    this is the bonus issue.  Bonuses were given out, undisclosed, during a
    time recently when we were losing a lot of money.  Paul K. got wind of
    it and posted as much as he could post with few "facts," but enough to
    get the attention of management and to get someone to look at it.
    
    That's what can and should happen here, IMO.  I have had information
    that I could not reveal, having been witness to verbal communications
    and having read sometimes confidential information.  But, the issues
    themselves needed to be brought to the highest levels and pushed.  Open
    Door Policy *can work* but I've seen that posting critical information
    in notes is sometimes the only way to make SURE that ODP issues are
    addressed in timely fashion.  
    
    It reminds me of confidential information that Lyndon Johnson
    supposedly gave to Martin Luther King.  Basically, the President told
    Dr. King that he, personally, favored the issues that Dr. King was
    working for.  But, the only way that he could act on them was if Dr.
    King *pushed* him into it.  As the story goes, this influenced Dr.
    King's attitude towards peaceful resistance rather than violence,
    because he was assured that a real goal could be reached and could
    avoid actions taken out of vengeance.
    
    So it goes with ODP, notes and getting things done.  Issues need to be
    raised to levels of management that can take action.  But, word needs
    to get out about such issues (notes, e-mail, word of mouth) so that the
    managers who are empowered to take action are also able to justify the
    need to take correct actions (as opposed to simply silencing the
    malcontents or ignoring issues).
    
    Look at it from a manager's point of view.  He or she has to justify
    the time spent on any project.  Otherwise, a superior might think the
    manager was doing something stupid.  But, showing that a stir is being
    created among the ranks gives a competent manager the justification
    needed to address real concerns.  An incompetent manager will try to
    intimidate or retaliate, but this is *supposed* to be addressed by ODP
    in its current form already.
    
    Steve

	re .25:

>    Learn from Paul Kinzelman. When he went after people he went after them
>    with facts, dates, places etc.

	Please notice where this got him! (Paul is no longer among us).

>    When you're fighting a bureaucracy you
>    have to be 200% sure you're right because if even a bit of your
>    accusation is incorrect those accused are going to use it to show
>    they're all lillywhite even if they aren't.

	Actually, as Robert Palmer pointed out in one of his recorded
	speeches, you can't fight a bureaucracy. All you can do is
	establish an alternative way of doing things and then either
	abolish it or wait for it to dry up and blow away. That's what
	Palmer is doing right now.

	I'm not disagreeing with you, Dave, in that if you don't fully
	prove and document what you say then your statements will be
	dismissed. But the other half of it is that if you do prove
	and document, very likely you will be dismissed.

	But I digress.

	/Tom

>I have deleted my base note because it seems that someone has decided to 
>punish the innocent for my having asked the question.
    
    Closing the barn door after the horse has escaped.
    
    			Alfred

>>    Learn from Paul Kinzelman. When he went after people he went after them
>>    with facts, dates, places etc.
>
>	Please notice where this got him! (Paul is no longer among us).

    Where it got him was a chance to talk to Senior VPs about his concerns.
    Granted he didn't win very often but he did get to make his case face
    to face. And he left on his own. I've talked to him since he left. As
    far as I can tell he was frustrated and left largely out of that 
    frustration. He wasn't pushed.
    
    		Alfred
    

    re: .28
    
    Ken, the "overreaction" to your initial "inquiry" was probably due to
    your base note reading more like an inquisition than an inquiry.  As 
    written, the nameless, faceless people in question were presumed guilty
    and set up to prove their innocence.  And, given the current environment, 
    I can well understand their desire to set the record straight
    immediately, regardless of the inconvenience.

	re .32:

>>>    Learn from Paul Kinzelman. When he went after people he went after them
>>>    with facts, dates, places etc.
>>
>>	Please notice where this got him! (Paul is no longer among us).
>
>    Where it got him was a chance to talk to Senior VPs about his concerns.
>    Granted he didn't win very often but he did get to make his case face
>    to face. And he left on his own.

	Never mind the labour pains, show me the baby!

	Net result:

	1. Paul Kinzelman is no longer a Digital employee.

	2. No perceptible change in the ills he sought to remedy.

	Without criticizing Paul in any way, or implying that he was
	forced to leave, I simply pointed out that the encounter
	between Paul Kinzelman and the bureaucracy resulted in a
	knockout for the bureaucracy.

	Right does not always triumph.

	Under the circumstances, the merit of "going after them with
	facts, dates, places etc." seems less clearcut.

	/Tom

    To those that say Paul Kinzelman didn't get anywhere. That's not true:
    
    	1, He was instrumental in getting the No Smoking Policy enacted
    	2, He was instrumental in getting 7 senior DEC managers bumped from
    	   the DCU board of directors
    	3, When he left in frustration he was only midway through his
           campaign to bring to the surface problems with personnel policy
    	   in DEC. This proved to be his most difficult fight to date. What
    	   was spawned by this though was an independent investigation by
    	   an outside security firm. To date I have not heard the results
    	   of their inquiry.
    
    The thing that frustrated the entrenched senior management the most was
    that Paul had an excellent work record. They couldn't understand how
    a consistent 1/2 performer had so much to complain about. Paul's name
    was well known in the halls of corporate at MLO and MSO.
    
    Dave

    
    Re: .34
    
	> Without criticizing Paul in any way, or implying that he was
	> forced to leave, I simply pointed out that the encounter
	> between Paul Kinzelman and the bureaucracy resulted in a
	> knockout for the bureaucracy.
    
    How was it a knockout?  From the note's I've read it seems that
    they listened but did nothing.  I don't see that as a knockout on
    their part.  In fact, I see it as a case of them being confronted
    directly and consciously choosing to ignore the plea.  If it all
    comes down around them they certainly can't plead that they didn't
    know.  There are no guarantees in life.  If we only complained about
    the wrong things that we *knew* would be corrected, where would that
    get us?
    
    Steve
    

    
    re: .32, ditto.  Paul was very frustrated with a system that would not
    try to simply "do the right thing."  However, he was very successful at
    proving how to do the right thing as a company.  Basically, he showed
    that if an individual is willing to champion what is right (no smoking
    at Digital, DCU Board problems, tried with the apparently high and secret 
    bonuses) and is able to get the support of a lot of people -- using notes, 
    e-mail and word of mouth -- management WILL eventually do the right thing.  
    "You need a lot of people," he told me.  This takes a LOT of work aside 
    from the normal work load.  And, it takes a lot of patience and a lot of 
    personal toll.  Sometimes a person just gets tired and eventually the 
    windmills get to be too big.  Paul went to another company where I feel he 
    will continue his crusade for doing what's right.  But, he left Digital 
    because, overall, his impression was that the current management is 
    intentionally distancing itself even further from the grunts, making the 
    possibility of "doing the right thing" even harder than before.
    
    I don't know that I agree with Paul on the latter point.  I still
    believe that it is possible to encourage management to see long term
    and to do the right thing.  But, this is a hard thing to believe in
    when management APPARENTLY does things like shut down Delta, pay large 
    bonuses to high-ranking "leaders" that may be questionable, insists on 
    keeping substantial bonuses secret, targets an individual for retribution 
    through Personnel, sends folks on trips in apparent violation of edicts 
    and so forth.  
    
    This latest where a hard-working IC at a conference is chewed out by a 
    manager about "junkets" rumors in notes and who then chews out the
    person that questioned them is an example of two things.  First, it is
    an example of a manager who, correctly, understands how powerful notes,
    e-mail and word of mouth are in this company.  Second, it is an example
    of how a manager might attempt to squash such scrutiny -- hammer on
    someone who is obviously NOT at fault in order to put pressure on those
    who would question.  A more believable response, if such is desired, is
    to have an objective and empowered party review the allegations, 
    investigate with reasonable restraint and openly communicate the facts.  
    This type of method worked with the DCU.  That is, a few people like
    Phil G. and other dedicated individuals were able to get information
    and make it available so that employees at Digital could be informed
    and make their own decisions.
    
    Paul K., myself and others who speak up for "doing what's right"
    sometimes get anonymous tips about internal goings on at Digital.  What 
    are we supposed to do?  We can't investigate.  We can only report what 
    we have heard.  The folks reporting these things usually say something 
    along the lines of "I can't give you the source or more details because 
    it would threaten my job.  But, someone MUST do something about this and 
    I don't trust my superiors to do the right thing."  This is ALL TOO COMMON 
    and is a symptom of something seriously, fundamentally wrong at Digital!  
    Delta was a group I trusted to get the information to the right sources.  
    I DO NOT TRUST PERSONNEL WITH THIS TASK -- and this is based on my own 
    experiences with Personnel as well as what I have watched happen with others.  
    I have met and worked with GOOD people that work in Personnel, BTW.  I
    believe that the bad impression is due to the infrequent actions of a
    few.  But, these actions must be addressed if Personnel is to have
    credibility with the grunts.  It is not sufficient to ignore them or to
    assume that the grunts just don't have a clue.
    
    Worse, I no longer trust my own management above a certain level and
    this has added a tremendous amount of frustration and tension to my
    job.  Basically, I no longer trust that club of management that seems
    to have formed below Bob Palmer and above my management.  They strike
    me as arrogant, secretive, nepotistic and of a tendency to speak without
    listening.  This does not inspire me to sacrifice for the company as I
    tend to try to do.
    
    I *do* trust Digital as a whole, as people at the low level who
    are sincerly interested in doing the right thing.  I *do* trust my
    immediate managers as competent, hard-working people who try to do the
    right thing.  I saw this whole team work to repair the DCU.  Paul K. did, 
    too.  It encouraged him to try to do the same for Digital, but he realized 
    it was too big for him -- and he felt really alone in this, in spite of 
    encouragement from me and others.
    
    BTW, lest anyone get the wrong impression, I am very much against
    unionization.  I have worked in a high-tech union shop and saw how 
    unions served to separate the grunts from management -- very, very bad 
    scene.  I would vote against unionization.  I am much more interested
    in establishing and enforcing policies that encourage Digital grunts
    and management to work together as a team.  I don't feel that "bad
    times" is a sufficient reason for being secretive, arrogant and
    nepotistic.  If anything, management should eschew even the appearance
    of such traits so that mutual trust and commitment can once again be
    established.  The grunts should be encouraged to question management
    decisions and management should be willing respond in a reasonable,
    thoughtful and timely manner -- and vice versa.
    
    Steve

    Perhaps this is a good point at which to begin a 'Paul Kinzelman' base
    topic?
    
    The topic was, I believe, "was I off-base?".  I think yes.  It is each
    employee's duty to practice good judgement, to do the right thing. 
    There will always be those that take advantage of any situation but the
    majority of people will always 'do the right thing'.
    
    Your questions impuned the integrity of everyone that has ever worked a
    trade-show or done a corporate visit; not by the fact that you asked
    but in the tone of your questions (and this has already been adequately
    and effectively been stated).  There is no glamour in the grunt work
    necessary to get the job done regardless of the location of the event.
    
    cw

    
    You know what scares me about the last few replies?
    
    If you substituted the words "Digital" or "Personnel" with
    "Department of Defense" or "US Postal Service" you
    would have a very close parallel with what people have
    told me the Federal Government is like to work in.
    
    The only difference is that we are required to make money
    at it; the government is allowed to lose money.
    
    I hope the bureaucracy isn't that bad here.
    
    Glenn

    
    When questions about company expenditures from employees who sincerely 
    wish to ascertain if cost reductions and travel restrictions are
    applied equally and at all levels is deemed the *wrong* thing.....
    
     now that's scary.
    
    

    .40
    
    Well said.
    
    John

    
    Re: .40
    
    Yes, that is quite true, but none of the replies here are saying that.
    They are only cautioning that if you bring it up, that it should be
    a genuine question and not a disguised accusation particularly if you
    don't have hard facts.
    
    Steve
    

    re: .42
    
    I agree.  My understanding is that "someone" is now pursuing this issue
    more formally now and through proper channels.  I anticipate/hope to
    read updates here.  Effectively, it sounds to me like a can of worms has 
    been opened.  I sincerly hope that the right thing is done for the good
    of Digital.  I've spoken with some folks who are truly upset about this
    issue, having nothing to do with the notes posted here.
    
    Steve

    
    Just what exactly is the issue being pursued?  Surely, not that some
    sincere questions must be backed up with hard facts, as has been
    suggested.
    
    

    The base note mentioned the Paris air show.  It also
    mentioned the DAC.

    I'm looking forward to some good trip reports from the DAC.
    Its been many (many!) moons since I last went to the DAC.
    Back then, you had to be presenting a paper to go.  I doubt
    there will be many Digital Papers this year.

    Digital is going through great turmoil in the Design Automation
    space.  I'm part of the PC Module Layout area....I hear that a
    great phalanx of Layout Managment are out at the DAC.  From
    my perspective it appears that they are desperately trying to
    find a replacement for our inhouse Module Design system.  Our
    internal system is no longer 'politically correct'.  I guess
    it must be written in the wrong computer language.  And I guess
    it gives them something to do.

    I hope its all money well spent.
    bob

From the "travel edict" memo:

>o     All travel and related spending which is not 
>      directly related to generating revenue will be 
>      canceled.

From note .45:

>    I'm looking forward to some good trip reports from the DAC.
>    Its been many (many!) moons since I last went to the DAC.
>    Back then, you had to be presenting a paper to go.  I doubt
>    there will be many Digital Papers this year.
>
>    Digital is going through great turmoil in the Design Automation
>    space.  I'm part of the PC Module Layout area....I hear that a
>    great phalanx of Layout Managment are out at the DAC.  From

Is it just me, or does this look a bit odd.  The DAC is on this week.

Steve (who presented a paper at IEA/AIE-93 recently representing Digital
       and had to pay all expenses in order to get permission to publish)

    re .44 
    
    
    >Just what exactly is the issue being pursued?  Surely, not that some
    >sincere questions must be backed up with hard facts, as has been
    >suggested.
  
    
    Tough to figure when the base note gets deleted.  The whole discussion
    is essentially rendered invalid because what was originally said is
    now remembered differently by each contributor.
    
    The note wsa put in to get someone held accountable for the Paris
    'junket' and then when someone is asked to account for it, the note
    gets deleted.  
    
    Sorry, but deleting the base note because it generates heat or does not
    get the approval of all your peers is a bit wishy-washy(and that is
    putting it as kindly as I can).
    
    Bill

    re: .47  I agree and would like to see the base note restored.
    
    Steve

    
    I would also ask that the base note be restored.
    

    As I recall it, The base note requested justification.  The group
    concerned gave business justification but sold themselves short on
    "evidence". I've travelled internationally quite a bit within the last
    few years, I have noted that it's impossible to avoid stringent
    guidelines around justification or travel, lodging and meal expenses. 
    I have been turned down on requests and errors made on claims if they
    do not meet the policies to the letter.
    
    I would be surprised if this trip was NOT subjected to VP approval,
    which means the buck stopped there at VP level, and not at middle
    management.  I therefore seems that the idea that "if you don't collect
    evidence, they'll whitewash it" is not possible - the written
    justification and trip approval (or lack thereof) would have to be on
    record BEFORE the trip is authorized. 
    
    No?
    
    Colin
    
    

    Personally, I'm glad that Ken posted the base note and I'm sorry
    that he deleted it. 

    If someone is abusing their financial authority in the great shrinking
    Digital, then we should all know about it. Bravo, Ken!!

    Digital has been described many times as a great big dysfunctional
    family. In such a family, one never tells "THE SECRET." Many know what
    the secret is, but nobody talks about it. It gets avoided as if it is
    not there. Interestingly, in such a family telling the secret is
    something that a person gets punished for by the more dysfunctional
    family members. (If this is all news to anyone, go to your nearest
    bookstore and read anything by Claudia Black.)

    Ken took the heat because he dared to tell THE SECRET. In this case it
    was just one of probably many such secrets that we throglites never
    know about. 

    Why is it good to tell such secrets? Because with Digital, as with any
    dysfunctional family, the family can only get better if the secrets are
    told. Exposed. It's painful. It causes turmoil. Yes, some manager who
    took her husband to the Paris Air show will get her toes stepped on.
    Big deal. That person will cover it all up by next month.

    The benefit of having such abuses told is that as they are told it is
    less likely that they will happen again. People need to speak up and to
    report abuses in an appropriate manner. In that way, we will see the
    new and healthier Digital that we all want. The environment of the
    company can become better when integrity rules the game.

    Dan Laukaitis
    P.S. Big brother - I know you're watching and I'm not afraid of you!

My suggestion with this note is a simple one.
Could we please stop referring to Individual Contributors as "grunts", and other
such terms?

"Individual Contributors" and "Management" have different roles, but we
each SHOULD have information and skills that are vital to the survival of this 
company and each other's jobs (or so we like to think) and we SHOULD be
dependent on each other.  I think we should strive somehow to improve the
morale of Individual Contributors...which is pretty difficult these days.

Idealistic... I know....

    Re: .50 - THANK YOU for having gotten to the nub of the matter.  The
    "secrets" in this company threaten to be its ultimate undoing, and
    more's the pity...
    
    "And God said, "let there be light""

re .51:  "Could we please stop referring to Individual Contributors as
"grunts", and other such terms?"


I don't think it's the managers using that term.  I believe the people
using it are really saying that they believe that their management views
them as "grunts" instead of valued contributors to the company.

It doesn't help anybody's morale to change the terminology unless reality
is also changed.  I am also idealistic, which is why I still believe
it is possible that there will be *real* changes in upper management's
attitude to lower level "troublemakers" who are actually trying to help
the company survive.

	Enjoy,
	Larry

	This was reported in VTX, well, at least the reportedrs from the
	Electronic Times saw us there!!!!!!!!!

	Heather


    DIGITAL AVIONICS DEBUT

    Digital Equipment made its first appearance at the Paris Air Show.  The
    Ilyushin IL96M, a Russian widebody airliner was unveiled at the show
    and flew with avionics developed by Digital and the Collins air
    transport division of Rockwell.  Software modifications for the
    avionics were done in a Moscow laboratory.  Raytheon and Rugged Digital
    Systems are developing military versions of Digital's Alpha and Vax
    computers.  Raytheon's machines will be for the US Air Force's joint
    surveillance and target attack radar system (Jstars) aircraft.  Digital
    has also announced sales and distribution agreements with the
    companies.

    Electronics Times.  17th June 1993

    <<Could we please stop referring to Individual Contributors as "grunts", 
    <<and other such terms?
    
    Oh yes!!  Let's not tell the secret! Let's not talk about the problem.
    Maybe it will just go away if we pretend it's not there. 

     
    Just sounds like someone who does not understand the endearing term
    as it is meant; grunts do the real work; I was a grunt 1968 through
    1971 in the land of OZ.  Proud to be a GRUNT. 5th Special Forces Group
    MAC-SOG 2.  callsign  zulu zulu three.
    
    
       Bob Cansler

    re: .51
    
    Personally, I'd like to see a modification of terms, too.  "Grunt"
    doesn't bother me worth a hoot.  But I find "resource" (as applied to
    a person) to be an offensive term.
    
    Out here in the field, we get these wonderful notices of "resource
    needed to perform DECbarf consulting in West Underwear, MO", "resource
    needed to provide DECslop start-up delivery services in Wachamacallit,
    TN".
    
    My sales rep tried to do a presentation to some northern (read: ivory
    tower) types.  She made the mistake of saying Digital "residents" were
    responsible for developing software supporting a leading-edge research
    effort.  She got chewed out for down-playing our "talented consultants"
    as mere "residents".
    
    Personally, I'll take the term "resident" any day; at least it implies
    that I'm human.  But, our management calls us "resources".  Like a
    lamp.  A table.  A chair.  A billable piece of liveware.
    
    It's humiliating...
    
    -- Russ


"late for dinner"

Bruce

    And while we're at it, keep in mind that MANY Individual Contributors
    have the word "Manager" in their Job Title, yet DO NOT have any direct
    reports.  When you/we are casting aspersions about the quality (or lack
    thereof) of our corporate management team (and THAT adjective is
    gratuitous), you/we unfairly wound fellow victims, as well.
    
    Manager, like Bureaucracy, are not necessarily dirty words.
    
    Dave

>  Out here in the field, we get these wonderful notices of "resource
>  needed to perform DECbarf consulting in West Underwear, MO", "resource
>  needed to provide DECslop start-up delivery services in Wachamacallit,
>  TN".

Are these approved reqs?  With all due modesty, I expect that I'm at *least* at
the expert level re DECslop, as anyone who's seen my office ought to be willing
to testify.  Maybe it's time to move into a consulting role, if that's what's
required to get the company back into the black. Give me a printer (DEClaser
1152 will do nicely) and a couple of cartons of paper and I can deliver a
DECslop startup that will make your head spin. And I'm willing to travel
anywhere to do it.

To all,

I was one of the grunts who worked the trade show floor at the Paris Air Show.
I was pulled from the DAC to work the PAS. This reply is by no means a trip 
report, that will take days to finish. However, after hearing about this note
while overseas and reading it in it's entirety, someone has to bring some
reality into all of this speculation.

Digital's purpose at the PAS was to make contact with high level management
in the aerospace industry and to help influence their decisions in the future
concerning purchases of computing resources, services, imbedded systems and 
hardware. 

The exhibition area consisted of six steel shelled and roofed buildings as well
as outside space for the large planes. The chalets were actually rows of pre-fab
temporary housing which lined two sides of the airfield. They were used to
conduct high level presentations to executives. The chalet was air conditioned,
the booth was not. Temperatures topped 90 degrees in the exhibition hall, while
we wore wool suits. 

We worked 9 1/2 hours per day, seven days per week during the show. Some of us
had to stage the hot-off-the-press demos before the show opened, and spent a
great deal more than 9 1/2 hours/day working during that period.

Most of us stayed in a two star hotel near the Aeroport Charles DeGaulle, the
room rate was 450 francs/nite (about $85). We were about an hour by rail from
Paris proper. The rail lines stopped running at 12:00 pm so that gave us about
2 hours per night to eat dinner and see the sights. There were many nights
where we were too tired to venture into Paris, and ate at a nearby hotel or at
the airport. There were no restaurants in the area.

Some have questioned the roles of everyone that attended the show. I'll speak
only for myself. What was I, an Electrical CAD/Hardware Engineering type 
doing at the show, taking the place of an aerospace engineer? To assist the
Aerospace IBU in convincing the major aerospace electronics firms to design
in Alpha AXP technology into their electronic systems. Some of those that I
spent considerable time with were the new COO of Rockwell, the CEO of McDonnell
Douglas, The Director of Engineering of Litton Guidance and Control, the Chief
Engineering Manager of Dassault Electronique, to name just a few. All wanted 
in depth technical information on our imbedded systems and the Alpha AXP
21xxx series of microprocessors. They were not concerned that I had not designed
an airplane. They wanted to talk to someone who knew the Alpha AXP chips and
had designed computer systems.

The deals were finalized at the PAS to sell Alpha AXP development systems to
three aerospace electronics firms. What does that mean to Digital? It means that
three more aerospace electronics firms will be designing Alpha AXP chips into
their next product. Another currently uses Sun SPARC microprocessors and is 
very interested in replacing them with Alpha AXP. And since they're designing 
our state of the art microprocessor into their state of the art system, why not
upgrade their workstations to the same level of technology? When these companies
make the decision to buy, they don't buy dozens, they buy hundreds or thousands
of seats. The revenue possiblities are tremendous if we play our cards right.

Did everything go perfectly? No. Could we have done things better? Yes. Was it
worth the considerable expense to have Digital be present at the Paris Air
Show? From my perspective, absolutely, positively, YES.

Chris deHahn







 

    Good show Chris and thanks for your report. I'm glad that we have
    good people working hard and that the hard work in not for naught.
    
    Jim C.
    
    

    Interesting article in Business Week, I think, that talked about how
    the PAS changed this year, fewer customers, fewer suppliers, less costly
    schmoozing, major suppliers chose not to attend at all, etc.
    

I have not had the "opportunity" to read .0, however, I was told that the 
discussion concerned both the Paris Air Show and the Design Automation 
Conference (DAC) in Dallas.  I worked at DAC.  We sent about 22 people to 
work the show in Dallas, where we had two main themes; Alpha AXP is here, 
it is hot, and there  are applications available, and Digital has Data 
Management applications available for enterprise integration running on all 
the major vendors' boxes.  The formal theme was "Imagine working faster 
than you ever imagined."

The booth was rather busy at all times, and the corporate sponsored 
comparison demo against HP and Sun went over very well.  There were several 
ISVs demoing their products, and availablity dates were discussed by the 
ISVs with a lot of participants.

One of the major benefits of the show was having potential ISVs see real 
customers show interest in the Alpha gear, and being able to meet with a 
lot of potential ISVs in a short period of time.

All the people attending the show to work the booth had 8 hour duty plus 
the normal set-up and shut-down duty each day.  We were all given 20-30 
minutes for lunch and a break when necessary, but since there were 4 people 
in the data management area staffing 3 machines, dragging in attendees,
doing the press announcements as well as customer meetings, long breaks 
were rare.

Most of the employees flew in on Saturday to get the lower fares, typically 
$350 and we were all Well Informed of the $40 per day meal maximum.  I did 
"entertain" one customer for a $50 breakfast for the 4 people there.  Most 
of us had breakfast meetings, dinner meetings and informal get togethers 
with customers to discuss business.  I personally blew off the night before 
the show and ate a peaceful dinner with no customers, though that was the 
only meal I had that way from the time I arrived.

Unlike the PAS, we had air-conditioning in the booth area, so I guess we 
were rather coddled that way.  I do know that after a business breakfast, 
walking to the car to get to the show floor for an 8:00 AM customer meeting 
the humidity and temperature were both battling for 95.  Not a pleasant 
place in June, my applogies to those Dallas readers who love it.  My blood 
is just to thick, I guess.

There were several hundred leads gathered at the show, and a method was set 
up prior to the show to ensure that all leads would be contacted within two 
weeks, along with an internal tracking system to measure the show 
worthiness.  As one potential customer was interested enought to send 8 
different managers to look at the data management products, if we close 
that one account alone we more than cover the approximately $138K of the 
show.  We had been unable to get this particular vendor very interested 
prior to the show.  Seeing many end users packed around the demo got the 
senior manager to send over the engineering VP and the directors.  Perhaps 
if I was a better sales person we would not have needed the show, but I'm 
not and therefore we did.  The sales history for this product is a sales is 
typically over a $1M and has a 30% PBT.

I did two press briefings that had been pre-arranged, many others were done 
by my manager.  I can only speak for the 2 I did, but in both cases the 
editors were very suprised to see so many people interested in ALpha boxes. 
They were also suprised to see a show that was traditionally end-user CAD 
and CAE people interested in enterprise integration.  The excitement over 
Alpha was certainly a great demonstration to editors.  The proof is in the 
pudding, so if we get bad reviews in ASIC & EDA or Datamation, then it is 
my fault.

The show attendance was not as high as we would have liked, being in Dallas 
in June had a lot to do with it.  Next year DAC is in San Diego, then 
San Franciso, then Anaheim.  The left coast shows have been better attended 
in recent years.  I bet the Paris Air Show will be in Paris next year, so 
anyone that wants to pick the concept apart can start now.  I would suggest 
that you first volunteer to work the show first.

Ed Lee of Shrewsbury was a tremendous help, he supplied real engineers to 
help demo the applications being ported.  We were actually able to have 
engineers, sales people, and marketers all working together on the floor to 
deliver the Digital message.

For you cynics out there, I was not asked to write a reply by my 
management, my boss(es) are on vacation this week, and neither of them 
follow notes.

If anyone has any questions about the show, please feel free to call me.  I 
am at dtn 521-6783 or (408)748-6783.  As you may notice from the reference 
that makes up my personal name, I welcome any of you to question the decisions 
made by either me or our management.  Go ahead and use a public forum.  
Please use some modicum of professional respect.  I invite you to reenter 
the base note, perhaps restated in a way more inclined to get honest 
feedback instead of extreme opinions.

I am sincerly yours, 

Matt Haley- a tooth on a cog in a subassembley of a module buried in a 
subsystem....

    re: .-1
    
    >>Matt Haley- a tooth on a cog in a subassembley of a module buried in
    >> a  subsystem....
    
    Hmmmm....the only Digit named Matt Haley I know is one damn good
    engineer type who calls it like he sees it. Glad to see we've got folks
    like you out beating the trenches, Matt.
    
    I share your views re: DAC. I've been in the past, and most everyone I
    saw there was working long, hard hours, making connections you cannot
    get from an office in MRO. Also get to see what the competition is
    doing, learn what's hot, etc.
    
    We need more positive visibility. We need more Matt Haleys!
    
    /Tim

    I don't have a problem AT ALL with Digital being represented at the
    PAS or the DAC, especially when (as has been indicated) Digital
    representatives appear to have been directly related to generating
    revenue.  To those who participated, kudos and I would have been
    happier if Digital could have helped you enjoy your trip even more!  
    
    I *am* concerned *if* some who Digital sent were not directly involved 
    with revenue generation or did not add significant value to revenue-
    generating activities.  In addition to being in apparent conflict with 
    direction to cancel non-revenue-generating travel, this *might* conflict 
    with the current focus on business control.  It *could* all be fine and
    good, but the appearance would be absolutely demoralizing.
    
    Steve

FYI, the Paris Air Show is held every two years in Le Bourget, France, a
suburb of Paris, thus the next show will be in 1995. Alternating with the
Paris Air Show is one held in Farnsboro, England. That will be the big show
next year and in 1996, etc.

Hi Matt, too bad I missed you in Dallas. Seems like the weather was the same
in both places. I work for Hisham Salimi who works for Ed Lee.

Steve, I agree with your sentiments. If either trade show trip had been the
junket they were perported to be in this file, you would be spot on. However,
I was involved with both shows at the worker level and it just wasn't true.
The last three shows I've worked we've made great strides in reducing costs
and maximizing revenue potential. For example, for the show previous to the 
PAS I personally saved Digital over $3,000 in equipment rental and shipping 
costs by driving our office AXP machines to the show and back in my van.
Driving to Dallas was out of the question, but we still brought our office
machines and avoided Event Services fees. At the PAS, revenue potential was
maximized by inviting high level executives to the chalet and booth months in
advance, and making sure they got our message. When they sent their engineers
and engineering managers through afterwards, some of which stopped back three 
and four times for hours at a time, we knew it was working. Now it's up to the
sales force to work on closing the deals.

Chris






 

I am the DAC'93 Program Manager.  Because the base note was written and deleted
while DAC was still going on I have not had the luxury of reading it.  From 
what I have picked up in the follow-up there seems questioned about the 
necessity of going to DAC and the Paris Air Show.  I will only address DAC.

DMD CBU Management approved a DAC budget of $100K.  AS part of the the approval
we established 4 goals for the program.  We exceeded or will exceed all 4 goals.
The goals for the program were:

	1)  Generate broad recognition of Alpha AXP as the price/performance
	    and price leader.  800 request for follow-up literature and 400 
	    additional customer surveys were completed.  Market awareness is
	    difficult to measure, but literature requests are indicative of
	    overall interest in the booth.  In addition, the DAC Technical 
	    Sessions Chairman counted 205 people in our booth at one time on 
	    Monday afternoon.

	2)  Generate 120 quality leads.  500 qualified inquiries were received
	    at DAC.  They are not considered quality leads until further 
	    qualified through telemarketing and accepted by sales or 
            distributors.  Complete reports will not be available until next 
	    week, but based on preliminary results and normal drop-off, 120 
	    quality leads will result.

	3)  Further comitment of 8 CSO to port to Alpha AXP/OSF-1.  Probably 
	    the most successful aspect of the show.  20 CSO have either agreed
	    to port or have entered into discussions as a result of DAC.  
	    Number one issue to CSO when deciding to port is the viablity of
	    and the potential customer demand.  The Alpha vs. Sun and HP 
	    demonstration was always packed 4 to 5 deep.  This was enough to 
	    convence some CSO to port Alpha AXP.  

	4)  15 press and analyst meetings and resulting articles.  15 meetings 
	    with major industry press/analysts and Digital management were held.
	    It is too early to measure the ultimate results.  The company did 
	    avoid a lot of negative press by being at the show.  Digital did 
	    not sign up for booth space early enough to make the preliminary 
	    show guide.  Many of the press had noticed our absence and were 
	    ready to write about Digital pulling out of the EDA market.  Digital
	    is 100% committed to the EDA market.

Hopefully,  this will give you a better understanding of the value of a show.

The other comments I have heard was concerning sending unnecessary staff, 
including managers and "support."  A total of 30 people were sent to Design 
Automation Conference, of which 4 were managers not scheduled for booth or floor
duty.  All staff scheduled for booth/floor duty were scheduled for full day 
shifts.  And the management had even worse scheludes, typically meeting with 
customers for breakfast, all day and at dinner.  No one at the show had an
eaier day at the show then they would have in the office.  

As far as support staff is concerned, the only person not scheduled for booth/
floor duty was one hardware technician and 1 software technician.  We had 
equipment in our booth plus 9 CSO that had to be keep up in running.  Based on 
the lack of nearby local support, I decided to contract for on-site service.  
Every show based on the number of pieces of equipment, the availability of 
local support and the hours of operation; on-site vs. local contract vs. time
and materials service is reviewed.  Hardware and software support are required
to come the weekend before for set-up and work after hours, especially at DAC 
where CSOs operate suites until 10:00PM.

No administrative support people were taken to the show, eventhough leads had
to be entered everyday.  The marketing and engineering specialists at the show
entered  the data themselves, sometimes late into the night.

What bothered me most about this thread is the damage to morale that is caused 
when hardworking people are charged with traveling on a bondogle.  High morale
is necessary to meet the challenge of reducing cost and increase market impact. 



Brian J Barry

    
    Re .-1
    
    Thanks for posting your note. I'm sure I'm not only one that
    appreciates seeing the information.
    
    Re:
    
>What bothered me most about this thread is the damage to morale that is caused 
>when hardworking people are charged with traveling on a bondogle.  High morale
>is necessary to meet the challenge of reducing cost and increase market impact. 
    
    I don't think you need to worry about damaged morale. These sort of
    strings show up due to sparcity of information. Posting of hard
    information by those responsible for particular areas or events is the
    very best way to improve morale in the company. Rumours, innuendo and
    speculation can only thrive in an environment where there isn't open,
    honest and clear communication.
    
    In this particular case you as the program manager of the show have
    posted information on what DEC did at this show and why. If this reply
    stands without rebuttal there will be thousands of readers of it that
    will have their morale improved. It will be accepted as the truth.
    If by some chance what you have written is incorrect (and before
    anybody jumps on me note I did not say I believe it not to be the
    truth, in fact I 100% accept it as the truth unless challenged)
    you have given the chance for others to post countervailing facts. If
    their are no facts to challenge what you've said your note will stand
    and everybody will have their morale improved from reading this notes
    string.
    
    Now in this case your note was reactive. But the problem in general at
    Digital is that upper management isn't communicating in a clear and
    concise way and an environment of bad morale is generated. Open honest
    communication is the very best way to improve morale and hence
    productivity. By the way I wouldn't have expected you to have posted a
    proactive note. But if others in DEC had posted proactive notes (rather
    than the normal wishy washy say nothing communications) on the
    substantive issues in DEC I doubt there would have been the environment
    where attendance at trade shows would have been questioned.
    
    Again thanks for your note. We need more of these sort of notes from
    those with authority and responsibility, not less.
    
    Dave

    re: <<< Note 2541.68 by MR4DEC::BBARRY >>>

    My take on this is that you completely misunderstand
    the 'intent' of the base note.  If that has led to loss of
    Morale, I guess that's unfortunate.

    The note asked the question 'Is everyone attending these shows
    really necessary?'.  And the base noter seemed to have some serious
    doubts.

    Can I interpret your answer to be that EVERY Digital employee
    attending the DAC this year was scheduled for full day booth duty
    or customer contacts?  Or just those sent by DMD CBU Management?
    To my knowledge, no one from Digital delivered a paper there.

    We all hope that shows like the DAC, Paris Air,  etc. help
    sell the heck out of Alpha.  But using shows like DAC and Paris Air
    to promote Alpha had nothing to do with the questions raised in the
    base note.
    bob

re .70:

>    Can I interpret your answer to be that EVERY Digital employee
>    attending the DAC this year was scheduled for full day booth duty
>    or customer contacts?  Or just those sent by DMD CBU Management?
>    To my knowledge, no one from Digital delivered a paper there.

Dammit, I'm sick of all the second-guessing and back-seat driving going on at
DEC. I don't see the point in accusing people of wasting money by going to
trade shows. Maybe it happens, but it's surely not one of our bigger problems
today.

We have too many people here who haven't been to a trade show in ages. They
don't have any idea how the world uses computers, what vendors are seling what,
or why. If we had more people "wasting our money" at trade shows, there'd be
a lot fewer clueless people walking around here.

When I joined DEC in 1979, my manager INSISTED that I should go to trade shows
and take courses. It was taken for granted that the company required its
employees to keep up with the real world outside DEC. 

What about those employees that went to DAC and did no booth duty? Would you
prefer them to stay home and stay out of touch with the industry? Is this
really the most profitable approach?? Before DEC had this no-travel attitude,
we were quite profitable!!

--RS

    re .71
    
>Dammit, I'm sick of all the second-guessing and back-seat driving going on at
>DEC. 
    
    Well, we have been suffering through losses long enough for even the
    most stalwart, company minded employee to guess that our management
    practices have not been up to "industry standards".  It does not take a
    Doctorate in Management Sciences (another oxymoron???) to figure out
    that considerable poor judgement, poor managerial practices,
    questionable decision making, and excessive GOB has been the norm, not
    the exception.
    
    As we have read from a recent respondant to this particular not, this
    may, indeed, be an exceptional case of GOOD judgement.
    
    But that does not mean we should not question the questionable.  Never.
    
    This particular stockholder will not stand quietly for suggestions of
    "gag's".  I honestly believe that the work that I do will stand the
    scrutiny of "...second-guessing and back-seat driving..."; indeed, I
    WELCOME it. It helps me do a better job...  And I am not alone.
    
    I just find it sad that much of the time, the questioning has merit and
    uncovers instances of unprofessional management practices.
    
    Please do not be ill at the questioning.  Today, that's analagous to
    shooting the messenger.  At some time (soon, I hope) we will have our
    collective act together so much that the questioning and pushing back
    will be just carping and grumbling.  Likely, when we get there you will
    see that the volume level of grumbling will have gone down; most of our
    employees are bright enough to figure out when we are back to "doing it
    right, the 1st time."
    
    As always,
    FWIW
    
    Dave

re:    <<< Note 2541.72 by BRAT::REDZIN::DCOX >>>


You will get no more answers from Brian Barry as he was TFSOed upon 
returning on Monday.  At least 2 people going to the show went knowing they 
would lose their jobs upon return.  They were necessary simply because they 
had planned the show.

What ticked off a lot of the MRO people is that the original questioner 
sits 2 cubes from one of the show captains and within 100 meters of almost 
everybody that went.  He could have gotten out of his chair and asked the 
question himself.  Steve, I think you should have done that.  If you 
disagree, I am Matt Haley at 521-6783 and you can call me to discuss it.

Questioning things is GREAT, and widely needed.  Creating inuendo is not.  
I catch from the thread that inuendo was the goal, not gathering 
information or changing the decision process.

If the original noter is questioning the attendance of Messers Picot, Lee, 
King et al, then so so.  I believe they need to attend as we spend a bit 
(>$25 Million) on things the show is for.  If $4K is spent to create a 
better relationship or find a small application that saves us reinventing 
one then I very strongly believe we should go.

Nothing is sold in a Digital office, nothing is well bought by staying 
there either.

Matt Haley
The tooth on the cog

> Questioning things is GREAT, and widely needed.  Creating inuendo is not.  
> I catch from the thread that inuendo was the goal, 

I don't believe that it is fair to claim that the base note author's
goal was to creat inuendo.  Indeed, I understood the act of deleting the
base note to be aimed at reducing the chaos that was swirling around (and
which was in some cases obscuring the original concerns).

Speaking as someone who is going to a conference in a month, I regret
that people felt so attacked by the questions that were raised.  It's
possible to go overboard in terms of questioning things, but it's also
quite possible to go overboard in terms of being defensive about being
questioned.  

Because it is so important to be open to having our actions questioned, I
feel that we should all try as hard as we can to believe that those who
ask questions are acting out of concern for the company.  In nearly all
cases I've observed, I believe this is correct, regardless of whether one
likes the personal style of the questioner.

	Peace,
	Larry

    re: .-1, .-2
    
    There's two things that smell like inuendo, one is inuendo, the other
    is the base note.
    
    I'm not saying don't ask tough questions but if you folks really think
    that there wasn't any hidden agenda by the base note ... jeez!
    
    IMHO the base note style of question went beyond 'insensitive' and
    even ecplipsed 'questionable'.
    
    cw

    re: .73
    
    I contacted the author of this note off line.  To avoid further
    confusion, I wish to point out that I am Steve Sherman.  The author of
    the base note is Ken Sherman.  I assume that the comments of .73 were
    meant for Ken and not for me.
    
    Steve

re .76

And let me publicly apologize to Steve.  I screwed up.  I am sorry.

Matt

    Time for some accountability ...  where's my wet noodle?
    Ah, here it is ... Lemme see your hand .... <whap> <whap> <whap> 
    
    Steve

I feel much better now.

Matt

    Dear Noters,

    I received an interesting anonymous letter today. I had previously
    posted a note in this string (#2541.50). The person who sent me a note
    printed off that note and had the following sentence from it
    underlined:

	People need to speak up and to report abuses in an appropriate manner.

    Below that was written the following text:

    	Ah, yes, do you suppose this could apply to YOU too?


    My comments... interesting. Pathetic. Spineless. But, I must admit you
    gave me a good laugh. If somebody is such a dishrag that they don't have 
    the guts to post a response openly, they are a prime example of what my 
    note (#2541.50) talks about. (Passive-aggressive people who don't have 
    the skill and self-esteem to speak their mind openly.)

    To the anonymous sender of the note - Why don't you simply stand up for
    what you believe and post your response in this string? I mean, if what
    you say has any validity, you should be able to back it up, no?
    If you think that I have somehow abused something here at Digital, go
    ahead - make my day - report it! You are invited to do so!

    Dan Laukaitis

    
    .80
    
    Hey, sounds like the Politically Correct Undercover Police are at it
    again.
    
    What a yuck! 
    
    Keep on smiling,
    Al
                 

    .80

    Dan, dont worry about it, i also once revived via digital internal
    mail from an anonymous DECeeee who send me a copy of the American
    Heritage Dictionary with short and unsigned note saying that hope this 
    helps or something like that, i wanted to reply saying thank you and
    all but i did not know who send it.

    so i know how you feel about receiving an anonymous letter and not
    knowing who send it too. 

    i think every DECeee who send an anonymous something to another DECeee
    should at least sign their name or put their node::name on it, else
    they SHOULD NOT DO IT !!

    \nasser

    

	Could be worse - at least it wasn't an anonymous bottle of
	mouthwash!

	Roy

    I don't think one can claim to have truely "made it" unless they begin
    to receive anonymous mail.  Receiving such mail should reenforce one's
    resolve as they most likely are on the right track and have hit a
    nerve.
    
    ????
    
    

    I haven't had anonymous mail, as such, but I have had reports filter
    down through my management chain and from Personnel about complaints
    from "a manager" who has objected to my "negative comments" or
    "unwarranted criticism" in public fora such as notes conferences.
    
    Have I made it? I suppose so.
    
    Laurie.

Re 2541.85   

Laurie,  

>    Have I made it? I suppose so.

Of course you have made it!  You helped us install RAM, didn't you?  By the
way, RAM V1.5 is now installed over here.  And that is no more of a rathole
than the rest of this topic!

Shalom
Baruch

    Sorry to interrupt this rathole to continue on my earlier rathole (.57),
    but "them's the breaks"...  8^)
    
    I just got an information packet sent to me from within Digital.  The
    letter enclosed in the packet begins with the following phrase:
    
    
    	Dear FABS field resource,
    
    
    I can't stand it...
    
    All the PR "stuff" that upper management puts out about increasing
    morale just gets blown away by trash like this!  How can anyone be
    motivated to work harder for Digital while being constantly reminded
    that they are regarded as an inhuman piece of material to be used by
    the corporate machine?
    
    If BP (the "CEO resource"?) wants to increase morale around here, he can
    make it a dismissable offense for any manager to refer to people as
    "resources".  That would bring us back to the level of humanity, at
    least.
    
    -- (nameless field resource)

    re: .87
    
    Whoa!  Waitaminit!  Is there really any PR stuff being put out about 
    doing something to increase morale?  I think that'd be a GOOD sign.  
    Sorry I missed it!
    
    Steve

    RE: .88
    
    Russ Gullotti has put "morale" as one of his 4 main thrusts for the
    year, according to various announcements.
    
    However, when I look at the LiveWire summary of a recent DVN on the 
    subject, I see the quote:
    
     Russ said he believes morale is better -- "I'm so pumped up, I'm having
     trouble coming down!"
    
    So, in short, it doesn't look like you missed much...
    
    -- (nameless field resource with reportedly improved morale)

>>    Russ Gullotti has put "morale" as one of his 4 main thrusts for the
>>    year, according to various announcements.
    
>>    However, when I look at the LiveWire summary of a recent DVN on the 
>>    subject, I see the quote:
    
>>     Russ said he believes morale is better -- "I'm so pumped up, I'm having
>>     trouble coming down!"
  

Of course, you might remember that, in one of his first DVNs as head of US,
Russ said HIS morale was high, citing the fact that he spent the prior week 
playing golf in California.

    RE:. last few.
    
    Do we have a VP for morale?
    
    Laurie$made_it!

    re: .91
    
    If we do, the position is probably in the organization cited in 2518.14
    
    -- (nameless field resource with ever-rising morale)

>>>    Do we have a VP for morale?

Yes, but he was TFSOed at least a year ago!


							-Paul

    Well, I am impressed.

    The individual responsible for writing the letter I cited earlier has
    contacted me and agrees that the "Dear resource" line could be improved
    upon.

    As I expressed to that individual, I am thankful that someone is
    actually willing to consider using language that brings field folks
    back up to the level of the rest of the human race.

    In the 2-3 years I've been receiving these "resource" messages from
    various sources, this is the first time anyone authoring one of these
    messages has ever agreed that a little better word choice could make
    for a much more positive memo.

    Again, I thank this individual for caring enough to make things a
    little better, especially during this time of such poor morale.
    
    -- Russ (no longer a nameless field resource)

    Russ, you just called the people who send you messages "sources".
    
    Perhaps the shoe also fits....
    
    :>) Rich

    re: .95
    
    I appreciate the smile, but:
    
    >    Russ, you just called the people who send you messages "sources".
    
    Incorrect.  The "sources" of these messages are usually e-mail
    accounts with some group name.  Most often, there is no indicator as
    to the identity of any person within that group.  Hence, the group has
    elected to present "itself" (note the word) as a single "thing", not as a
    group of individual human beings.  In American English, at least, it is
    considered proper to deal with a collective entity as a "thing" without
    delivering a negative message to those individuals in the group.
    
    There is miles of difference between:
    
    	The US Field organization is a valuable resource of our company.
    
    and:
    
    	The Rich Olsen resource will now report on current progress.
    
    -- Russ