Conference 7.286::digital

Just to add a little excitement...

I think your note might be more accurate if you swapped digital and IBM! 
I've seen a lot of situations where we have put customer satisfaction 
above profits and where comments about IBM were negative.

Realistically, I think both situations are accurate depending on the 
timing and circumstances.

-mark

    You are exactly correct, Mark.  It DOES depend upon one's perspective.
    Note .0 was from someone in the field who deals with customers while
    you are several levels away.  I believe that there are several good
    points in .0 especially if you care about REAL customer satisfaction
    as opposed to the number on some obscure survey.
    
    I've been in Software Services for nine years having just escaped
    from the field (BIG SMILE goes here).  When I joined Digital there
    was really SERVICE in Software Services.  No longer.  When I joined
    SWS there was a plaque in each manager's office:
    
    	   	   SOFTWARE SERVICES GOAL
    	 Satisfy Digital's Customers' Software Services Needs
    
    			OBJECTIVES
    
    	A. Deliver Software Services which help Sell Standard Products
    	   According to the Following Priority:
    			1. Warranty
    			2. Sales Support
    			3. Consulting
    	B. Deliver Software Services which help Implement Product Lines'
    	   Marketing Plans & Corporate Policies

    At the start of B$ST (Billion Dollar Sure Thing - aka W$RST, Where
    Dollars Reign Supreme Throughout) orders went out to destroy the
    plaque.  I saved mine - just call me a pack rat rebel.  The CLEAR
    message at the start of B$ST (and since it's failure) is that
    Consulting dollars are the ONLY THING.
    
    At the moment, the ONLY customer satisfaction basis in the field
    is the result of the annual customer survey which is TOTALLY numeric
    and HIGHLY weird in nature.  No sane person really believes that
    these survey's measure anything useful (I can hardly wait to see
    the flames on this).
    
    In fact, I've heard that in one area near here that unit managers,
    who are on the front line, have as a goal to visit ONE (1) customer
    a week.  This is a CLEAR symptom of lack of REAL concern for customers!!
    ONE customer a week?!?!  ONE!!  These people are expected to be
    too busy pushing revenue numbers around to make budget the rest
    of their time rather than getting bogged down in petty issues like
    customers, apparently.
    
    The major problem described in .0 is that there is really no way
    in the field to give customers the FEELING of support that IBM does
    so well.  Our philosophy, quite rightly, has been that customers
    should pay for only what they need and that we shouldn't bundle
    in extras.  This has been one reason that we've been able to offer
    cost effective tools to our customers.
    
    I would HOPE that the new separation of Sales Support and Delivery
    in SWS would help the Account Managers use Sales Support resources
    to help provide the FEELING of support.  Certainly, given the goals
    of SWS in the past few years it has been VERY difficult to do what
    is RIGHT unless the customer or Sales assured the USWM that he/she/it
    would make margin.
    
    Sorry to have been so long,
    
    Don

    re .2
    
    Well said, Don.  Couldn't have said it better myself (and if I'd
    tried, would probably have been much less tactfull about it).  The
    "Dollars Reign Supreme Throughout" syndrome has bitten far too many
    of the field sws folks.  Refer to the "hypothetical question" in
    this conference: if presented with an opportunity for revenue, is
    it better to: (1) try to deliver it with specialists who are not
    qualified because the folks who are qualified are not available,
    (2) try to push the timeframe for delivery out until the available
    sws folks can be trained = "qualified", at least to an acceptable
    extent, or (3) failing option 2, turn the business down instead
    of trying to sell the customer the proverbial "pig in a poke"?
    
    My experience with sws is that option #1 is chosen before even
    examining option #2, and heaven forbid that option #3 be chosen.
    
    Jon

    RE: .3
    
    Same thing happened to a friend of mine. Her famiely runs a
    toy/sporting goods wholesle outfit in western Mass. They REALLY
    wanted to buy a DEC machine, preferable a MICRO-11 (since they liked
    a software package that they saw for it, A to Z, I think) to get
    started, and then buy a larger system later on. They knew just what
    they wanted but wanted direction on would we have what they needed
    a few years when they outgrew the micro. They put off buying a
    computer for 18 months waiting for a sales person to "get back to
    them" and finally got so fed up they went out and bought a DG. In
    talking to her, I got the idea that the sales people didn't want
    to give them the right time of day; every time they called, sales
    was too buzy to send someone out and just sent them promo material
    or suggested that they visit a computer store. They got the feeling
    that DEC just didn't want their business, so they decided to go
    with DG (I might add that both DG and IBM sent made several sales
    visits to these people). Anyhow, in probably another year they will
    be ready to upgrade to a bigger computer and it really irks me that
    DG will be getting the business that we should have had.
    
    Deb

    RE: .3 & .5
    
    	Call the sales office involved!! This should not happen <obvious
    hmmmm?>. I had a friend I had done work for in a past life <before
    d i g i t a l employ...> and he wanted to get DEC equipment and
    got the same $%#& from sales. He told me! I called the office an
    got it straightened (sp?) out quick.
    
    Do it!! We're worth it!!!
    
    dd;

    Customer Satisfaction comes up quite often in HUMAN::MARKETING.
    Generally, when the topic concerns Digital and competitors or Digital
    and customers, I'll start the note there.  You may have different
    criteria for choosing between the different conferences.
    
    Second housekeeping note.  The Annual Customer Satisfaction Survey
    asks questions like "How do rate the attitude and manner of your
    Software Specialist" on a 1 to 10 scale.  Any sociology textbook
    will tell you that a 1 to 10 scale has too many points.  Someone's
    7 is someone else's 6.  Or from year to year, you might rate the
    _same_ performance with different numbers.  Some customers are coached
    to score "10" as "meeting expectations".  Some uncoached customers
    score "5" as "meeting expectations".  I find that over two years
    where the district manager and the unit managers are roughly the
    same the "explanatory variable" is the growth in _number_of_customers_.
    In a bad year for new business, sales and sales support are re-exposed
    to the installed base and are able to "satisfy".  In a good year
    for new business, staffing lags the numerical growth in customers,
    and both old and new customers don't see their sales and sales support
    from DEC as often.  "Why is he stating the obvious", you may ask.
    Well, this was fed up to through the normal channels and got nowhere.
    The best surveys consistently come from the units and districts
    with the highest concentration of business in a few customers.
    
    My opinion on the question at hand:  While you won't see it written
    down in black and white, Digital doesn't want to do business with
    _anyone_ who can't sustain $1 million of product and services sales per
    year.  We don't want the business.  We are not an easy company to do
    business with and that's not being fixed. 
    

If you enjoyed the customer message in .8, then the 145+ other messages
just like it in BULOVA::BULOVA$DISK:[NOTES$LIBRARY.SANFRAN]LICENSE_POLICY
(q.v.) will make your day.  VAXnotes was up on a public system at Fall
DECUS, and someone created this conference for customers to comment.
Someone from Digital took all the conferences back and put them in that
directory on BULOVA (write-locked).

While general concerns about customer satisfaction had *better* be related
to "the way we work at Digital", it might be best if people's thoughts
about the license policy change were added to the existing discussion
in topic 371 of HUMAN::MARKETING.
				/AHM/THX
P. S.  Actually, the messages aren't just like .8; most are worse.

    Software licensing issues aside, one of the reasons dealers
    (aka OEMs, VARS) exist is to sell DEC equipment, sometimes
    with applications software, to customers too small for DEC.
    
    For a long time, DEC has been selling more and more to 
    "corporate" customers who buy in large volume, generally
    without (application) software.  Re-sellers such as dealers/
    OEMs/VARs are customers that DEC can work with, because they
    buy in volume.
    
    War stories, about the rug merchant down the street who wanted
    to buy a microVAX but got brushed off by DEC sales, abound.
    I'm as disappointed as the next person that this happens, but
    one thing to DO about it is to point that rug merchant towards
    a reputable 3rd party who is better able to sell them DEC gear.

    once upon a time I was told by a DIGITAL VP that the "cost of sales"
    was approximately $14,000 each!  No wonder they don't feel like
    servicing small accounts!
    
    	Rick
    	Merrill
    

    RE .6
    
    Call SALES???? I can't even get a reply from them!! Working in Field
    Service the only time I hear from them is if a customer (BIG) has
    a problem. Since i've been with DEC 9 yrs. I've ony met 3 SALESPEOPLE
    I have ANY respect for. I don't mean it be nasty just truthful..
    
    And as far as MARKETING goes... I didn't know we had one... :-)
    
    
    Joe_C

Re: .11

If this figure is true for *any* sale, then something must be seriously
wrong.  Can someone explain why selling a small item should cost so much.

I can understand that a $1M system may cost this much to sell, but no way
should a $20k MicroVAX or something of that sort cost so much.

jb

	That number was probably something like


			$$$$ expended on Sales
		  -----------------------------------
			   # of [something] sold

which is the way a beancounter would look at it.

	If they did it scientifically, each Salesperson would track the hours 
spent on EACH Sales situation, and IF successful, then the cost of sales would 
be a little more precise. Of course, the Salesperson is going to spend more 
time on the $$$$$ than the $$$!