Conference 7.286::digital

From:	MSBCS::TURBIDE "05-Sep-1988 1313"  5-SEP-1988 14:19
To:	@[TURBIDE.DIS]FORUMREM.DIS
Subj:	***MANAGEMENT SEMINAR SERIES***             "PRESENTS"                             LTN1 CAFE/3:00 - 4:30           "A STUDY OF CORPORATE CULTURES"                                                            "WITH"                                                                      REESA E. ABRAMS                          TUESDAY/SEPTEMBER 13

                               
                                    
		   ,---,---,---,---,---,---,---,---,---,--, 
		  /   /   /   /   /   /   /   /   /   /   |
		 +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+|  
		 | M | A | N | A | G | E | M | E | N | T  | 
		 |   | S | E | M | I | N | A | R |   |    | 
		 |   |   | S | E | R | I | E | S |   |    |    
		 +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+

		         ****P R E S E N T S ****



                    A SEMINAR FOR MANAGERS WHO WANT TO 
 		   TAKE A PROACTIVE ROLE IN THE CHANGING
			     DIGITAL CULTURE



		  DATE:: ***TUESDAY*** SEPTEMBER 13, 1988
		 PLACE:: LTN1 CAFETERIA
		  TIME:: 3:30 - 4:30 P.M.
			
        TECHNICAL HOST:: RALPH CHRISTENSEN


PREREQUISITES: A PERSONAL AGREEMENT THAT THE DIGITAL CULTURE IS
	CHANGING AND A WILLINGNESS TO CHANGE WITH IT

THIS SEMINAR IS DESIGNED FOR MANAGERS TO DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING ISSUES:

	AS A STARTING POINT ENVISION A STABLE POINT IN THE CULTURE
	OF THE FUTURE AND DESCRIBE ITS CHARACTERISTICS AND DIFFERENCES FROM 
	TODAY?

	HOW IS YOUR ROLE AS A MANAGER CHANGING?

	HOW IS THE ROLE OF YOUR SUBORDINATES CHANGING?
	
	HOW IS THE ROLE OF YOUR MANAGER CHANGING?	

	WHAT CORPORATE MECHANISMS ARE ALREADY IN PLACE THAT WILL
	FACILTATE POSITIVE EVOLUTION?

	WHAT CORPORATE MECHANISMS ARE NEEDED THAT ARE NOT IN PLACE?

	WHAT HAVE YOU ALREADY DONE TO FACILITATE A POSITIVE EVOLUTION?

	WHAT CAN YOU DO STARTING NOW THAT YOU HAVE NOT DONE BEFORE?

ABSTRACT:  Digital has always prided itself on being in the forefront
of change. Today the outside environment is having a great impact upon
our company.  We are seeing outsiders affect markets and public perceptions
which we previously controlled. We must continue to make fundamental
changes to survive.

Many of the Digital strengths of the past may not be strengths today. For
example, size has limited our abilities for everyone to network and
know each other. We are in an evolutionary era where people are being asked 
to look inside and draw upon more and more strengths to
	* Stay focused in an environment of chaos
	* Be willing to make changes with less and less data and time
		to make the decisions.
	* Recognize that strategies of 18 months ago are not necessarily good 
		today
	* Recognize that we cannot forsake our traditional markets 
	* Be good at developing new markets
	* Focus into a few areas where we do well and keep up there

The above list is just some of the contradictory messages we hear.
What is real? How do we cope? What can we do to support each other?
Some do better at this than others - what are their characteristics?
How will we make it to the 90's and beyond?

The issues I have just outlined have caused me to think it is time for
another Culture paper. This time it should be focused on the Digital
Heroes who are the changemasters - pathfinders, if you will, in uncertain
times. Each person in this company is a potential changemaster - are you?

I will be taping the seminar on audio tape and possibly using the
material for a culture paper. Any material will be used in a confidential 
manner only. You may not want to come to the seminar but you may want to
send me mail. Any form of input to this issue will be appreciated. I will
be making the completed paper to the general Digital reading 
public announced in the Stanford Technical Digest.

    all that in one hour?

        Maybe things are moving faster that we thought!!!

        Ignoring .1 for the moment, there hasn't been a day since I
        joined DEC (1984) that I haven't heard about the "New Digital".
        Digital is trying to change with the times and the culture
        changes with it.  It seems to have occurred naturally as the
        people change and "unnaturally" when some corporate directive
        (like the abolishment of Plan A for SWS and Sales) is issued.
        
        Digital *must* continue to change.  I think we all want to
        try to retain the traditional culture while this happens. 
        Unfortunately, this isn't always possible or permitted.
        
       _Mike

    I, like Mike have also noticed that DEC constantly changes.  It
    is the way DEC reacts to the market, and the world for that matter,
    in order to survive.
    
    Typically, the changes have manifest themselves in corporate, area,
    and district restructuring, new directions in product lines, and
    marketing strategies, etc.  Do you remember when the software
    installation unit was placed under Field Service?
    
    Lately however, the "New New New" (sorry Mike, couldn't help it) DEC
    has begun to resort to drastic internal cost cutting.  These new
    policies have effected everything from catering important meetings
    off site, to eliminating company car plans, to having employees
    "Hot Rack" desks in the office (a concept I personally find degrading).
    
    It's one thing to change who your boss is or who s/he reports to.
    It's another thing to *REDUCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE*.

    Doug

>    "Hot Rack" desks in the office (a concept I personally find degrading).
    
O.K....I give up...what is 'hot racking' desks?

I'm against it in any case.  Whatever it is.  Sounds TERRIBLE!!

Betty

    I think "hot racking" desks means having more than one person share a
    desk. Hot racking beds means having more than one person use the bed in
    shifts.
    
    Sharing offices during a space crunch has nothing to do with the
    New (**n) Digital. When I came to Digital in 1964 I shared an office,
    and it has happened a few times since. 

RE: .7
    
  > Sharing offices during a space crunch has nothing to do with the New
  > (**n) Digital. When I came to Digital in 1964 I shared an office, and
  > it has happened a few times since. 

    I agree, sharing offices during a space crunch was happening long
    before our culture started to change so drastically.  But sharing
    offices is different from sharing desks.  Moreover, desk and office
    sharing is now being done when there is no space crunch.  In fact, our
    facility started the practice this week when we moved into a brand new
    facility, where we could have rented as much space as our little hearts
    desired. No, I never heard anyone *really* express dissatisfaction when
    the facility just got so crowded that there just wasn't any extra room
    anymore.  The current practice is purely a cost-cutting measure, done
    at the expense of the employees' quality of life and productivity. It's
    not the same thing at all. 
    
    							Pat

    Re .8:
    
    Thank you for the clarification. I didn't understand the circumstances
    under which the sharing was being done. 

    Excuse me for not making the term "hot-racking" more clear.  This
    is a term used in the service (also known as "hot-bunking").
    
    During WWII, some surface combatants required many more people than
    they had beds (known as racks aboard ship) for.  Since each mans
    watch was anywhere from 8 to 12 hours, they were scheduled so that
    as one person was going on watch, another person who was just getting
    off would use that persons rack.  Thus the term "hot-rack".
    
    I too share an office, and actually enjoy it because of the great
    conversations I sometimes get involved in.  But to have to share
    your desk with someone else is a rather silly idea.  In many respects
    it implies a sense of revoked privacy among other things.
    
    Doug

I also joined the company in 1984, and I have a different view of how
things have been changing - at least compared to Mike's (.whatever).

First of all, please go back and re-read .1. While reading .1, ask yourself
if any of the topics/questions are NEW. I believe the old-timers will say 
the considerations aren't really any different from 5/10/20 years ago.
So I question the novelty of whatever was trying to be taught.

Anyway, the real point of this reply is to focus on the _culture_.

In the past, cultural changes and definitions were caused, by and large,
when technical challenges were overcome. In fact, many stories about
Ken have some degree of technical or product involvement. The Dave Cutler
and Gordon Bell etc etc stories are of the same nature.

The NEW DIGITAL has much much less room for cultural impact through
technological progress or brilliance. Take a look around - you see
cost-cutters, managers from [your_favorite_competitor_name_here],
_very senior_ field people hired off the street, and an enormous emphasis
on finding ways of getting I*M-sized.

Now that may or may not be bad, but it sure as h*ll is DIFFERENT!
About the time I joined Digital, Ken announced we were going to compete
with big blue and become a serious competitor in their accounts. I laughed.
Digital's history held no particular justification for the belief that
we could go from our traditional markets and propeller-heads to blue
suits and political savvy.

Well we pulled it off! But to do it, a NEW DIGITAL had to be created.
And the NEW DIGITAL is still evolving, but take a good hard look at
the cultural focus. Who are the heroes? What are they good at? 

You can answer those to your own satisfaction. What I see is:
     - marketeers on the fast track.
     - "golden boys" (and "girls") are mostly in finance, admin, and other
       non-technological areas.
     - an increasingly top-heavy management structure.
     - official acknowledgement of double standards (room sharing, anyone?)
     - fewer culturally recognizable technical contributors

And, frankly, I'm not happy about it. Oh, I can live with it. I can
even try to change it. But it's not easy, and unless I write a new 
VMS or ALL-IN-1, the only way I'll get recognition is by thinking
numbers/cost/etc. Even if I create the new whiz-bang that nets us a
cool billion, I'm not sure that'll have much cultural impact. (How many 
people outside of Charlotte even know WHO wrote ALL-IN-1? Get the idea?)

It's always been important to make a profit. But in the past, the corporate
philosophy was real...[quoting now]
"Success is measured by profit. With success comes the opportunity to
grow...and the satisfaction that comes with meeting business goals.
...
Growth is not our primary goal. Our goal is to be a quality organization
and to do a quality job, which means that we will be proud of our product
and our work..."

Sorry folks, but today that just isn't real. Growth IS our goal today.
Too many people are proud of our "market share" and not the quality
of the products we produce. (And why shouldn't they be proud of market
share? That's what they're measured on!) "It must be good - we have
X% of the market!"

I have a final thought for you. 

"When dealing with a customer, a supplier or an employee, 
do what is "right" to do in each situation."

Thanks for plodding through this. The contributors/readers of this
conference are, like myself, very interested and concerned about the
culture. I guess as long as we all remember the first rule, everything
will work itself out, eh? <insert half-hearted grin here>

K.

        Thanks Karl for your note.  You are right about the culture.
        Perhaps it would have been more appropriate to name this
        note "The New Digital Culture".
        
        Since we've both been here the same amount of time, how do
        you feel about the fact that you've been at Digital longer
        than half of the current employees?  I think that's amazing.
        
        You are also right about recognition.  For example, as recently
        pointed out to me, the ALL-IN-1 Lifetime Achievement Awards
        given out at the B/OIS symposium went to people who have
        helped archieve the _marketing_ success of ALL-IN-1.  None
        of the creators have been honored in any way as far as I
        know.  Another example is the fact that our software "inventors"
        are anonymous to both our customers and the rest of our "peers"
        in the computer industry.   Just ask any Macintosh programmer
        who Bill Atkinson is.  *THAT'S* recognition!!

    Who did write ALL-IN-1

	I think John Churin and Skip Walter did the ORIGINAL work, which was 
intended as a prototype demo to R. J. Reynolds.  From that, some courageous 
decision making on the part of Gerry Bryant, and some others whom I can't
think of, led to the full development of the CP/OSS - Charlotte Package/Office
System Services software as an "investment".  After that, I don't know the
story. 

    You're on the money, Jack.  I was in the Charlotte unit when it
    started.  The pre-sales effort was actually for R.J. Reynolds and
    Milliken.  Both customers had come to Digital wanting essentially the
    same thing.  Skip Walter had the vision to realize that maybe 80% of
    what these customers were asking for could be done by integrating
    products we *already* had for sale.  Skip and John Churin shared an
    office at the time, and John, an LCG specialist, became fascinated with
    what Skip was doing.  John's involvement started as after-hours
    un-authorized stuff, just helping Skip. The further they got the more
    they realized they were really on to something.  Sometime during this
    period, John discovered BLISS and was completely taken by it.  He took
    the book home a couple of nights, and started generating what later
    became the very first ALL-IN-1 code. 
    
    Their relationship eventually evolved to one of Skip fighting the
    political battles to sell the software product internally, and John
    doing the technical stuff.  Both guys are the sort of brilliant
    thinkers that made Digital what it is today. 
    
    Interestingly enough, R.J. Reynolds didn't actually buy the product
    until much, much later (years in fact).  And to the best of my
    knowledge, Milliken hasn't bought it to this day.
    
    							Pat

    As Pat points out in .15 office sharing has lead to one of the highest
    profit products that Digital has ever produced.  Actually, I don't
    know if that was a point she was making but it does show that office
    sharing is not a new concept.
    
    Sharing rooms on trips isn't new.  I started 11 years ago and the first
    district meeting I attended required me to share a room. Of course, it
    was at Disney World so that made it less Mickey Mouse (or was it
    more?). 
    
    As Karl (one of the ALL-IN-1 Lifers to get an award, of course) pointed
    out Digital has always been changing.  It always SEEMS horrible and
    that we're losing what makes Digital special.  The current 'New
    Digital' is still a far better enterprise than 99% of the enterprises
    on this particular planet.  It still allows those on the bottom
    to control a lot of the direction of the company.
    
    It is vital that we have discussions such as this one.  The very
    fact that we can seems to indicate that Digital is special and more
    open to culture than other places.  The philosophies that Karl quotes
    are still a valid statement of the 'True Digital'.  As long as we
    believe in them and PRACTICE them we'll all be better off.
    
    Clearly, the most important thing to Digital must be to help customers
    be more effective with computers.  I agree that many people in the
    'Rear' seem to have lost this concept.  I don't believe that Digital
    as a whole has.  Read the editorial in Digital News of last week
    or so about the license transfer policy that was recalled for proof.
    Digital proposed a completely stupid policy and told the customers
    at DECUS.  The customers told Digital how stupid it was (I believe
    it was discussed here and other conferences long ago) and the policy
    recalled.  Unfortunately, the people weren't but that's another
    story.
    
    ALL-IN-1 is the enormous success it is because a lot of people,
    starting with John and Skip, believed in customers and saw a way
    to provide solutions via Digital products.  I know a lot of people
    who still do that every day.  I would hope that we can spread the
    faith to those that don't understand it.
    
    And don't forget to have fun while doing it, 
    (spreading the faith, too)
    
    Don (who is also an ALL-IN-1 lifer according to marketing)

Just an additional note:

I don't object to room or office sharing on principle. I _do_ object
to the double standard currently espoused by some organizations:
"You people _must_ share rooms, but you other people don't have to."

K.

    First, two apologies:  1) I don't really know how to cut stuff from
    past replies and paste it to my own, or other such esoteric notes
    skills and 2) I've only been here a year, and I've been struggling
    up the learning curve of just what this great company is all about,
    New or Old!
    
    Please be patient as I relate some of my background.  I worked in
    a sales office for both Sperry and Wang for a total of six years,
    besides some nasty experience in the PC business.  I've made a lot
    of friends and acquaintances who moved around various companies
    and got together to share notes.  Maybe you could relate some of
    the New/Old Digital question to my ten-years-in-the-business-based
    observations.
    
    I've read with interest what people try to describe as the best
    of the old DEC.  Its wonderful stuff.  Funny, but much of what I've
    read is alot like my experiences at Sperry, people working all day
    and night knocking their brains out, having a great time, fun, and
    a sense of personal accomplishment and shared frustration and
    achievement.  At least from five years later thats how I choose
    to remember the best of those days.
    
    Having lived in eastern Taxachusettes most of my life, I had great
    expectations when I came to this company.  I won't burden you with
    them, except to relate that maybe I would have liked the Old DEC
    better.  A couple of replies back, someone mentioned some things
    which REALLY struck a responsive cord.
    
    When  I first started working for Wang, there was a well-known rumor
    that John Cunningham, then president, said that his personal goal
    was to have Wang pass IBM in sales by 2003, or something like that.
    This was just before they put out their disastrous "Gunning for
    IBM (Blue Thunder)" ad campaign.  Wang was going to out-IBM IBM
    by trying to be like IBM and hiring IBMers was one step in that
    direction.  The whole program took place in the midst of deepening
    crisis in product strategy which led to some disastrous financial
    problems; the real problems were glossed-over in the effort to "beat
    IBM".  What happened to Wang after this is kind of sad.
    
    When I first got to DEC, I saw the K.O.-walking-through-the-mill video.
    Boy, was I impressed!!  All the talk about quality and "doing
    the right thing" really struck a responsive chord with me.  What
    a great way to build a company:  put quality first and everything
    else will follow.  But now I've heard that some senior managers
    have said that they want to be bigger than IBM by "2007, April or
    May."  Anybody else out there from Wang has got to feel a shudder
    at those words!  The emphasis is shifted away from a "quality
    products and services first" to a "revenues first" way of doing business.
    And  I even read an industry rag article which quotes Ken as saying
    that he wants DEC to "be more like IBM."  Something's wrong here.
    Nobody will ever beat IBM by being like them; every company that
    has tried has failed.
    
    One area where I've seen problems with this whole strategy is in hiring
    IBMers and adopting their management style.  In comparing notes
    with my friends who, like me, have had opportunity to work for ex-IBMers
    at various companies, I think a few traits become a "stamp" of IBM
    mentality.  Try fitting this into your New DEC/Old DEC thinking.
    
    1) IBMers have a fetish for management layers, and putting distance
    between them.  Every non-IBM manager I've worked for has had an
    open-door policy.  If all else failed, and the situation called for
    it, I could go to my boss's boss directly and look for guidance,
    advice, and help (I'm not addressing here boss related problems,
    just normal "hit a roadblock and need some advice" type situations).
    This is not the case with ex-IBMers I've come across.  Make an
    appointment three weeks in advance and have a carefully worded script
    or you're dead; candor is not desired, nor accepted.
    
    2) Management by carrot-and-stick (emphasis on stick) also seems
    symptomatic of IBM-style management.  Forget concensus-building.
    Or real leadership.  The chief role of the manager seems to be get
    the corporate message across, and you'd better get with the program
    or get out.  This leads to three other symptoms.
    
    3) Garbage rolls downhill.  100% of crap recieved at the manager
    above you is doled right on your plate.  Don't expect any buffering
    of the type which may enable you to do your job more effectively.
    
    4) Messages become mixed, sometimes schizophrenic.  One day you're
    a hero, a roll model for your peers, recieving loud adulation from
    the boss.  The next day (literally) you're a bum.  "Why don't you
    get a new  job?"  "You're performance is completely unacceptable."
    "There's no excuse for the lousy work you're doing."  Etc.  If later
    on you turn out a ringing success, they'll clap you on the back
    with a broad grin and say "I always knew could do great stuff like
    this."
    
    5) Closely related to this is the general  IBMer practice of mushroom
    management.  You know, keep 'em in the dark, etc.?  If any career
    -shaping decisions are about to be made for you, don't worry, you'll
    be the last to know.  Your input not needed (see #1 above).
    
    Please understand that this is a composite sketch of the attributes
    of many ex-IBM bosses as percieved by many individuals that worked
    for them.  Some of these attributes can exist in any company.  And
    of course they don't apply to my situation.  But when we get together
    and this subject comes up, it is absolutely uncanny how many times
    these things, and a few others, seem to hold true.  
    
    How much of this sounds like the New DEC?  I'd really like to hear
    it from you seasoned DEC veterans.  I don't claim to know enough
    about DEC, Old or New, to know if there's any relationship between
    these things and your complaints/observations.
    
    BTW, I've noticed that people who remember the Old DEC fondly, and
    recount many years of comparing badge numbers, seem to view anyone
    that worked for another computer company through narrowed, suspicious
    eyes, muttering things about "dam furriners." Speaking for myself,
    I'm too new and ignorant to be responsible for any New/Old DEC
    clash.  I'd truly like to make a contribution to the success of
    DEC every day, and if we can have fun doing it then I'm not sure
    I've missed anything with the passing of the Old DEC (if indeed
    it really has passed). 

    Re: .18 by WAV12::HICKS
    
    A lot of the things you said hit home with me. I have five years with
    DEC, all of it in sales. Some of my impressions are similar to much of
    what you said: 
                   
      o The emphasis on bigger and bigger sales budgets to try to 'force'
        incredible sales growth, in order to exceed IBM by the year
        2xxx. Apparent disregard for the sales reps' ability to be 
        successful against those (imposed) goals.
        
      o The obsession with outdoing IBM by becoming more like IBM.
        Several of my customers have expressed profound dismay when they
        see us doing things that caused them not to choose IBM in the past,
        in favor of DEC. 
        
      o A clear impression that management is not interested in honest
        'input' or any questioning of the decisions being made.
        
      o Garbage rolling down hill, and not being buffered. I have always
        believed that it is the sales manager's job to insulate his
        people from the 'crap' so they could get their jobs done.
        
      o An increase in paperwork and 'tracking' and 'documenting' things 
        to death (related to above item).
        
      o A decrease in the quality of life as evidenced by facilities,
        expense, and fleet policies.
        
      o Our products are often not priced to be industry price/performance 
        leaders. Our justification for pricing is generally - 'Look what
        IBM charges'. Innovative products and aggressive pricing seem
        to regularly be quashed so as not to disturb the profit margins
        of older products or pricing that is still regarded as competitive
        with IBM. The result is that smaller companies like DEC used
        to be are now targeting and often winning against DEC.
        
    I don't consider myself to be an old-timer at DEC, so I can't compare
    to the 'old' DEC (whatever that is), but these are directions I
    see us taking that disappoint me.
                                                    

    re .18
    
    Point for point, life in the field!
    
    Jim
    

   
    
     "There are far more qualified people than there are meaningful jobs."
    
    
            [Sherman's Second Law of Inverse Vocational Dynamics]
    
    
    

    i've been around DEC for nearly 10 years, and competed with ibm
    even longer than that.  i genuinely admire them for what they do
    so well (marketing), but i don't ever want to see us become 'like'
    them.  i think that i'd rather go work for someone else who had
    the kinds of values (quality, humanism) that i've usually associated 
    with DEC.  i think those values are still here -- or i wouldn't
    be.  perhaps our rapid growth has simply made the natural proportion
    of bozos among us that much more noticeable.
    
    you know who they are -- they just got louder lately.
    
    tim
    

    When I first considered the concept of the *NEW* DEC from .0, I
    viewed it from the "internal" side.  The last few replies have been
    discussing it from the "external" side.
    
    I would like to take the opportunity to denounce another *IBM* like
    trait that we are starting to show...
    
    When I started in 1984 (yes Karl, me too), we (software services)
    were told that the little customer was just as important as the
    big customer.  We made sure to live up to that commitment, sometimes
    robbing Peter to pay Paul, but we tried to do the "right" thing.
    
    Lately, it seems like the software delivery units have been moving
    ever more toward big long-term projects, and less toward the 1 to
    5 day consulting that some smaller companies really need.
    
    It gets real frustrating when you have to tell a smaller budget
    customer that it's going to be a while before you can do anything
    for him because you're off working on a project that's going to
    last a year.  It's even worse when you gained that customers respect
    back in the "old" DEC era!
    
    Doug_the_frustrated_specialist_with_"old"_DEC_customer_friends

RE: .-1

	The P3 program that Sales initiated to lower expense charges is one 
way to handle that 1-5 day requirement.  This presumes that the whole manpower 
reduction doesn't go straight to projects or residences, of course!   It also 
presumes that the Sales Support force, most of which is less than 3 years with 
the company, can actually go out and USE our products in the customer 
environment.  That AIN't like an A.C.T., folks!

	Our management is struggling with both those issues.  The best way to 
get the Sales Support force up to speed technically is to put them on 
DEC-managed projects under an experienced project leader.  That way, the 
mistakes can be invisible to the customer.  That also precludes, or restricts, 
their use on short term PSS.  It also solves the manpower reduction problem in 
relatively short order for the DSWMs.  But the 80 to 160 hour opportunities 
still come in, regularly, and many are willing to pay $115/hour to get us!

	Guess that's why they pay management such big bucks.    :>)

    This seemed to be the right place for this amusing piece that I
    received via mail today. 
    
    Joe
    
    News item

NEW YORK  --  During a creative session at a major public relations firm today 
to formulate a new corporate message for Digital Equipment Corporation that 
reflects the company's new direction promoting and supporting computing industry
standards, the shopworn phrase "Digital has it now." was replaced by a new 
tag line that is more contemporary and tied to DEC's adherence to standards.  
"Digital's hip to the standards thing." will become the $11.5 billion company's 
new-image slogan.  In a radical departure from it's traditionally staid 
advertising approach the company will produce a television advertisement built 
around a rap music theme played out in a rapidly changing sequence of office and
engineering scenes.  In a parody of the commonly used product nomenclature, the 
video itself is referred to as a mythical Digital product called DECrap.  The 
lyrics to the rap music video are published here for the first time.


		 A DECrap by

		Rapmaster Ken 

    "Digital's Hip to the Standards Thing"


  I heard some news just the other day
  It sounded kinda strange and I said, "No way!"
  But I heard it again from another source
  It mighta made sense and I said, "Of course!"

  Now computer biz has a lotta confusion
  'Cause operating systems abound in profusion.
  But there's a whole new wave in data processing
  Now that Digital's hip to the standards thing.

  (chorus)
  Digital's hip to the standards thing!
  Digital's hip to the standards thing!

  Way back when a long time ago
  IBM owned the whole show.
  But other dudes saw this proprietary mess
  And formed committees to find out what's best.

  Some went their own way and built their own software 
  But users were perturbed, "It's just a different nightmare."
  So they got together to look over the picks
  Put their down their money on good 'ol UNIX

  (chorus)
  Digital's hip to the standards thing!
  Digital's hip to the standards thing!

  Now Digital always kept their users in mind
  And pushed VMS as the best of the kind.
  A lotta folks agreed but kept askin' for
  UNIX support, "We gotta have more!"

  Soon DEC saw the light and decided to give
  UNIX to the masses, (sorta live and let live).
  So DEC's ridin' the wave ahead of the rest
  On a backplane bogie board on top of the crest.

  No doubt about it DEC's sprouted its wings
  'Cause Digital's hip to the standards thing.

  (chorus)
  Digital's hip to the standards thing!
  Digital's hip to the standards thing!


    

    re .18
    As an ex-IBMer
    
    I believe IBM managers are taught that they are the real IBM.  This
    can only make them a little tense and a little serious.  They do
    vary greatly, and the best of them, in my opinion, were outstanding.
    
    I think one key difference in Digital is that this IBM notion is
    reversed.  It makes an amazing difference.  These notes files are
    evidence of the difference.  I certainly feel different inside Digital.
    
    I do agree that perhaps we give IBM more respect than it deserves,
    and we ought to be sticking to our knitting instead of trying to
    emulate them, if that's what we're doing.  If we knew nothing at
    all about IBM, how would we compete?  By understanding the customer's
    needs as well as we can, and building the best response we can in
    terms of service, strategy, products, and sales (helping the customer
    understand what we have to offer).  Obviously, knowledge of the
    competition is helpful.  But reacting to the competition is not
    a long term strategy, as we ALL agree so what am I arguing about???
     :-)
    
    

    What's 'P3' and this talk about reductions and Sales Support doing
    PSS?
    
    Excuse the ignorance, but I'm a PSS resident just returning from
    the field for a breather before I go back to the wars :-)
    
    Bob