Conference 7.286::digital

    I'm at a small DEC contractor SWS site with about 10 specialists.  In
    the past few months two people have left DEC.  The grapevine says
    another may  be leaveing very soon.  Seems like there are a lot of very
    good job offers being by outside firms to highly skilled DEC people.

re: 973.0

That's a problem that has troubled the computer industry since its inception.
When customers need more staff, they love to hire the already trained experts
from their suppliers. I expect that each computer company goes thru peaks and 
troughs with this sort of thing. I would expect a peak now that DEC has stated 
it wishes to reduce its work force by attrition rather than layoffs. That's a 
good policy. In the process we will loose some good people, but nothingsd 
perfect.

    All I can say, is in this area, people are leaving, sometimes staying
    within DEC, and sometimes leaving the company.  I'd say it's about
    50/50.  But there are plenty of opportunities in this area
    
    I can't agree that it's a good policy to have people leave through
    attrition, rather them a lay-off (or firing).  DEC needs revenue, why
    is it good to keep those that produce little or none, at let those
    that produce revenue leave.  I tend to believe that manufacturing is
    another story, but DEC has dead-wood, and I see that as the problem. 
    It's not that we have to many employees......
    
    I hope KO can address this problem, before the problem addresses DEC!
    
    Just my humble opinion.

    I feel compelled to respond to 973.3 regarding 'dead wood'.
    
    It's always very easy for a person to pick those individuals
    in an organization who are less than star performers.  It is easy
    because you have the star performers as a basis for comparison.
    
    Star performers act that way because they would be good at
    anything they tried.  They are generally people who take pride in
    what they do and they want to succeed.
    
    People who are not star performers need to made into star performers.
    If you've read 'In Pursuit of Excellence', you will know that the
    non-star performer needs to be channelled into an area at which
    he/she can excel.  If such an area does not exist (which is rare
    in most organizations), that person would be better off leaving.
    
    One problem we are faced with is the 'Peter Principle', where a
    person gets so far in an organization (maybe over their head),
    and they cannot move back to their proper niche (where they could
    be a star performer) without losing a lot of face.
    
    No, the real reason an individual appears as 'dead wood' is strictly
    a MANAGEMENT problem.  It is up to that individual's manager to
    ensure that that person peforms to their top capability.
    
    I used to think our organization had tons of dead wood and only a
    handful of talented individuals did all the word.  I believe otherwise
    now.  What we have an acute problem with right now is managing those
    people so that they can produce more, and work more efficiently.  The
    people in my organization, just a few key ones, that are called
    MANAGERS, are simply hacks who have reached their level of
    incompetence, the Peter Principle.
    
    Jim

    Are people leaving?  Certainly, but it is also true that we (DEC) are
    also hiring talent from our customers.  Perhaps it all washes out in
    the long run.  My belief is that people tend to leave when they see
    better opportunity for advancement/recognition or higher quality of
    life in a new job.  It's not a case of disliking the company, it's
    usually unique personal circumstances.
    
    I also agree with .4s comments about not-so-dead-wood.  Consider a
    simple example:  Cost Center 666 hires a tech writer for their new
    AI database project.  Three months later the project is canceled when
    funding vanishes, due to VP-level rebudgeting.  There being no other
    writing projects, the tech writer is now deadwood.  Not fair. 
    Management has a good-faith responsibility to help them find similar
    employment, which is (a) not always available and (b) not always the
    highest priority item on management's stack.  Laying off the writer
    would be a straightforward, simple and dead wrong approach (IMHO).
    Not all cases are so clear-cut, but usually the same principles apply.
    
      John

    IMHO, the reasons for dead-wood are, poor management.  It is certainly
    not the fault of the employee, until that employee takes advantage of
    the system, and does not perform, by choise.  It seems to me, that not
    only is DEC management not willing to lay-off, but also not willing to
    fire (I've heard that we have a slew of law-suits, that we just settle
    on, apparently, it may be cheaper to keep 'dead-wood').  Regardless of
    the reason for dead-wood, in this time of difficulty, we all need to
    perform, 'star performs', 'average joe', 'dead-wood', and 'management'.
    
    But, I fear we are entering a rat-hole, and not addressing the topic of
    this note, and for that I appologise.  People are leaving, and it
    worries me.

    I wish to respond to this note as one of the soon-to-be former
    DEC'ys that have made the decision to go elsewhere.  This will be a
    quick summary of my personal situation, although I am sure it will
    hardly be considered unique by other employees caught in the same
    trap:
    
    1- I like the people I work with a great deal!  Lots of talent there
       although clearly talent that goes untapped or missused.  
    
    2- I dislike the award (read lack of) system in my area.  No real
       compensation or recognition for Performance.  Excellence awards
       is purely political in nature 
    
    3- No accurate objective measurement of Performance in a Fire
       Fighting environment such as ours.
    
    4- Lousy Salary Increases.  The last two PA rated me either a one or
       two in each case in most categories.  Still the salary increases
       did not even keep up with cost of living.
    
    5- When the salary freeze was placed on the U.S. employees, all the 
       employees who stayed through the last one said that DEC would
       compensate those employees who stuck it out.  Somehow that just
       doesn't seem to be the case this time around.  Latest figures are
       about 4% pot for our district (NYFD).  NYFD did very well this
       past six months.  Including Fiscal 89.  Why such a dismal pot?
    
    6- Facilities that we are expected to work in are unacceptable.  
    
    7- etc!
    
    As a result I made a personal decision to leave.  I feel that to a
    good extent, that decision was taken out of my hands.  I only hope
    that DEC gets smarter at how they plan the attrition in this
    company, before they find many more of their one and two performers
    leaving to become one and two performers elsewhere!
    
    Hal Mondrow
    Networking Consultant
    NYFD 

    All I can say, is Hal works for the same DEC I do!!!

Same here on the West Coast.
I'm not leaving, but sometimes it gets real hard to motivate
yourself to go the extra mile.
To add to that:  Here in the field SWS, a techie has little chance
of any recognition.  The ones getting recognition are managers and leads.
Many times (in fact its the rule) I've seen projects succeed IN SPITE OF
the project manager/lead.  Yet at the end of the year its the manager/lead
who get rewarded.
It gets old.
Kevin

    We in the NYFD have had many such experiences where the people doing
    the work do not get the rewards.  If they scream loud enough
    however, some recognition seems to filter down.  But, isn't it sad
    that one has to resort to no less than blackmail at times to get
    some small recognition.  Oh well as some wise person once said " If
    you do not toot your own horn, someone will use it for a spitoon"
    Seriously though, I feel that most of the factors that went into my
    decision to leave Digital revolve around the issue of recognition,
    whether it be financial, or just words of thanks for a job well done.
    Is it so difficult to keep basic common courtesy and common sense in
    the management of people in this company? or is it that managers are
    just so damned tied up in their own careers that they neglect the
    people who make them successful.  This is not a comment necessarily
    of my immediate management as much as it is a comment on the
    menagement structure in the field in general.  
                                                           

    I just joined DEC after 10+ years at different customer sites, and
    I'm here to tell you that the problems you see in this company can
    be found everyplace else too.  Raises too small?  Salaries have
    been generally lagging behind inflation across the whole industry,
    and indeed, across much of the American economy for the last five
    years.  Political-minded team leads and managers get all the credit
    (and money)?  It is no different in any large organization.  Some
    groups are prospering and some groups are dying, and you just cannot
    make meaningful statements ("everybody is leaving") without specifying
    a context.
    
    I changed jobs every three years until I could not find anything
    useful or fun to do, then I changed employers.  I am glad to be
    here now.

    
    Considering that (for delivery people) most of the praise and
    recognition comes from the customer rather than the employer, it seems
    natural to me that many employees would choose to work for customers.
    
    - David
    

Come on now.  Considering that there are 125,000+ people in this company, 
I would be astounded if some people weren't leaving.  Sure, every company is
great when the work is interesting, the pay is good and your work is recognized.
The trouble is that often it only occurs in certain types of companies at 
certain times in their life.  It's lots of fun to work for an up and coming 
"hot" company.  Let's see...IBM, Digital, Data General, Wang, Sun, Hp, Apple,
etc. etc. have all been "hot" to work for at some time or another.  Many 
at several different times.   

I've worked in other companies besides DEC and the problems mentioned before
are EXACTLY the same.   The squeeky wheel generally gets the recognition 
and pay over the quiet types.  Incompetant managers are often saved by their 
staff.  

It doesn't mean Digital should get complacent.  The more these problems are
addressed and fixed, the better people Digital will employ.  

It's unfortunate that good people leave and that sometimes it can't be avoided,
but if one finds another company with the right manager, job and pay, 
more power to you.    

			Bob Cohen

    Turnover in my site has been amazingly low - perhaps because this
    city is seen as an attractive place to live.  There's only been 6
    people to leave (that I remember) in the past four years.
    
    Of those, two (1 Sales, 1 SWS) xferred to other DEC sites.
    
    In the same four years no one left SWS for another company, and
    we've had two SWS imports from 'back East'.  One Sales transfer 
    import from the Northwest.  One Sales, one SWS new hire. 
    There has been NO customer service turnover in 4 years, as far 
    as I know.
    
    Senior people cost the company more money per year, but that's
    hopefully offset by a smaller amount of annual training required.
    
    karl

    Another way of putting the question raised in this note is, "Are people 
    Waiting (to leave)"???  The economy is slow now and no one is in a
    hurry to leave to another company.  Digital has a TRADITION of no
    layoffs and is a good place to wait out a slow economy.  What happens
    when things pick up in a few years?  After all the creative salary
    policies we've seen, won't Digital see a large turn around when
    things are better and people look to get a little buying power back?
    

re: -1

What will probably happen is that Digital will improve it's salary policies
enough to remain competitive in the industry.  Enough that people who generally
like working at Digital will stay.  If they don't or are slow to realize the
change in the employment market, then I think people will leave.

Of course, some people may be so alienated that it won't matter what Digital
does.  That may be why they announced the raising of the freeze, despite
the fact that DEC earnings are still just fair.  Like mentioned before, it 
depends on an individual's own circumstances.  There are other reasons beside 
salary to stay or leave a company.

				Bob

    Re: .13 and others
    
    If the squeaky wheel deserves greasing due to extended wear, I agree. 
    If the squeaky wheel has seen little service, it probably gets
    replaced.
    
    An alternative, which I believe was mentioned earlier, is "toot your
    own horn...spitoon".  Rather than complaining when you don't get
    something, keep reminding them how much you are giving.  It doesn't
    have to be overt, just don't let it be forgotten.  That squeakiness
    would get much more attention from me were I in a position to do
    something about it (as I was in previous incarnations).
    
    General:
    
    Being relatively new to Digital (a little over 2 years), I find it
    {amazing|amusing|sad|expected} that some of this dialogue is taking
    place.  I react to the notes concerning this issue, in this and other
    topics, in these ways and try to guess why it is that the author feels
    Digital is so {bad|different|unfair|old}.  My guess(es) would be that
    the authors of the notes that evoke these responses in me are
    
    Big Braces {malcontents|naive|inexperienced|burned out}
    Big Braces {naive|inexperienced|burned out|malcontents}
    Big Braces {inexperienced|burned out|malcontents|naive}
    Big Braces {burned out|malcontents|naive|inexperienced}
    
    Based on 12+ years, 10 elsewhere, with 2 big software houses (CSC and
    Ford Aerospace), a university space physics research group, a small
    aerospace R&D firm, a small consulting firm, and as a private
    consultant, I suspect that these people are {never going to be
    happy|getting experience in life (professionally and otherwise)|in for
    a big shock|in need of a change}.  I think I have changed jobs for all
    the above reasons (no, I'm sure I have, and have managed to outgrow
    some of those attitudes, grow through others, but most of all grow and
    learn).  No matter where you go, for the most part, it doesn't change
    and the only thing that will convince you of that is your experience. 
    
    Shortly after leaving Ford, they cut back their "Cadillac John Hancock"
    plan severly, eliminated the one week shutdown everyone got at the
    "traditional end of the year holiday season", etc.  I left there five
    years ago.
    
    When I started there, I was told there was great growth potential,
    management opportunity, etc.  Even though they could not offer what I
    wanted (company rules prevented offers in excess of X% above the
    prospect's current salary (even though I was coming from a university
    research environment), they would quickly (6 months was the stated
    timeframe) help me get there.  Six months came and went, my supervisor
    had a personal crisis which extended this, so I went to my boss' boss. 
    He gave me the raise, and I said, "Great, but you're a little late.  I
    am due another raise and only now getting the last one.  We went to his
    boss, who said, "Well Steve, we can take care of that because even
    though you got the maximum raise _according to the rules_, we'll give
    you another under this _special clause_ at the maximum, which
    compounded with the first raise, gets you where you need to be. 
    
    Great!!!  What rule was I being quoted when I applied and why was it so
    fast when these were so soft?  A new hire knows not the ins and outs of
    the company, has not established a rapport with management, and most
    importantly, has not established their worth to the company.  Once I
    had shown how much I could accomplish, both within my assigned
    responsibilities and outside my assigned responsibilities in regard for
    the welfare of the customer and the project, they had no problem with
    that.
    
    I suspect most companies are like that, perhaps Digital is an
    exception.  All the companies I mentioned previously, with the
    exception of the U of Md., have laid employees off at least once in the
    last 3-5 years, and some more frequently.  Projects end, no more
    projects, hit the streets PAL (caps intended as a TLA).
    
    I believe Digital _is_ an exception.  It takes a great deal more
    perseverence to learn the "system" at Digital, perhaps because of the
    matrix organization, and almost certainly by design.  If you're going
    to quit at the first roadblock, you don't belong here.
    
    If you feel there may be some merit in what I say and wonder how to
    stick it out while you find out, try a new hobby, change your personal
    habits (go to a movie one night a week, go bowling, take up a musical
    instrument, etc) and concentrate on that for a few months.  Before long
    you will have weathered the storm and will have grown personally as
    well.
    
    Enough rambling from a cow from the other side of the fence.
    
    Steve

re: -1

Generally I couldn't agree more.   Waiting for any company to take care of you
without any "reminding" on your part only works so well. And yes, there is a 
big difference between being agressive and being assertive.   

But,  I don't think we can pass off stupidity on Digital's part because it's 
"just another big bureacracy".   It's important to communicate your feelings/
discontents to your supervisor, not just to "toot" your horn, but provide him
with the information to pass to his supervisors and so on.  If managers are
made aware, then they can't play stupid, and some of the responsibility does
become theirs.  This may sound naive, but it is an alternative to "take it" or 
"walk".
				Bob 

re: .17

Great letter! I've been with the company 18 years, experienced 3 freezes, looked
outside to inspect the grass, and still am here. Let's face it, there are 
procedures and there are PEOPLE who implement those procedures. The biggest
variable seems to be the people. Some individual managers (and organizations) 
take the extra effort. I've been on both sides of the manager/worker fence and
think I understand how "the system" works.

I read this conference regularly, but don't usually bother to "soapbox" my
opinions. I get fed up by the people who encounter problems and are so quick
to blame "THEM". 

<flame off> 

	/Marvin

    Recently, Flavio Rose left Digital to go to Convergent Technologies. He
    was offered $20K more... Flavio was a one man army of technical support
    and pulled Digital's rear out fire at customer accounts many times. He
    was one of those super performers receiving mediocre compensation.
    
    In contrast, I know of some low level management that got some large
    incremental raises recently (e.g., $15K for one person taken out of
    discretionary funds) because they played the political game well. And
    they didn't perform on tenth that of Flavio for the company.
    
    I don't how many of you are aware of corporate's new compensation
    policy: Corporate wants to push out pay raises from once a year to
    every 18 to 21 months! Each organization is given 5% increase in budget
    for wages this year. The assumption is that some will recieve better
    than 5% raises by taking raises from those perceived as less valuable.
    That is, most of Digital will see their wages growing at less than
    inflation. With Wang, DG, Prime, etc., laying off in large numbers,
    finance thinks they have on a chain.
    
    -George
    
    

:        I don't how many of you are aware of corporate's new compensation
:    policy: Corporate wants to push out pay raises from once a year to
:    every 18 to 21 months! 
:
    
    	For what it's worth, the last year for which the average time
    between raises was 12 months or less was 1987.    In other words,
    "Corporate" isn't pushing raises out from "once a year" at all.
    It's been less frequent than once a year for the past two years
    already.
     
    1988 was 13 months;  1989 was 15 months.   1990 will indeed be a
    21 month average.   However, the 21 months include 6 for the freeze.
    18 months is the minimum.
    
    Apparently, this message wasn't too well communicated for the past
    two years.

    d.

    I thought everyone knew how Digital really worked as far as salary &
    promotions (probably the whole world works this way)....
    
    Doing a good/great job gives you the right to go scream/whine/harass/etc
    your boss for a raise and/or promotion.
    
    Not doing a good job deprives you of that right... but doing a good job
    doesn't guarantee you anything.
    
    Regards
    
    Gary B	(someone who's never been very good at playing the game...
                 but at least I know the rules)
    

    Let me jump back in here if I may........
    
    I've got about 7 years in the industry, with the last 2 at DEC.  Prior
    to coming to DEC, I thought working for DEC would be the pinnacle of my
    career (excuse me for being ignorant after only 5 years working with
    DEC's equipment).  After getting my offer from DEC, I thought I'd made
    it.  I naively thought the 'best' worked for Digital.  Unfortunatly,
    that is not 'completely' true, and worse yet, it seems to me, the best
    are leaving.
    
    Digital charges alot for our services, and hopefully they get almost
    what they pay for, considering the forces WE can bring to bear for the
    customer.  BUT, if those forces move elsewhere, what are the long term
    considerations.
    
    My points are:
    	We all need to contribute to the success of the corporation
    	management needs to be concerned with the growth of it's employees
    	DEC is now too large to have general rules regarding issues such as
    		salary
    
    In an unrelated (sort of) area.......
    
    I am a software resident, working 40 (or so) billable hours AT the
    customer site.  I can not waste time in NOTES during the day, I can not
    PLAY with the VAX or a new product during the day, and I am the first
    one the customer thinks of, when they have a problem, and for the
    $100.00 charged, they expect and deserve an answer.  What is very
    demoralizing, it that:
    
    	since I not in the DEC office, it appears that mgmt is unaware
    	since I am not in the DEC office, I can not buddy up to the powers
    		that be and politque a promotion/recognition/increase
    	since DEC is seeing a better 300% return on it's investment in me, 
    		I can not understand why 5% is going to be the average
    		raise every 18 months (correct me if I'm wrong, but that's 
    		about 3.3% a year)
    	It pains me to see the customer making as much or more, when they
    		don't have the experiance/expertise/ability
    
    
    Digital needs to cut expenses (layoff, fire, train, motivate, whatever
    it takes) so that it can offer salaries that don't fall below
    inflation.
    
    Are there benefits to working for Digital, of course there are.  I am
    just worrying about the long term ramifications, both to my career, and
    to Digital's future.  Digital will survive, since we have great
    products, I hope we continue to have the best possible people to
    support those products, and alert our customers to the benefits of our
    products.
    
    Enough,
    
    later
    
    Mark

    Mark,
    
    I too am concerned about turning the profitability picture around.  It
    _IS_ frustrating to see others around you that barely perform, much
    less with any demonstrable measure of quality.  Do they get booted out
    the door, here or at the customer site?  Usually, the answer is no
    unless the employer is in dire financial straits.
    
    Unfortunately, it may be necessary to keep those people around in some
    cases.  Some would argue, perhaps it has been in this note or some
    others in the conference, that those people are a part of the big
    picture.  If there were no poor performers, what would that do to the
    rest?
    
    If I were a 2 performer, and the 5's and some of the 3's went
    away, then suddenly, without any decrease in my performance, I
    would be a 3.  But I would probably get a bigger raise, because the
    pie was being divided in fewer pieces.
    
    I also would pick up the slack left by the poor performers.  This may
    not seem like much, but think how many menial tasks are given to these
    "poor" performers.  They may not have the same abilities, but they are
    not being tasked with the same responsibility.  In some instances, it
    may take the company some time to catch on, but I think in the long
    run, it will probably work out.
    
    Perhaps some of your concerns come from working in a customer
    environment that in some ways is similar to Digital.  No layoffs, good
    benefits, good salaries (not great).  The thing that is irritating is
    _you_ have to do all the work while they BS, read, sleep, talk to their
    SO on the phone, etc.  How many layoffs have you heard of at that
    employer?  Perhaps RIF's?  Occasionally, but those people are pretty
    secure.  So why not quit Digital and go to work for them?  There are
    some intangible benefits to consider here as well.
    
    My ex-father-in-law (what a hyphen-nation) worked for the same
    employer, different agency, for 34 years.  At one point in his career,
    he was at the highest _non-appointed_ level of that agency.  The
    administration changed, he got stuck in an office with nothing to do. 
    That can happen in private industry also, but there are some
    differences.
    
    After 34 years, he was probably making less than 50% more than I was
    after 17 years (I'll count college and part-time jobs just for the sake
    of argument).  Double the investment, only 50% more payoff.  The
    salary-increase curve flattens out after a while no matter where you
    are employed.  But had he stayed a little longer, I would have caught
    up with him in only a few years.
    
    He had lots of leave, which is great, but there isn't much potential
    there.  He was in a position where he saw the same things you saw,
    worked very hard for many years, did nothing to deserve the position he
    was put in other than work for a _very_ political employer, and for
    what?  To see some green, politically appointed, idiot mess up
    everything he had accomplished.
    
    You on the other hand, are in a situation where you see a number of
    colleagues you perceive as performing below standard (see the P.S.). 
    
    Yeah, I too could get discouraged by this, but if I am good, I will
    always be on the starting line-up rather than the bench (let's try not
    to compare athletes salary structures to ours in this note,
    because...better left to SOAPBOX).
    
    Or, I could say, "Wow, those people are making me look so good, and
    the less they do the better I look."  Seize the opportunity and make
    the most of it.  Work even harder so that the difference between me 
    and "them" is that much more noticeable.  Pick up the fumble and run
    with it (sorry, football is on the tube).
    
    Forget "them".  It's an attitude, an outlook, an opportunity.
    
    As Nike says, "JUST DO IT!"
    
    P.S. I always struggle with the question of standards.  Whose, the
    manager's, mine, the company's, society's?  I see these kind of
    performers, determine that _I_ feel they aren't working up to potential
    (yeah, judge them <:-( ), based on my expectations, standards, etc.,
    and wonder how I would do if asked to give them PA's.  Do I know those
    things that affect them personally which may impact their professional
    performance?...Maybe, maybe not.  Hopefully, over a year it would not
    play a big part, but there are circumstances that can have a dramatic
    effect for years such as death of a loved one, divorces, lawsuits or
    legal matters, etc.  Just look at the "stress lists" the psychologists
    publish and see how many stressful situations there are.  Changing jobs
    can be one of the most stressful along with buying a new house,
    marriage, etc.  Happy events?  Yes.  Stressful events?  Yes, very.  So
    how does one "judge" the impact of these events, especially if one is
    not aware.

    reg: -1
    
    As our readers may have noticed, Steve and I come from the same node,
    and yes, we do know eachother.  Steve, you address many good points,
    but the topic started, 'Are people leaving'.  It seems to me I got a
    pep talk.  I like working for Digital.  The benefits out way the
    drawbacks.  My only problem with DEC, is it's management (dare I say
    Leadership, no, I dare NOT).
    
    It just seems to me that some professionals want to be technical, and
    some want to be managers (I dare anyone to come up with the DEC
    definition of a manager!).  As a technical person, my interest now is
    to provide a service, and I expect management to manage ME!  It was
    asked what happens in DEC to poor performers.  It seems all to often,
    they are promoted to managers (and why not, they are not providing
    revenue....).  It's easy to assign tasks to a technical person, since
    there is always something to do.  But, seriously, what is expected from
    a manager?  And, maybe, just maybe, those better than average technical
    persons, fed up with the BS, decide to leave, and just happen to get
    the big bucks at the same time.  DEC is a great company, thru no fault 
    of it's own.  I hope I can make a career of DEC.......
    
    P.S., this attitude does not necessaily express my feelings towards my
    management, but I see trends within DEC, that I am not happy with, and
    this is my way of letting people know.

    interesting related topic...I just heard on the news at lunch that IBM
    plans to reduce its work force by 10,000 nation- or world-wide, and is
    offering a modified "buyout" package of 1 week's pay for every 6 months
    service (though this might be incorrect, since the newscaster said
    there was a maximum of 1 year's buyout $; that would be 100 years of
    service!  Maybe they meant 1 week's pay for every 6 weeks of service).
    
    Anyway...the interesting thing is that regardless of what the actual
    plan is, it is substantially less than their selective buyout given to
    employees in Tucson, Colorado Springs, and other places over the past
    few years of 2 years pay + $25,000, and is likely to cause some
    hard feelings among IBMers who weren't "lucky" enough to fall under the
    earlier plan and may have to leave the company with far less $ than
    others. 

    RE -.1
    
    This morning's Wall Street Journal referenced analysts' comments that
    IBM must find a better way to control early retirement plans so as to
    induce weak performers to leave, rather than the mass exodus from
    certain projects which IBM experienced the last time they offered such
    a program.
    
    

    Boy! It just took me :30 minutes (slow response time) to read 22
    notes that did NOT answer the question asked!
    
    My information is "informal" (not auditable) but hopefully objective.
    
    I acquire delivery resources for the CEA when no local resource
    can be found.  That puts me "in tune" with the 5 districts under
    my purview.
    
    One district just lost 3/5 of their line management staff - that's
    right 3 out of five left! Only one was out of the company.
    
    another district has lost over 8 of some 24 specialists in the last
    quarter.  Here over 1/2 of those left the company.
    
    I know of at least 12 people in the Central Area (of approximately
    250) who have left the corporation in the last 6 months.
    
    BUT!  How does this compare with the industry at large?
    
    It's rather easy to observe and comment on the many negatives in
    our workplace.  Having worked 20 years thus far in the EDP industry
    (6 with DEC) with some 6 different employers, I find that DEC is
    a very easy place to work.
    
    Please understand some of the "facts of life" working for a large
    corporation:
    
    1) We pay a "fair and reasonable compensation" - as compared with
       other LARGE manufacturers.  (you will never be paid local market
       value!)
    
    2) We are structured and managed about as efficiently as the rest
       the competition - ie. DEC, WANG, AT&T.  (If you want the freedom
       and homey spirit of a small company got to Apple)
    
    3) Big fish eat little fish. (Politics exists - use it, or be used
       by it!)
    
    4) Manager's are a scourge upon the face of the earth! [I was one]
       (they get paid big bucks for doing nothing because everyone below
        them AND everyone above them uses them as a whipping boy for
        their problems)
    
    <flame off!>
    
    Really, what we are experiencing is BRIGHT FLIGHT - those who have
    the self confidence to leave and who are marketable on the outside
    will always go off to accept the challenge.  This implies that some
    of those who are left not only do not perform as well but also
    lack the self confidence to leave.  Some of these "holders on" also
    approach their jobs in a very negative manner (afraid to make
    decisions, spending their time "managing" their image, hiding mistakes,
    etc).
    
    As a result, productivity, personal performance, morale and customer
    satisfaction go DOWN.
    
    I recommend that we address the symptoms directly:
    
    1) look around for and advertise examples of good performance
    2) try to see what others are doing RIGHT
    3) seek out and take the time to HELP others improve their performance
    4) Give the second, third and fourth chance to others (including
       managers)
    5) Do not participate in or promote the many negative rumors and
       negtative self-talk that distracts and cripples our performance

    Re: .25
    
    > It seems to me I got a pep talk.
    
    Sorry Mark, no "pep talk" intended.  I thought my response was simply a
    comparison to some others I have known and what they went through
    compared to the environment at Digital.  I guess it was kind of late.
    
    Re:  .28
    
    The original question may be answered in its simplest form with a
    simple "Yes".  I was more interested in discussing why and how to keep
    those we value.  Sorry if I strayed from the topic note too much.
    
    > One district just lost 3/5 of their line management staff - that's
    > right 3 out of five left! Only one was out of the company.
    
    But only 25% left the company.  Transitions occur all the time. 
    Attrition, I believe, was the topic of the base note.  Attrition may or
    may not be bad, but in general, changing positions within a company is
    usually good, and usually expected as a part of professional growth.
    
    > another district has lost over 8 of some 24 specialists in the last
    > quarter.  Here over 1/2 of those left the company.
    >                   .
    >                   .
    >                   .
    > I know of at least 12 people in the Central Area (of approximately
    > 250) who have left the corporation in the last 6 months.
    
    If I read this correctly, that's 1/2 of the 8 out of 24 left the
    company in the last quarter, or 1/6.  What about over the last year. 
    Are job changes seasonal also?  I've always seemed to make the majority
    of my job changes around anniversary time when I start evaluating my
    tenure with that employer.  Since many people graduate from high school
    and college in May or June, it's not surprising that they would leave
    within a couple of months of that time of the year.  Perhaps because
    they have always changed grades "over the summer", it has become
    ingrained in their lives that this is a time for change.  Or perhaps
    they wanted to leave earlier, but said, "If I leave now, I have X and
    1/2 years experience.  If I wait a couple of months, I then can say I
    have _over X+1 years_ and I'll be more marketable."
    
    > BUT!  How does this compare with the industry at large?
    
    Back to the beginning of my last ramble, at one point, and it may still
    be true, the industry average was a 30% turnover per year.
    
    > Really, what we are experiencing is BRIGHT FLIGHT - those who have
    > the self confidence to leave and who are marketable on the outside
    > will always go off to accept the challenge.
    
    Perhaps this phenomenon is a by-product of KO's entrepreneurial spirit.
    In this company, one is encouraged to be a risk taker.  Once some of
    our employees learn that, maybe they begin looking for bigger ponds or
    new challenges and feel they can't find that here.  If their love is a
    certain type of hardware or software which we don't, or no longer,
    provide, maybe they need to go off and do that somewhere else.
    
    > This implies that some
    > of those who are left not only do not perform as well but also
    > lack the self confidence to leave.  Some of these "holders on" also
    > approach their jobs in a very negative manner (afraid to make
    > decisions, spending their time "managing" their image, hiding mistakes,
    > etc).
    
    Let's hope that the majority of those who are still employees are not
    holder on.  Perhaps they are committed to the company and KO's ideals.
    
    > I recommend that we address the symptoms directly:
    > 
    > 1) look around for and advertise examples of good performance
    > 2) try to see what others are doing RIGHT
    
    Great idea.  I thought that is what some of the awards programs were
    supposed to do.  It is believed that this is particularly important in
    the field where the engineers spend more time at the customer sites
    fixing problems than they do in the office and the software residents
    feel closer to the customer for whom they are working (for a year or
    two at a time) than their colleagues and managers whom they may see
    once a quarter.
    
    Unfortunately, all it takes is one award to an individual whom everyone
    believes has caused more harm than good to _absolutely_destroy_ the
    value of the award for the rest.  Or a perception that the awards go to
    brown-nosers.  Or that everybody gets their turn.  Why can't we give
    everyone an award if they all worked hard, or give no one an award if
    no one deserves an award.
    
    It was explained to me that the awards (Software Services Soar with the
    Eagles Special Achievement Awards) don't have to be for anything
    special other than you are doing a good job at what you are being paid
    for.  Where is there special achievement in that?  Why don't we just
    call them the "Muddled Through Another Quarter Awards."
    
    > 3) seek out and take the time to HELP others improve their performance
    
    I have heard suggestions of a "mentor" program where senior employees
    take junior employees under their wing to help them acclimate to
    Digital, learn the ins and outs of the system, the many tools available
    to help them perform the jobs such as Notes, STARS, etc.  I think it's
    a great idea.  I think a much better rapport could be established
    between a senior technical person and a junior technical person that an
    employee/manager relationship.  By definition, the employee/manager
    relationship is often an adversarial one, even if it is only at raise
    time when the manager is trying to stick to the budget and the employee
    is trying to get as large a piece of the pie as possible.
    
    > 4) Give the second, third and fourth chance to others (including
    >    managers)
    
    Where do we draw the line?  I feel second chance is sufficient,
    provided the manager has made it clear what was wrong and what is
    expected next time a similar situation occurs.  My four year-old
    quickly taught me that if I don't _consistently_ adhere to the rules I
    lay down, he doesn't have to obey them and can get away with murder
    more often than not because he figures there will be a third time, and
    a fourth time, and a ....
    
    > 5) Do not participate in or promote the many negative rumors and
    >    negtative self-talk that distracts and cripples our performance
    
    Agreed.

    
    >> 3) seek out and take the time to HELP others improve their performance
    > 
    >I have heard suggestions of a "mentor" program where senior employees
    >take junior employees under their wing to help them acclimate to
    >Digital, learn the ins and outs of the system, the many tools available
    >to help them perform the jobs such as Notes, STARS, etc.  I think it's
    >a great idea.  I think a much better rapport could be established
    >between a senior technical person and a junior technical person that an
    >employee/manager relationship.  By definition, the employee/manager
    >relationship is often an adversarial one, even if it is only at raise
    >time when the manager is trying to stick to the budget and the employee
    >is trying to get as large a piece of the pie as possible.
    
    There are many new hires that are in a senior management or consultant
    level which poses a problem. Where would we find a *more* senior person
    to be the mentor?  Besides, a junior person is usually fresh in working
    life and thus more receptive to new culture. On the other hand, old
    dogs don't usually learn (or want to) new tricks.
    

    Remember Fredrick Herzberg's motivators:
    
    
    	o   Interesting Work
    
    	o   Interesting Environment (Good Co-workers)
    
    	....... (many in between)
    
    
    	o   Pay (some where around 7th to 9th place).
    
    
    Pay is more often a negative motivator.  When it's too low, then
    it affects the job motivation.  Good pay raises will only offset
    a crummy job for a short period of time.  
    
    Local attitude is very important.  When I graduated from college,
    I took job with a Oil Company in Concord, California (remains 
    annonoymus).  They hired a number of bright college graduates to
    effect a transfer-rif of older clerical employees in regional
    offices.  At first, we loved the comradarie of a bunch of young
    professionals.  After about 6 months, we figured out that 
    we were brought in to learn routine jobs in a short period of 
    time and transfer them to the home office, moral dropped rapidly.
    We started having pools to count the weekly resignations.  (the
    high was something like 8 or 9 people out of about 140)  It became
    very popular to want to leave the company.  I left within the 
    year and took a job I soon regretted.  I'm not sorry I left,
    but I remember how the negative attitude affected how I precieved
    my job.  Within the those 5 years, I worked for 5 companies. 
    
    Since I've been at DEC, I've seen that attitude begin to fester in
    certian organizations.  My job may not be the best, or pay market
    value, but the work has been interesting, the pay has been adaquate.
    When my manager told be about the salary freeze, I told her I didn't
    care about that issue.  Keep me working in interesting assignments.
    
    I've been here 6 years and am not thinking about leaving.  However,
    I know that my attitude about growing personally would pay very well
    if I decided to leave.  The reason to leave would have to be an 
    overwhelming combination of the right job, right pay, right
    circumstances.  I've been in too many shitty jobs to consider
    leaving DEC lightly.
    
    

    Re .31 , with respect, I think Herzburg regarded pay as a "wild card"
    - too much could be as bad as too little . Its ranking is therefore
    suspect. One does need to eat, therefore some pay is essential.
    One likes to feel a sense of success, and (relative) pay is one way
    of signalling such success. Not quite as straightforward as "7th
    or 9th" I would suggest.
    
    Mike Day