Conference 7.286::digital

Re .0:  The first qustion that pops into my mind is whether the
theoretical questioner is employee X him/herself or a member of the
group that wants the training. If it's employee X, then his or her
own desires ("Do I really want to provide that training?") play a 
significant role, and the employee can pursue a number of options
to break down the manager's resistance - for example:

   - Assuring the manager that he/she can complete all assigned tasks
     on schedule and still provide the training, even if this means
     putting in extra hours.
   - Persuading the manager to have someone else cover the assignments
     during X's absence; persuading the manager that the assignments aren't
     so important that they can't be deferred; etc.
   - Arranging for his or her own cost center (i.e., manager Z's) to
     get a cross-charge credit for providing the training.
   - Persuading the manager that this is in the Company's best interests,
     and broadly hinting that he or she will give manager Z generous
     praise and publicity for being such a fine corporate citizen.

If employee X doesn't want to provide the training or is indifferent -- or
if he/she does but the manager still won't approve despite X's efforts --
then the group wanting the training could elevate the issue to manager Z's
manager, and if unsuccessful on up the management hierarchy till they reached
a common manager.

    
     Tell manager Z they are not going to have a job soon because all the
    revenue-stream dried up in the EMPIRE building process.
    
     Get the revenue generating managers involved they will eat manager Z
    alive. I have seen this all before, it is not a pretty sight.
    Opps, I am sorry this is theoretical.
    
     Are you a DIGIT! Do the right thing, edit the policy and procedure
    while training revenue-generators to do the same!
    
    -Mike Z.
    

    If the groups desiring training are big earners, then they have 
    considerable clout.  It merely needs to be applied to the right
    manager.  If employee X wants to help, (s)he can do a little research
    on the management chain and discreetly inform the manager(s) of
    the other group(s) where the pressure points are.
    
    re .-1:
    
>   Are you a DIGIT! Do the right thing, edit the policy and procedure
>   while training revenue-generators to do the same!
    
    I doubt the revenue generators want training in editing policy
    and procedure, at least I HOPE not! -)
    
    /Dave

I kind of like a combination of .1 and .2 (although my heart is with .2)
People may be attempting to continue to build empires, but these are 
'empires of dust'.

    I too, used to have a manager who only cared about what was in his
    charter.  He didn't care about anything else.  He is gone, as is his
    boss.  Now I have a manager who, as long as she has been my boss,
    has never spoken the word "charter".  She is one of the best managers
    I have ever had.
    
    The are too many managers with charter on the brain.  They forget
    that we are all one company, working together towards a common goal,
    to sell hardware and software that solves customers business and
    technical problems.  Many times, with my previous manager I was told,
    "i don't care about that, thats sales (or the field, or engineerings)
    problem".  They fail to realize that, to a customer, they are not
    sales problems, field problems or engineering problems but dec
    problems and it's dec, as a whole, that the customer will hold
    responsible, in the long run.
    

    I think .2 is right on the mark. Well put. 
    
    Of course, the person's other option would be to go find a job in a
    dynamic field organization in the "revenue producing" realm that would
    greatly value his/her knowledge and contributions, thus leaving current
    manager to "policies and procedures" himself into oblivion and
    uselessness.
    
    ;^)
    
    /se
    

    re .5 BAGELS::CARROLL
    
    It's good to know that there really are managers within Digital who
    take that viewpoint.  It's refreshing to know that while the almighty
    "group charter" is important, it shouldn't also be all-consuming to the
    point where doing what's right for Digital as a whole at any one point
    in time would take a back seat.
    
    Gee, would your current manager have any hypothetical open reqs if
    there existed a hypothetical employee as described in 1002.14?  
    
    Jon