Conference 7.286::digital

    I don't know of any change in policy.  It still reads the same in
    the orange book but in practice...............
    
    Try this beauty.   A very close friend of mine is working an issue
    with local management.    This person has a very legitimate issue.
    Local management and personnel have heard the case and been presented
    with written documentation of same.   They have also been told that
    the person is going higher with the issue as there has been no 
    resolution at this level.    The local bureau.... er managers have
    demanded that if the person goes higher the information  may not
    be shown at the higher level.
    
    Is this possible?   Do people have the right to censor the issue
    as it moves up through the system?

That's not unusual.  I was told that if I took an issue one step higher, there
would be severe consequences for me.  Since I could not afford to lose my job
or be persecuted for the rest of my career at Digital, I dropped the issue.
It still burns me that I could not puruse it higher without the full force of 
politics coming down on me. This ODP is a real farce. 

Jim

    re:.2
    
    Sounds like somebody dumped a shovel full of manure on your head,and
    you swallowed it! You should have no problem taking an issue as high as
    necessary to get satisfaction.I know of more than one employee who has
    done just that with no retribution.(I would also make an issue out of
    being threatened...the head of personnel would hear about it)
    
    Ken

    This is my first reply to a NOTESfile so I hope this works.
    
    I have seen references to a John Murphy in CFO as our company
    ombudsman. He reports directly to Ken and in the ombudsman role doesn't 
    have ties to any DEC organization. I think I saw this info some
    time ago in the CAREER notesfile. If you feel up against the wall you
    might give him a call (251-1317 or his secretary 251-1306). I haven't
    had occasion to go to him, and don't know anyone who has. But the note
    sharing the info says they look at your record, the evidence, and that
    at least one person got satisfaction this way.
    
    If you try this avenue with success, would you post your victory here?
    I've never seen any official notice that we even have an ombudsman.
    Hope this helps.   

re .4

I really don't think this is John Murphy's role.  As part of Corporate
Personnel, he's involved in writing employee relations policies to protect
the company.

Of course, he might have changed jobs since the time a year ago when he
called an emergency meeting with me, my manager, and my site employee
relations manager to "discuss" a disparaging comment I had made about
a recently deceased and long-hated world leader.

Really doesn't sound like a representative of the employee point of view.

/john

        Re: .1

>    The local bureau.... er managers have
>    demanded that if the person goes higher the information  may not
>    be shown at the higher level.
>    
>    Is this possible?   Do people have the right to censor the issue
>    as it moves up through the system?

        The higher level manager may or may not care about the employee. 
        If the higher level manager doesn't care, then the documentation
        doesn't matter.  If the higher level manager cares, the employee
        just has to say `I have documentation, but <lower manager> says
        I can't show it to you' and the higher level manager will
        extract the documentation from <lower manager>.
        
        If you worry about the relationships amoung the people involved,
        I don't believe that the documentation will be a problem.

        					B.J.

    John Murphy is in Corporate Employee Relations.  He is an excellent
    resource if you believe you are being treated unfairly and are fearful
    of some form of retaliation.
    
    He has worked both sides of Employee Relations issues, helping
    managers and employees. I know of both types of incidents that
    he has facilitated.    
    
    I agree that the Open Door Policy seems to suffer from 'local
    interpretation', and that if the local personnel organization
    and management chain failed to help, Corporate Employee Relations
    is an option.     
    
    How about sending a suggestion to SOCIAL::INVOLVEMENT recommending
    that all managers be measured on support of the Open Door policy?
    It might save Digital a fortune in loss of disgruntled employees
    and lost productivity.
    
    Just a thought - 
    
    Laurie Orlov
    

    RE my previous reply (.3)
    
    See DEBIT::CAREER notes 67.2 and 67.3 for people who have used Murphy's
    services.
                                             
    

    The effectiveness of an Open Door Policy is in direct proportion
    to the maturity of the management overseeing it.  The only Open
    Door truly provided by the 'good old boy' management style is under
    the red sign marked 'exit'.
    
    

    I think It is More Important to have an Open Ear Than an Open Door.
    
    /NMA

    re .10

>   I think It is More Important to have an Open Ear Than an Open Door.
    
    ...attached to an Open Mind (<> Empty Mind!)


    /peters

It's too bad, it is really too bad...

I originally asked this question because I honestly believed that 
Digital was turning the corner.  That DEC realized some parts of 
the company are broke, and was making an effort to fix it.

It's nice to know that Mr. Murphy is around, but I knew Mr. Olsen was.  
I hope Mr. Murphy is not the 'revised' open door policy (I realize
no-one has said that he is).

The open door policy does not exist, a policy exists, but it is called
the 'black-hole' policy.  Let me explain how it has worked for me:

My story begins 9 months ago, and it continues today.  What do I have to
show for this 'black-hole' policy.  Well, I am no closer to my objective,
but, I my name does now leave a bad taste in some peoples mouths.

So far, I have had the honor of:

	not having calls returned
	not having memos answered
	not having scheduled meeting attended by the other party
	not being invited to a meeting, to which I was expected

How does this great, black-hole policy work.  Well, first you need facts,
and for that you are given a shovel.  As you dig, you begin to sense you
are getting somewhere, but wait, what is that smell anyway...?  You see,
the faster you dig, the faster B.S. is piled on top of you.  And, heaven
forbid you dig so deep, that you uncover where someone else has been,
because if you do, you'll SINK into their hole, and if they didn't get out
you can bet you won't either.

Lesson to be learned, don't even try to find an 'open door' policy.  If
you need to use one it's already too late for you.  Open door policy's
are for when you feel nobody cares, but if nobody cares....?

OH, for the record, I have spoken to 3 levels of my management, 2 levels
    of Personnel, and Corporate.  I assumed I was valued, so I guess I
    deserved this.

    Re: 1113.13
          -----
    
    (Boy, you're REALLY in trouble with that number...)
    
    I'm sorry you are so frustrated.  Try to look at it as a learning
    experience.  Here's what you've learned:
    
    If you have a difficulty with someone and you go to his boss, the
    boss will side with his person unless there's some way the Company
    will be sued, in which case, the boss will protect himself.  Now
    you have a difficulty with the second person - he didn't care to
    listen.  As you step up the ladder, you'll always be dealing with
    the last person's boss who will always side with the last person.
    
    Just so you know you're not alone, I was a customer and Digital
    did EXACTLY what I have described when I had a policy complaint.
    As a customer, I had less to lose and more power, and I simply asked
    for the name of the person who *could* change the policy which was
    in my way.  I simply told him that I would be happy to personally
    fly to Boston and take the issue up with Mr. Olsen.  Things happened.
    
    As an employee, you can not make those threats - or at least you
    can't expense the trip like I would have!  
    
    If your problem is NOT with your own manager, then you can go up
    the line through him and you'll end up with as much clout as the
    person/procedure you're having trouble with.  If it IS with your
    own manager, then may I recommend VTX JOBS_US.
    
    Most people I have spoken with have objections to the processes
    and policies of this companiy.  Only those individuals who use them
    to avoid doing what appears to be right (or to avoid doing anything)
    are picked at personally.  Those folks will be dealt with by Hitachi.
    
    
    Don

    VTX JOBS_US....
    
    please, don't get me started, but since you have.....
    
    I went the way of a new job, and the issue now centers around THAT.  My
    offer came thru 6 weeks ago (yes, a written offer), and the offer was
    made with no release date, because a release date could not be agreed
    to.  I now have 4 weeks, probably 8 (or more) to wait, before I will be
    released.  I'm screwed.

    re .15
    
    Once you have a written offer, you are supposed to have a maximum of 30
    days in your old job (if that's what you and the new boss want) --
    see orange book in vtx.  This is an easy one for personnel to resolve.
    Just go to your personnel consultant and ask the question pretty much
    the same way you presented it here and say -- "What's supposed to
    happen?"  If your personnel consultant doesn't do anything, then start
    going up the personnel chain of command.  I'd say good luck, but you
    shouldn't need it in this case.

	Orangebook Policy 2.05

	Date Of Transfer

	"In most circumstances the transfer date should be no longer than
	two week from job acceptance for non-exempt employees and four weeks 
	for exempt employees, unless all parties agree."

	In other words both you and the hiring manager have to agree to let
	your old boss hold you longer than 4 weeks. Doesn't sound like "all
	parties" are agreeing.

				Alfred

    sounds resonable to me, but, try explaning it to:
    		my current mgr
    		his mgr
    		my PSA
    		her mgr
    
    you see, the 'business conditions' clause is killing me.  I am a spec
    III, doing system management/network support.  But, I am critical.  So,
    I can not be taken out.
    
    I have gone to Corporate (in late February).  Got the actual offer in
    mid-March.  I want out, my new mgr wants me, but....
    
    In the imortal words of John Sims, "Personnel is not the mouth piece of
    management".
    
    But, this is how it works (note, actual discussion with my district
    Personnel mgr)
    
    me: what is a business need.
    him: I can't give you a definition, because there isn't any
    me: who decides is there is a business need?
    him: management
    me: and what would personnels response be?
    him: we'd support it
    
    so much for the orange book.   

What good is the P&P orange book if even personnel is allowed to ignore
it?

Lee

The policy does say "in most circumstances."  This allows your manager to
keep you longer, if truly necessary.

However, it is your incoming manager's job to negotiate with your current
manager (according to the policy) and get a firm date for the transfer.
Six weeks is long enough for that negotiation process, and 12 weeks is
more than long enough for your current manager to replace you, especially
since he presumably knew you were looking even before the offer came in.

This kind of thing is nothing new.  When I transferred from Charlotte to
the RSX Group -- I notified managment that it was time for me to look for
work elsewhere, called the RSX Group supervisor I knew best, and the next
day had a firm job offer (we don't even need you to come for an interview).

This was in mid October 1978.  SWS Management told me I would not be free
to leave until mid January 1979.  Plus, I had to do my househunting trip
over a single weekend.  We flew north Friday evening, looked at houses on
Saturday, made an offer Saturday afternoon, and had a contract Sunday
afternoon before we got back on the plane to Charlotte.

After I wrapped up my work at my principal customer sites, I spent a lot
of time doing busy work, including making up RS-232 cables.  Pfui!

But at least I had a firm date, and you should demand nothing less!

/john

    I got held up on a transfer long ago.  More than two months. So one
    weekend I got tired of it and just moved my office and started working
    for the new manager.  When the old manager got tired of paying for
    services he wasn't receiving, another month, he signed the transfer
    papers.

    Two years ago I left a group whose manager makes it standard 
    operating procedure to try to delay all transfers out of his 
    group.  Fortunately, my present manager quoted P&P and refused 
    to agree to any extensions beyond four weeks.  In spite of all
    the whining from my former manager, I was out of his group four
    weeks after giving notice.  The bottom line is that your hiring
    manager has to force the issue and be willing to escalate if
    a bogus "business reason" is being used to justify an extension.
    
    Claude
    

    re: .21  Make your own move ...
    
    I think this is maybe the best way.  Make agreement (written, of
    course) with your new manager on a start date, start moving stuff
    out, and let your old manager try to fight Personnel.  You do have
    the policy on your side, and I can't expect that your old boss would
    put up that much of a fight if he *knows* you're not going to knuckle
    under and keep doing the work.
    
    Good luck.
    
    

    refuse to work for current/old manager
    
    Isn't that insubordination and grounds for dismissal?

    It is indeed "insubordination and grounds for dismissal" at some low
    level.  (If I had asked first, that would make it much worse;
    forgiveness is easier to get than permission.) But I don't think the
    old manager would bring any such charges when he was subject to similar
    charges against himself for not approving the transfer within the time
    period stated by the PP&P.
    
    Again, I wouldn't do this unless I was VERY sure of the new manager.

I think it was a lot easier for Tom to move from MLx-y to MLp-q than it would
be for Mark to move from DC to New England.

Mark,

There is some responsibility on your part for producing a plan to get yourself
replaced at your customer sites.  I'd suggest you write down your current
responsibilities and figure out for yourself how other people in your unit
will be able to take them over.  Then send a memo to your manager with the
dates you plan to turn these responsibilities over and a transfer date.
Copy personnel and your new manager, as well as all the people involved
within DEC that you're turning responsibility over to.

Keep the memo purely factual.  Make the dates reasonable.  Be prepared to
have to revise it (hopefully not more than once) based on feedback.

/john

    Quick review:
    
    	December, 1989, told mgr I was looking
    		mgr told me I was unavailable till Oct 1, 1990
    		(point of fact, 2 year commitment was up Jan 1990)
    
    	Feb, found position that I wanted, and wanted me
    		local personnel told me release was up to Mgr
    		first contact personnel up north
    
    	Mar, met with my mgmt and personnel where:
    			I suggested June 1 was resonable
    			Mgmt said maybe July 1
    			Mgmt stated intention to hire from outside
    				(remember, I am spec III, doing system mgmt
    				and network support at customer site)
    
    	April, offer cut, AFTER new manager and current manager could not
    		come up with release date (July 1 aside)
    
    	May, new-hire started, as a spec II
    		Training began per document, allowing for 40 hours training
    			over 4 weeks, this training is complete
    
    	June, mgr first met with customer, where:
    		mgr asked if I could be released
    		mgr stated another specialist would need to be pulled
    		customer is uncomfortable with my being pulled
    
    Why is customer concerned by my being pulled.  There are 4 DEC people
    on site in this office.  Myself and another have been there better then
    18 months.  For the other 2 spots, maybe a dozen specialists have been
    in and out.  Also, management is never present, which was my original
    problem, which I could not get resolved, thus my desire to be
    transfered out.  Customer as learned to depend on myself and the other
    DEC specialist.
    
    I have done all I can do, except manage my managers duty.  What this
    comes down to, is I am being stalled, because others are not doing
    their job.  I have a stack of memos an inch think (no exageration) with
    the vast majority being written by myself, because I never get written
    responses.  I have driven this completly, and to high levels...
    
    9 months boys, 9 months of trying to work a system that doesn't work. 
    Oh, to add insult to injury, I have been acused of making
    libelous/slanderous remarks by my manager, and personnel and my mgr
    state, apparently openly, that I am difficult to work with, but my
    customers apparently love me.  SEE, see, that is the problem, I am
    doing my job.
    
    Back to John Sims, who also stated "Our great enemy is mediocrity". 
    That reminds me of another statement, "I've seen the enemy, and the
    enemy is us".
    
    As I said, I'm screwed!

    Oh, 2 other points for your reading enjoyment:
    
    	I am staying in the area, New England comes into play only because
    I have contacted them for help or support.  Staying in same building,
    and so still available to customer, if needed...
    
    	December to now does not equal 9 months, but my first WRITTEN request
    for management visits to meet with me and/or customer was September, 
    1989.  9 months ago.
    
    Management visits to me and/or customer, not unreasonable, is it?  It
    is considering I don't get unit meetings, PA's, training, etc.
                        

    For those misguided souls that thought (due to another note) that
    racing off to the northern midwest was a panacea, see the preceding
    replies.  We're confronted by situations VERY analogous to his.  
    
    Manager?  What manager?  We had 5 people on-site (one gave up an quit)
    and  didn't see our former UM for weeks at a time.  Now they've bought
    another one, and in the 2+ months he's been here he has NEVER been
    on-site - in fact, "can't" come on-site.  Of course, he has also NEVER
    had a meeting with his people in the office...
    
    Training?  We started this assignment off by being cancelled out of
    training we worked for and wanted, because the CUSTOMER didn't see the
    need for US to have it, and that set the precedent.
    
    Performance reviews?  You've got to be kidding.  The one person that
    had one was downgraded from 2 to 3 "because you are on this ...".  It
    has been 14-15 months since at least two of us have had reviews.
    
    And best of all, the customer now expects us to provide ON-CALL
    SOFTWARE SUPPORT.  That's right boys and girls, carry a beeper and sit
    by the phone in case someone wants to talk to you about their problem
    logging in!  When approached by one of the "project managers" about
    providing this "service', we asked many questions.  None were answered
    at the time (unless "I don't know" is an answer).  We were assured that
    answers would be forthcoming.  WRONG.  But, a proposal to the customer
    agreeing to have us provide the support WAS FORTHCOMING.  
    
    I won't even bring up the customer, our "partner" Andersen Consulting,
    or the herd they replaced us with in the office...
    
    But then, we always have these words to live by, given to us by a
    manager when we expressed our concerns:
    
    "If its causing you pain, perhaps you should seek employment elsewhere."

    re:  Insubordination comment ...
    
    I was not advocating insubordination in any form.  My reasoning was
    simply this:  Gave old manager notice (as per P&P), got job with new
    manager, time expired for transition (as per P&P), then by default,
    I *must* be working for new manager, and old manager's instructions
    are null and void.  If he thinks otherwise, then let *him* argue the
    ramifications of the P&P with Personnel, not you.
    
    Perhaps one avenue to resolve this is to jump directly to the level
    of management that has authority over both managers involved.  You
    may have already done this.  If you haven't gotten a decent response
    from *that* level, then you are well and truly screwed.  At that point
    there are no positive influences that your new manager could exert for
    you without pissing his own management off.  No matter how high you
    go in the management chain after that, you will still be working for
    a manager in the chain somewhere that you went over the head of, and
    that is deadly in the long term.
    
    It truly starts to sound like you must either look outside the entire
    organization for a better situation, or outside the company.  I guess
    if you really felt that management was deliberately violating the P&P
    to bail themselves out, you could go right to the top (Sims, Smith, or
    K.O.) but you better have a good job lined up somewhere else, because
    you would probably be finished at DEC.
    
    Re: .29
    
    Being on call is a pain, no doubt about it.  But I have found that it
    is a matter that can be dealt with.  You may have to take the beeper,
    but it's a one-way communications device!  It's up to you how to respond
    to it.  And always make sure that you have it in writing somewhere that
    you were *required* to carry the beeper (comes in handy when you are
    calculating your overtime pay).  What overtime pay?  Check with the
    local labor authorities, because response to on-call situations may
    qualify you for overtime pay or other compensation even if you are
    an exempt employee.  Even if not, the idea is to make management take
    the burden of managing on-call issues, like they are paid to do.
    
    Finally, as to the "manager-never-on-site syndrome":  I have been
    fortunate to be a resident at a customer who made sure that regular
    management visitation was a part of the statement of work.  The first
    time my manager missed a meeting, the customer's lawyer called up DEC's
    lawyer at Region and politely informed him that DEC was in violation
    of contract, and that the resident should not set foot on the customer
    site until DEC conformed to the contract.  The manager and the DM were
    on site the next morning.
    
    I won't say that I mentioned it to the customer, or that I wrote the
    Statement of Work in such explicit terms, but ... let's just say that
    the customer saw it was to his benefit to have active participation
    of DEC management in the residency, and did not flinch from flexing
    his muscles as a prominent customer to get his own way.
    
    Regards.
    

    REF: <<< Note 1113.30 by AUSTIN::UNLAND >>>
    
    >><< ...you could go right to the top (Sims, Smith, or K.O.) but you
    better have a good job lined up somewhere else, because you would
    probably be finished at DEC.>>
    
    John Sims said in the recent State of the Company address that there
    would be NO retaliation for using the Open Door policy.  A year ago I
    used it all the way to Sims where a solution to a minor issue was
    resolved to my satisfaction -- I think I was the first in this Area to
    have escalated an issue so high, and a minor one at that ;-)
    
    Jeewhiz, with the Berlin wall falling, dead-end despotic rule ending in
    communistic countries literally overnight, and employees becoming
    empowered to overcome bureaucracy (dare I use the word), perhaps the
    traditional management practices by some of bureaucracy and
    intimidation even within private companies has seen its day.  Maybe
    virtual self-managed teams with LEADERS is just around the corner.  I
    believe KO made reference in the State of the Company address that
    Digital was run more like a communistic system than a democratic one,
    and how the communistic system has shown to be a total economic
    failure.
    
    Whatever the issue, if you believe you're right, stand up and express
    yourself until the issue is resolved makes good common sense.
    
    Then again, if you're of the school of thought that your career
    advancement is primarily contingent on ingratiating yourself to those
    above, then ignore my above reply, keep silent, create nothing, change
    nothing, do nothing unless first authorized, and definitely refrain
    from writing either Notes or memos.
    

RE: < Note 1113.28 by GRANPA::MZIMMERMANN >
>    	I am staying in the area, New England comes into play only because
>    I have contacted them for help or support.  Staying in same building,
>    and so still available to customer, if needed...

No, make sure that you're not available to the customer!  If you don't
make a clean break, you'll be carrying old baggage with you into the
new position.

I was told by personnel that the 'all parties agree' part of that policy
includes only the managers (incoming & outgoing), not the employee.  So
it is the Incomming manager that should protect your interest.

BTW, show me the policy that allows a manager to prevent you from
transferring to a new job because you are 'critical'.  I mention this
not because you wrote about any such policy, just curious where
one is.

Dan

    Reg .32
    
    first, assume 'Critical' = 'business need', for business need, see PP&P
    2.05, page 3 of 4, also see below:
    
    Time in Job
    
    .
    .
    .
    
    In all cases, the hiring manager must communicate time-in-job
    expectations to the employee before the employee is offered a position.
    ...
    	   ...	There may be situations (e.g. Assembler I moving to
    Assembler II) in which job family progression is involved or when
    business conditions justify where these minimums would not be
    appropriate. ...
    
    'Business need' = 'business conditions'
    
    Ignoring that when I was first hired, I was told I was expected to
    remain 24 months (which ebded Jan, 1990), I must comply by the business
    conditions clause!

    
    
      re -.2
    
      It seems to me that if the issue were between *only* the old
    and new managers (As personnell told you), than the policy 
    would be worded "Unless *BOTH* parties agree", rather than 
    unless *ALL* parties agree...
    
      I used that definition to successfully veto an old manager's
    attempt to delay my transfer by 4 months.
    
    
    						-al
    

    re .32

>   I was told by personnel that the 'all parties agree' part of that policy
>   includes only the managers (incoming & outgoing), not the employee.  So
>   it is the Incomming manager that should protect your interest.
>
>   BTW, show me the policy that allows a manager to prevent you from
>   transferring to a new job because you are 'critical'.  I mention this
>   not because you wrote about any such policy, just curious where
>   one is.

    The internal transfer policy section (2.05) outlines the specific
    responsibilities of all parties involved:

    	- employee
    	- current manager, including
    	  "(G) Transfer the employee within a reasonable amount of time
    	  once the job has been accepted."
	- hiring manager, including
    	  "(H) ... After an offer is accepted negotiate a release date and
    	  obtain salary plan information"

    Employement specialists and personnel representatives also have listed
    responsibilities, but these do not have anything to do with the transfer
    process, only sourcing/providing job position information.

    Then we have

   "Date of Transfer
    ----------------

    In most circumstances the transfer date should be no longer than two
    weeks from job acceptance for non-exempt employees and four weeks for
    exempt employees, unless all parties agree."


    It's up to the managers to negotiate the exact date, this is specifically
    stated as such. The policy also states that the transfer should usually
    take place in a finite period of time [about the same amount of time you
    would normally provide to DEC if you were giving notice that you were
    leaving the company] -- unless "all parties" agree. Knowing how policy is
    written, if the policy meant "managers", it would say managers or at least
    "both parties."

    I would draw two conclusions:

    - In the event that the proposed transfer date falls beyond the usual
      limits, the policy *clearly* indicates there is employee involvement in
      the transfer process.

    - It is up to the hiring manager to *drive* the negotiation process. It is
      up to the current manager to *expedite* the transfer date.

    That's my "manager's hat" interpretation.

    /Peters

    re: .31  career limiting moves ...

>   John Sims said in the recent State of the Company address that there
>   would be NO retaliation for using the Open Door policy.  A year ago I
    
    Not to impugn John Sims in any way, but he *has* to say this, because
    it's the law ... I have no doubt that he means it, but he can't be
    the personal protector of everyone that tries to use the ODP.
    
    Speaking as a former manager, it's one thing to use something like the
    ODP to get a policy clarified or changed that no one really wants to
    be the one to stick his neck out on.  In this case, you're just trying
    to find someone who is self-confident enough to make a decision and
    stick by it.  It's another thing *entirely* to use the ODP to call a
    manager down for violating the rules.  That kind of behavior may make
    many managers nervous ...
    
    Geoff
    

    re: .35  "all parties" vs. "both parties"
    
    While this doesn't pertain directly to the topic, I can't resist!
    
    It may help to remember the "IRS Rule" when dealing with Personnel.
    If you get "an opinion" from someone at Personnel that is not what
    you wanted, go ask someone else (preferably higher up) for another
    opinion.  Because it is *opinion* that you are getting in most cases,
    not a factual finding based on research or on documented precedent.
    Don't take it as gospel.
    
    Regards.
    

    re .36

>             ... It's another thing *entirely* to use the ODP to call a
>   manager down for violating the rules.  That kind of behavior may make
>   many managers nervous ...

    Perhaps not so much "nervous" as "combative" and "irrational."

    One other possibility is saying "I could use the ODP, but I want to work
    this out." I was having problems with a former manager. When I receieved
    a letter of congratulations from 3 levels up on a major event I did, I
    forwarded it to my manager's manager and said, "Hey, look, I'm a
    professional here and I'm doing a first rate job. I'm really tempted to
    tell '3 up' the kinds of adverse circumstances I accomplished this work
    under. Fix the problem I'm having with my manager, already!" It seemed
    to get the ball rolling, though I would not have said that if I weren't
    prepared with documentation and thoroughly convinced of my case.

    The real problem with ODP is that when you're using it to right a wrong,
    you've already made a personal commitment to go on a crusade (not
    meaning that in any negative sense). Even if you can maintain a sense of
    objectivity, every hurdle in the process is going to take an enormous
    toll on you because you already have used up all your tolerance. If
    you're rehearsing conversations in your head about what you really want
    to say to someone, those are the EXACT words NOT to say when you
    actually see that person if you want to have anysort of negotiated
    progress. (I won't say what I *really* wanted to say in my afore-
    mentioned memo!)

    If you do use the ODP this way, you have to start with a clean slate --
    even if people you're dealing with in the ODP process are the ones who
    sullied the "previous" one. You have to leave the accumulated baggage
    that got you to ODP behind you to succeed. Otherwise you will be so
    involved thinking about what was said/done or what you *really* want to
    say/do that you won't be able to effectively focus on the situation at
    hand.

    And if you resolve your situation somehow, you *have* to leave the past
    behind you, for exactly the same reason. It's not easy. I know.

    Someone should write "The Zen of ODP."


    /Peters
    

<><><><><><><><>  T h e   V O G O N   N e w s   S e r v i c e  <><><><><><><><>

 Edition : 2405            Wednesday 11-Sep-1991            Circulation :  8275 

VNS COMPUTER NEWS:                            [Tracy Talcott, VNS Computer Desk]
==================                            [Nashua, NH, USA                 ]

 IBM - Racial bias suit will scrutinize IBM "Open-Door" personnel plan
	{The Wall Street Journal, 10-Sep-91, p. B6
   A race discrimination trial scheduled to begin today in Detroit will raise
 questions about IBM's open-door employee relations policy, which allows
 employees to appeal a supervisor's decision all the way to the top of the
 company. The suit was filed in Wayne County Circuit Court by Joseph Martin, a
 former Detroit-area IBM salesman. He alleges that he was denied promotions,
 salary increases and appropriate career counseling because he is black.
 According to court documents, Mr. Martin complained about his treatment to
 IBM Chairman John F. Akers, who responded that Mr. Martin was not being
 treated unfairly. IBM has denied the charges in court documents, noting that
 Mr. Martin received several salary raises and that as a salesperson, the more
 he sold, the more money he made in commissions. Mr. Martin's attorney, Noel
 gage of the law firm Gage, Beach & Ager in Southfield, Mich., said he will
 attempt to show that the policy is a "sham" and that the IBM chairman "put a
 rubber stamp to a form letter." Mr. Akers is expected to testify at the trial
 and will likely be asked about the company's so-called open-door policy.