| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1300.1 | we don't have one | PSW::WINALSKI | Careful with that VAX, Eugene | Wed Dec 05 1990 22:37 | 8 |
| Digital today has no corporate vision. Or, the corporate vision changes weekly,
which amounts to the same thing. This has been the case since the demise of
"One Company, One System, One Message" several years ago.
Establishing such a vision and keeping the company on track towards achieving
it was one of the things that Gordon Bell did very well.
--PSW
|
| 1300.2 | The world doesn't follow digital | GUIDUK::B_WOOD | Compared to Alaska, Seattle winters are warm | Wed Dec 05 1990 23:29 | 8 |
| >Digital today has no corporate vision. Or, the corporate vision changes weekly,
>which amounts to the same thing. This has been the case since the demise of
>"One Company, One System, One Message" several years ago.
>Establishing such a vision and keeping the company on track towards achieving
>it was one of the things that Gordon Bell did very well.
Sun has used Gordon Bell's vision to kick our ass!
|
| 1300.3 | This'll keep us busy for a few years | SVBEV::VECRUMBA | Do the right thing! | Thu Dec 06 1990 00:52 | 19 |
|
re .0
> "Many shared visions are extrinsic -- that is, they focus on achieving
> something relative to an outsider, such as a competitor. Pepsi's
> vision is explicitly directed at beating Coca Cola; Avis's vision at
> Hertz. Yet, a goal limited to defeating an opponent is transitory.
> Once the vision is achieved, it can easily migrate into a defensive
> posture ...
Digital's vision:
B E A T I B M
Works for me.
/Peters
|
| 1300.4 | Asked and Answered | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | Patrick Sweeney in New York | Thu Dec 06 1990 01:28 | 13 |
| When asked, there were first laughter, and then these points were
made: Digital's vision is that it is now generating cash and
surviving, and the it needs to be well organized and ready to take on
change and know where our costs are...
A world vision that encompasses all the possibilities that can happen
in the future? I don't know... We're committed to adapting to change
and being happy and doing well no matter what... (more laughter)
Educational Services, Sales and Sales Support Training, Audio Cassette
Program, "Digital Quarterly Report", Tape 202 Side B, Sept 1990
This was also videotaped as well, but I never saw the video of this.
|
| 1300.5 | Vision? I'd settle for well-articulated goals... | CIMNET::PSMITH | Peter H. Smith,MET-1/K2,291-7592 | Thu Dec 06 1990 02:38 | 6 |
| I'm not picky, you don't have to give me a single, unified, worldwide,
fully applicable vision.
Just give me a list of goals which extends beyond this quarter, and which
isn't subject to constant reversal. I'll even let you slip in a few
conflicting goals...
|
| 1300.6 | Tora Tora Tora | CSCOAC::ELDRIDGE_B | | Thu Dec 06 1990 12:13 | 14 |
| Visions can be dangerous. Volkswagon (sp?) had a vision to beat the
America Car builders in the small car business. They did it and then
sat back and collected the profits.
Then came Tora, Tora, Tora and kicked Volkswagon's A**. I don't even
know where there is a Volkswagon dealer near my home.
Regards
Bob
|
| 1300.7 | Can't rest on one's laurels | VIRGO::MASTEN | | Thu Dec 06 1990 14:14 | 0 |
| 1300.8 | | TEMPE::RAMSAY | FREEDOM ISN'T FREE | Thu Dec 06 1990 21:50 | 1 |
| Never seen or heard of a Tora, Tora, Tora.
|
| 1300.9 | Corporate Mission Statement | ULYSSE::WADE | | Fri Dec 07 1990 07:45 | 13 |
| Here's the Corporate Mission statement
- but I guess you could call it a
Vision. More detail in next note ....
=====================================
TO BE RECOGNIZED AS THE
BEST PROVIDER
OF
QUALITY INTEGRATED
INFORMATION SYSTEMS,
NETWORKS AND SERVICES TO SUPPORT
CUSTOMERS WORLDWIDE
=====================================
|
| 1300.10 | Corporate M&Os - more detail | ULYSSE::WADE | | Fri Dec 07 1990 08:00 | 583 |
| Here FYI is the full text of our Corporate
Mission and Objectives (with some European
specific annotation).
As the Appendix indicates, a similar set
of M&Os has existed in Digital Europe since
at least 1986.
I hope this helps the discussion.
Jim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D I G I T A L M I S S I O N & O B J E C T I V E S
TO BE RECOGNIZED AS THE
BEST PROVIDER
OF
QUALITY INTEGRATED
INFORMATION SYSTEMS,
NETWORKS AND SERVICES TO SUPPORT
CUSTOMERS WORLDWIDE
What does the mission statement mean ?
- BE RECOGNIZED ... we want to be the best and have our customers know it.
- THE BEST PROVIDER ... we are a reliable and easy-to-do business with
international supplier.
- QUALITY ... measured by customer satisfaction and adherence to the
highest standards in the industry.
- INTEGRATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS ... the way in which a
company acquires, shares, integrates and uses data to fulfill its
mission, optimize its productivity and competitiveness and plan its
evolution. This includes a wide range of compatible information-handling
products suitable for a heterogeneous multi-vendor environment, from the
user-tuned workstation to non-stop multi-MIP computers, supported by a
complete set of software tools, applications and consultancy, integrated
with internal and external networks and database architectures.
- SERVICES ... the widest range of services from first contact through end
of product life and any services with added value to help the customer to
design, implement and manage his information systems and networks,
setting the effectiveness standard in the industry and continuing to set
the pace in service technology.
- CUSTOMERS WORLDWIDE ... from the individual professional to the large
multi-national enterprise in all its locations.
P O S I T I O N I N G
STATEMENT
Digital Equipment Corporation is the world's leader in networked computer
systems.
Through innovation, we lead the market with our compatible product family,
open networks and fully integrated information systems.
You will find us open, friendly and dedicated to providing systems and
solutions that help you increase your competitiveness.
We are your long-term partner.
PURPOSE OF THE OBJECTIVES
A) All employees should understand the objectives and use them to guide
their behavior and work output. The objectives should help to make
employees proud to work for Digital and should influence the quality of
their work and their productivity.
B) All employees should be able to explain the meaning of the objectives to
their colleagues and friends (and customers).
C) Customers who happen to be shown the objectives should understand them
and feel good about them (although they are not written with external
publication as an intent) and should notice Digital's dedication to
quality.
D) Therefore, each objective has a short explanation associated with it
which can be used by managers as an aid in explaining the objective to
employees, written in clear language for a multi-national population.
THE OBJECTIVES & EXPLANATIONS
MARKET
Introduction -- the meaning of "preferred partner"
We like to establish partnerships with key strategic accounts
which go beyond selling systems. We want a deeper relationship,
which implies mutual satisfaction and long term investment on both
sides. We aim for the highest share of the Information Systems
spending of our strategic customers. Our message to all potential
preferred partners is: "Digital can help you to integrate your
enterprise and its partners and offer greater system flexibility
to allow you to change your way of doing business, as your
customers change their demands on you."
We collaborate with leading application developers and other
distribution channels to complement and supplement our solution
selling and marketing efforts to maximize quality, profit, and
volume, precisely in that order.
1. BECOME A PREFERRED PARTNER FOR ENTERPRISE-WIDE AND CROSS-ENTERPRISE
DISTRIBUTED INFORMATION SYSTEMS.
Explanation : There is a growing market recognition that
distributed computing is a more effective way of responding to the
changing needs of business. We will capitalize on Digital's
leadership in distributed computing to build a portfolio of
products, services and applications either from Digital or its
partners. We will develop the full capabilities to Market and sell
Enterprise Computing Solutions. We will make a major effort to
have applications developed by Digital and its partners on the
Digital Extended Enterprise Computing Environment : specifically
the new Digital Architectures such as DECWINDOWS, Application
Integration Architecture (AIA), Distributed Transaction Processing
Architecture and the Compound Document Architecture. This will
enable Digital to become a preferred supplier to our customers and
partners for all application development.
2. ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN A STRONG MARKET POSITION IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR.
Explanation : the Public Sector includes the Scientific,
Educational and Research communities, Health Care, Public
Institutions, etc. These markets exert a great influence on the
total Information Systems industry and a strong Digital position
in them has a beneficial impact on other markets. Also, we strive
to be good citizens of the communities in which we operate by
contributing to the public sector needs of society.
3. BE A PREFERRED PARTNER TO THE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES.
Explanation : Our products are particularly suited for the
Manufacturing industries and, over the years, we have developed a
good understanding of the applications and needs of these
industries. Digital is a manufacturer, and we make use ourselves
of what we sell. We will develop an application portfolio strategy
for each of the manufacturing industries which includes acquired,
developed, jointly marketed, and referred applications.
4. BE A PREFERRED PARTNER TO THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SERVICE INDUSTRIES.
Explanation : In this objective, we address the Public Service
Industries and Private Services such as Banking,
Retail/Distribution, Insurance, Transportation. We understand the
requirements to provide industry specific Solution Systems. We
will develop application architectures based on a thorough
understanding of the future business requirement of each industry.
We will invest in the development of platform systems and
encourage application developers to integrate their products to
meet these needs.
5. BE A PREFERRED PARTNER TO THE TELEPHONE SERVICE PROVIDER AND
TELECOMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES SUPPLIERS FOR DISTRIBUTED
APPLICATIONS.
Explanation : Because the Telecommunication markets are going
through major changes, a significant opportunity exists for
Digital to sell its distributed computing environment. In selected
market segments, country by country, we will focus on internal
data processing, software development, network management and new
telecommunications businesses such as value added networks.
6. ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN THE PUBLIC POLICY PROCESS AND COMPLY WITH ALL
GOVERNMENT REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO BE A MAJOR PARTICIPANT IN THE
GLOBAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MARKET.
Explanation : Because of our size and market position, we play a
significant and visible role in the economies of most countries.
Our strength in technology, our complete product and services
offering, and our goal of open architectures makes us an ideal
supplier to ensure an open market and standards environment.
Therefore, we have many opportunities for local presence and
participation as a quality supplier, customer, employer,
technology partner and standards partner. We want to address these
opportunities fully in our relationships with customers,
governments, suppliers and the Information Technology industry as
a whole.
PRODUCT/APPLICATION
7. ENSURE THAT CORPORATE PRODUCTS INTENDED FOR WORLDWIDE MARKETS ARE
DESIGNED TO ADAPT EASILY TO ALL COUNTRY MARKETS AND THAT WE CAN PERFORM
THE ADAPTATION AND COMPLEMENTARY LOCAL PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT NECESSARY TO
MEET COUNTRY PLANS AND THE REQUIRED QUALITY STANDARDS.
Explanation : It is company policy to design and manufacture
products that can be easily adapted to country markets, while
meeting our quality standards. We do this in order to maximize our
presence in all countries and therefore our worldwide sales
volume. It is an objective of the European Marketing and
Engineering organizations to identify these needs and make sure
that they are satisfied in our Product Development Plans.
SERVICE
8. STRENGTHEN OUR LEADERSHIP POSITION IN THE SUPPLY OF A FULL RANGE OF
QUALITY SERVICE PRODUCTS.
Explanation : We must continually emphasize effective, high
quality services. We recognize that our industry is becoming ever
more service intensive and that we must anticipate and meet the
demands of our customers. In order to retain our leadership, we
must keep on expanding our service offerings. Services are an
integral part of the overall operation.
9. "MEET OUR CUSTOMER'S NEEDS BY PROVIDING FULLY INTEGRATED SUPPORT FOR
SYSTEMS, APPLICATIONS, NETWORKS,AND SERVICE PRODUCTS."
Explanation : More and more customers want complete solutions to
their business problems, not just separate hardware, software and
service components. This means that they require Systems
Integration in a multi-vendor environment; we meet their needs by
supplying standard Digital hardware, software and services,
together with customized services and project management. Where
necessary we will form alliances with independent suppliers of
professional services to meet full customer needs.
BUSINESS
10. MEET OUR OPERATIONAL OBJECTIVES WHILE INVESTING TO ACHIEVE OUR
LONG-TERM GOALS.
Explanation : We include long-term investments within our
short-term operational objectives. We are committed to a change in
operating style which will produce an increase in financial
performance, especially in return on assets. A key to these
results is successful implementation of our cross-functional
integrated operating plan and dedication to quality and
productivity throughout our organization.
INTERNAL
11. ENCOURAGE CLOSE COOPERATION, TEAMWORK AND INTERDEPENDENCE AMONG
INTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS WITH THE GOAL OF PRESENTING OURSELVES AS ONE
COMPANY TO THE OUTSIDE WORLD.
Explanation : Within each cross-functional management team, the
following functions have the primary responsibility to define and
implement our integrated business plan:
Computer Special Systems, Educational Services (customer
training), Engineering, Field Service, Manufacturing, Marketing,
Sales, Software & Application Services.
As part of each cross-functional management team, the following
functions are responsible for defining and delivering effective,
efficient and high quality cross-functional service:
Administration and Logistics, Educational Services (internal
training), Finance, Human Resources, Information Services, Law.
We will implement team metrics to ensure proper feedback to
individuals on their team behavior.
12. ENSURE THAT ALL EMPLOYEES ARE ABLE TO MAINTAIN DIGITAL'S COMMITMENT TO
QUALITY AND PRODUCTIVITY.
Explanation : Technology, competition and customers are changing
at an ever-increasing rate. We must adapt to these changes to
ensure our success. Digital's employees and their interactions are
key to meeting our objectives. Therefore, changed objectives will
be communicated effectively to maximize employee contribution to
the successful implementation of the changes in a decentralized
environment. We use a formal change management process for major
change programs (the "PROMPT" process).
13. ENCOURAGE WIDE PARTICIPATION IN DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES AND
DISSEMINATE ALL RELEVANT INFORMATION TO THE APPROPRIATE GROUPS IN A
TIMELY FASHION.
Explanation : To achieve quality, decision-making that is based on
proposals is preferred and listening to a wide variety of views is
encouraged. The company supports an open and innovative internal
environment receptive to employees' ideas for internal formal
change and improvement. We prefer a decentralized decision-making
approach, with small teams used to stimulate innovation. Some
decisions cannot be participatory; however, all decisions will be
clearly communicated and explained. Efficient implementation plans
which affect people's tasks will encourage participation as much
as possible by the individuals affected.
In the exceptional case that agreement on an issue cannot be
reached in a timely manner, the individuals involved are
responsible for escalating the disagreement to the appropriate
manager(s). This is an important part of our decision-making
process.
14. ENSURE FULL DEVELOPMENT OF THE SKILLS OF EACH EMPLOYEE TO ENHANCE
CURRENT JOB PERFORMANCE AND EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION, AND TO ENABLE
EMPLOYEES TO SHARE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MATCHING THEIR CAPABILITIES WITH
CHANGING BUSINESS NEEDS.
Explanation: People are Digital's most important asset. We believe
that the high level of skill and capability of Digital employees
is a major contributor to business success now and in the future.
We will provide an integrated framework of people development
tools and solutions which match the needs of employees with
changing company needs throughout their careers.
... Enhance current job performance
We will strive to ensure that each employee is given the
opportunity to acquire the skills necessary to perform their
current job.
... Share responsibility
All employees are responsible for their own development together
with their manager.
15. MEASURE EACH EMPLOYEE ON THE SATISFACTION OF OUR CUSTOMERS AND ON THE
QUALITY OF SERVICE RENDERED TO OUR COLLEAGUES.
Explanation : customer and colleague satisfaction are central to
our success. We expect clear measurements of satisfaction to be an
important part of the feedback which improves our performance as
individuals and as a company.
Attachment II
COMPARISON BETWEEN THE 1986 M&O AND THE NEWLY AGREED 1989 M&O
The purpose of this memo is to describe briefly the important changes
between the 1989 version of our Mission & Objectives and the previous
version which we distributed in 1986.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
THE MOST SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IS THAT THE 1989 MISSION AND OBJECTIVES
ARE NOW A DIGITAL SET OF STATEMENTS INDICATING OUR WORLDWIDE
CORPORATION'S VIEW OF HOW WE SHOULD SATISFY CUSTOMER NEEDS.
THE PARAGRAPHS OF EXPLANATIONS ARE SPECIFIC TO EUROPE BUT THE WORDING
OF THE MISSION & OBJECTIVES IS SHARED WORLDWIDE.
[my `bolding' - Jim Wade]
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
POSITIONING MESSAGE
The positioning message is the same as 1986.
PURPOSE OF THE OBJECTIVES
The purpose of the objectives is again the same as the 1986 version.
MISSION
The mission wording has been augmented to include the following
concepts :
1 - To be recognized as the best rather than just to be the best
supplier.
2 - Focus on integration of the corporation.
3 - Focus on networks as one of our main strengths.
4 - Focus on our worldwide capability.
Otherwise the underlying mission statement is exactly the same.
THE OBJECTIVES
The objectives are mostly the same with a slight change in their order
of priority and some specific focus points added to individual
objectives.
The following paragraphs discuss briefly the changes of the various
objectives. They are given in the order of the new objectives.
EXPLANATION OF "PREFERRED PARTNER"
The new objectives begin with an explanation of the meaning of
"preferred partner". This is to avoid having the same words in each
of the first four marketing objectives. It also focuses strongly on
the partnerships which we will use through various channels to provide
additional added-value to our customers. This focus on OEM's or
complementary solution providers is made here in the beginning and in
addition in each of the marketing objectives themselves.
This focus within the marketing objectives replaces the old objective
# 5 which separately stated our commitment to OEM's.
OBJECTIVE 1 - PREFERRED PARTNERS AND ENTERPRISE-WIDE DISTRIBUTED
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
This new first objective focuses on the company-wide and inter-company
information systems activities. It draws on wording from old objective
# 5 for OEM's, # 7 for Application Software and # 9 for Networking.
It is the basis for our thrust into the integrated enterprise.
OBJECTIVE 2 - PUBLIC SECTOR
This is almost identical to our old objective # 1.
OBJECTIVE 3 - MANUFACTURING
This is similar to our old objective # 2.
OBJECTIVE 4 - SERVICE INDUSTRIES
This objective is half of our old objective # 3 since we have split
apart the service industries and the telephone industries.
OBJECTIVE 5 - TELEPHONE SERVICE PROVIDERS & TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT
MANUFACTURERS
Due to the enormous opportunity in the telephone market, we have split
out the telephone industry marketing objectives from the service
industries. This focus is also seen in the new corporate worldwide
organization focusing on the telephone industry.
OBJECTIVE 6 - PUBLIC POLICY
This objective is similar to our old objective # 4 but with more focus
on policy participation, compliance to government regulations and the
global nature of our participation in worldwide public policy.
The previous objective focused purely on single country governments.
OBJECTIVE 7 - WORLDWIDE PRODUCTS
This objective is the same as old objective # 6.
OBJECTIVE 8 - SERVICE
This objective is the same as old objective # 8 but with an emphasis
on our current leadership position in the supply of service to our
customers.
OBJECTIVE 9 - INTEGRATED SUPPORT
Objective 9 expands on old objective 9 but emphasizing on multi-vendor
support and systems integration capabilities, in addition to our
interest in managing corporate networks. This objective demonstrates
some of the new behaviors which we need to exhibit in order to become
the preferred partner for integrated enterprises.
OBJECTIVE 10 - MAKING NUMBERS
This business objective is the same as our old objective # 10 with a
new focus on longer term investments in addition to making the
short-term budgets.
OBJECTIVE 11 - ONE COMPANY
This objective is a simplification of the old # 11 with the addition
of team metrics to reinforce our one-company behavior.
OBJECTIVE 12 - QUALITY AND PRODUCTIVITY
This objective combines old objectives 12 and 16 and simplifies the
wording.
OBJECTIVE 13 - DECISION MAKING AND INFORMATION FLOW
This objective is the same as old objective # 13 but with a new focus
on participation in the decision making process by a wider group of
employees.
OBJECTIVE 14 - EMPLOYEE DEVELOPMENT
This objective is an expansion on old objective # 14 to show our full
commitment to employee development. It also focuses on the employee's
own role in their career.
OBJECTIVE 15 - MEASURE SATISFACTION
This objective is identical to our old objective # 15.
Distribution List:
NAME: David BARLOW @GEO <BARLOW AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: John BARRETT @GMO <BARRETT AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: Hermann BINDER @OUO <BINDER AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: Georges CASSIR @GEC <CASSIR AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: Bruno D'AVANZO @GEC <DAVANZO AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: Shel DAVIS @GEC <DAVIS AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: Dick ESTEN @GEO <ESTEN AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: Pier Carlo FALOTTI @GEO <FALOTTI AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: Sergio GIACOLETTO @GEO <GIACOLETTO AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: Marie-Jose HAUZENBERGER @GEC <HAUZENBERGER AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
WILLI KISTER @RTO,
NAME: Earl MASON @GEC <MASON AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
PIER PAOLO MONDUZZI @IYO,
NAME: Werner OPPLIGER @GEC <OPPLIGER AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: Jack SCHWEIZER @GMO <SCHWEIZER AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
GEOFF SHINGLES @REO,
NAME: Beat STIEFEL @GEO <STIEFEL AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: David L. STONE @GEC <STONE AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NAME: David BARLOW @GEO <BARLOW AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
NIELS BIRKEMOSE MOELLER @DMO,
BO DIMERT @SOO,
HANS DIRKMANN @ZUO,
NAME: Pier Carlo FALOTTI @GEO <FALOTTI AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
MICHEL FERREBOEUF @PAO,
BERT DE GROOT @UTO,
WOLFGANG JAEGER @SQO,
HANS JARNIK @VNO,
HENRY KELLER @BRO,
WILLI KISTER @RTO,
BRUNO KRUL @XIP,
BIRGER KVAAVIK @NWO,
DEREK MACHUGH @DBO,
PIER PAOLO MONDUZZI @IYO,
MARTIN RANWELL @REO,
PEKKA ROINE @FNO,
YVES SARRAZIN @PAO,
GEOFF SHINGLES @RES,
NAME: Beat STIEFEL @GEO <STIEFEL AT AMIS1A1@EHQMR1@GEO>,
GIL WEISER @ISO
LAURENS BOUWMAN @UTO,
MARIE BRESCIA @GEO,
JEFF BULL @GEO,
JOHN CARTLAND @GEO,
GIORGIO CORSI @GEO,
SHEL DAVIS @GEO,
ANNE-MARIE DUVOCELLE @EVO,
ERIK FAES @BRO,
DOINA FILIP @GEO,
EHUD HAR-CHEN @ISO,
YVES IGNAZI @VBO,
PETER KOPPES @JGO,
GEORGE MANN @GEO,
JOE MCALLISTER @ILO,
JACK MCDERMOTT @GEO,
PETER MEDEK @VNO,
LAURENCE MEGSON @GEO,
ANTONIO MELA @IYO,
FRANK MOELLHOFF @GEO,
JORGE MOREIRA @XIP,
MIKE MULQUEEN @ILO,
KAJ NORDSTROM @FNO,
DAVID O'DONOVAN @DBO,
LEIF OLSEN @DMO,
ENRIQUE ORTEGA @SQO,
PHIL PORTER @GEO,
WERNER SCHAERER @ZUO,
HALVOR SKJEGGESTAD @NWO,
RICHARD STAHLI @GEO,
ERIK TEGNER @SOO,
PETER THOMSON @RES,
HERMANN WAGNER @RTO,
WAYNE WATTERS @GEO,
ALASTAIR WRIGHT @REO,
GILLES REGAMEY @GEO,
FOTIOS PAPANDRICOPOULOS @HEL
|
| 1300.11 | Eyes in the back off our heads might help | CSCOAC::ELDRIDGE_B | | Fri Dec 07 1990 12:10 | 18 |
| To .8 - You must be quite young or pulling my leg. If fact today marks
the event that Tora Tora Tora took place in history. Now maybe I
spelled it wrong but it is when Japan caught the US sleeping and got us
good. Tora Tora Tora was the war cry.
The point I was making was the car builder was watching the US builders
only. Then Japan came along in the car business and kick butt.
Digital must not get caught in the same trap. Our mission statement
should be flexible enough to cover all bases. We need to learn from
the German car builders mistake.
Regards
Bob
|
| 1300.12 | World Class Companies | VIRGO::MASTEN | | Fri Dec 07 1990 17:35 | 148 |
| Just received this...
Excerpt from a Boston Consulting Group publication
"Perspectives" (summarized)
WORLD CLASS COMPETITORS
-----------------------
o Select group of corporations that do a great many things right and
get steadily better.
o These companies continually develop new competitive advantages instead
of always resorting to the old ones.
o Their profits don't seem to be at the mercy of currency swings.
o They are led, not just managed.
o These companies are the Benchmarks and they include Hewlett-Packard,
Milliken, ICI, Chapparal Steel and Toyota.
WHAT DO THEY DO DIFFERENTLY?
----------------------------
o FOCUS ON EMPLOYEES, NOT CAPITAL ASSETS
- Tap the creative potential of employees to improve their performance
- They find that employees provide simple, low cost solutions to
problems, often avoiding major capital expenditures.
o MANAGE THE WHOLE SYSTEM, NOT JUST COMPONENTS
- Compete as a whole enterprise, not just as departments or
functions.
- It is cooperation and cross-functional teamwork that create
unique value for Customers.
o MICROMANAGE, NOT MACROMANAGE
- Top companies don't change technology and add new investments
until they have refined and improved the capabilities of the
exisiting processes.
- They make small changes that cumulatively have large effects.
- The best companies know that competitive advantage is in the
details.
o FOCUS ON TIME, NOT COST
- Faster response time to Customer
- Develop New Products in half of the time of competitors
- Time is the best way to measure the performance of their
day-to-day operations as a system.
- Cutting time means cutting waste.
o ORGANIZE AROUND VALUE CHAIN, NOT FUNCTIONS
- Visualize the company as a continuous flow of work toward the
Customer.
- World Class competitors tend to describe themselves more as
flows of activity than as static structures of people.
o LEARN FROM MISTAKES, DON'T REPEAT THEM
- World Class companies solve problems by tracking them to root
causes.
- Directly confront problems.
- These companies go face-to-face across the organization to get
the changes they need rather than up the organization with paper
to complain or seek relief.
- A World Class company makes nearly all of its engineering changes
on a new product before tooling for production while a competitor
makes thes changes after tooling.
o LOCAL, NOT CENTRAL
- World Class companies run lean by putting full responsibility for
management and direction down in the divisions.
- Little Staff review of new investments and go/no go decisions.
- The key to making this work is small staffs and using only a few
simple performance measures.
o PROMPT, NOT DEFERRED DECISIONS
- World Class Competitors act quickly.
- With dynamic organizational systems designed for fast response,
they are able to make quick decisions, perform required analysis
set priorities for moving forward.
- By compressing the decision cycle, they surpass their competitors
with innovative solutions to problems.
o COOPERATION, NOT COMPETITION
- World Class companies know that Internal Cooperation creates more
successes than Internal Competition, so they emphasize company
performance over individual performance.
- Empower a multi-functional team inside the business to figure it
out and take responsibility for making it work.
- Evaluate team members on the solution's success, not their
specialist input. This is where team building comes from,
not off-site seminars.
o WORLD CLASS COMPETITORS
- Focus on short term profits and on long-term competitive advantage
- Current advantages pay today's bills, but competitors usually
catch up.
- Leading companies think about how good they will have to be three
to five years out to keep their profit premium.
. How will we save our Customers even more money??
. How fast to market with new products will we have to be??
o WORLD CLASS COMPANIES
- Don't let Customers or Competitors set their goals.
- They don't survey Customers and ask "what more can we do for you?"
o WORLD CLASS COMPANIES
- Figure it out for themselves.
|
| 1300.13 | VISION, people create, customers buy | 2CRAZY::QUINN | | Mon Dec 10 1990 00:40 | 58 |
| Vision: Unusual foresight.
KO had it in 1957 and if what I read in 5th Generation Management by
Charles Savage (Corporate Consulting Group) is true he still has it.
But the company has become so political that the effective delivery of
that vision is clouded and different from organization to organization.
Charles writes about the human side of networking and the importance it
has on the future of industry. In it he discusses the transition from
Industrial Era to Knowledge Era. An era in which human interaction MUST
be considered for corporate survival.
As a kid growing up in New Hampshire I was fascinated by the growth of
Digital and by the apparent concern for the PEOPLE in the company. I
saw a company that was vibrant and alive with excitement. The vision at
that time seemed to be go and grow, involve your people, and keep them
interested in all aspects of the company. Then in 83, times got a
little tougher, the company got extremely political and the excitement
went away. WHAT HAPPENED ?? The shared vision of the employees began
to disentegrate and the organizational hierarchy took over. This
created more distinct lines and boxes for "effective" measurement and
blurred the ability of groups to interact effectively. Now, a corporate
vision is nice but when distributed through the ranks it gets twisted.
In the end each organization develops its own vision based on the
corporate example.
After reading 5th Generation Management and a slew of others I see a
need for a basic change. Fully involve the people by breaking down the
organizational barriers, get through the "Von Neumann bottleneck" so
aptly explained in the book. And best of all bring back the excitement.
Using Charlse's model we can build a Digital that far outstrips the
competition and provide an example to the world. If we continue to use
lines and boxes for ease of measurement and organization we will surely
see many tough years. I say this because lines have a definite beginning
and a definite end with a maximum of two connection points. Boxes give
people a place to hide or a line to point to another box. Currently, if
you stick your head up you'll probably get shot.
The 5th Generation model calls for an organizational structure that is
more circular in nature. I like this because there is no beginning and
no end to the line. It creates an organizational structure that is 360
degrees in synch with itself, with an infinite number of ways to
connect other circles. This model invites teamwork and cooperation
between organizations. Through the effective development of this type
of modeling we together can develop a truly effective vision for all of
us to understand.
The proper useage of this type of model will weigh heavily in the
ability to bring back the excitement. I believe that we are unique in
the ability to involve the employees as PEOPLE not as numbers in regard
to other industrialized nations. We must change the current structure
and show the world that we are NOT just a computer company but a
company that is as successful as the individuals that work here.
I'd stay at the HELM even if the BOW were buried in a trough.
Dave Quinn
|
| 1300.14 | Maybe .10 is a little too detailed 8^) | WORDY::JONG | Steve Jong/T and N Publications | Thu Dec 20 1990 20:01 | 4 |
| Anent .10: I'm heartened to see that the European vision and mission
statements can be summed up in only 583 lines.
Now if we can only inscribe it on buttons...
|
| 1300.15 | Corporate M&Os - the essential 10% | EUROPE::WADE | | Mon Dec 31 1990 11:45 | 59 |
| Ref .14. In case it helps, here is the naked Corporate
Mission & Objectives statement less all the explanatory
stuff ....
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D I G I T A L M I S S I O N & O B J E C T I V E S
TO BE RECOGNIZED AS THE BEST PROVIDER OF QUALITY INTEGRATED
INFORMATION SYSTEMS, NETWORKS AND SERVICES TO SUPPORT CUSTOMERS
WORLDWIDE
1. BECOME A PREFERRED PARTNER FOR ENTERPRISE-WIDE AND CROSS-ENTERPRISE
DISTRIBUTED INFORMATION SYSTEMS.
2. ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN A STRONG MARKET POSITION IN THE PUBLIC SECTOR.
3. BE A PREFERRED PARTNER TO THE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES.
4. BE A PREFERRED PARTNER TO THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SERVICE INDUSTRIES.
5. BE A PREFERRED PARTNER TO THE TELEPHONE SERVICE PROVIDER AND
TELECOMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES SUPPLIERS FOR DISTRIBUTED
APPLICATIONS.
6. ACTIVELY PARTICIPATE IN THE PUBLIC POLICY PROCESS AND COMPLY WITH ALL
GOVERNMENT REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO BE A MAJOR PARTICIPANT IN THE
GLOBAL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MARKET.
7. ENSURE THAT CORPORATE PRODUCTS INTENDED FOR WORLDWIDE MARKETS ARE
DESIGNED TO ADAPT EASILY TO ALL COUNTRY MARKETS AND THAT WE CAN PERFORM
THE ADAPTATION AND COMPLEMENTARY LOCAL PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT NECESSARY TO
MEET COUNTRY PLANS AND THE REQUIRED QUALITY STANDARDS.
8. STRENGTHEN OUR LEADERSHIP POSITION IN THE SUPPLY OF A FULL RANGE OF
QUALITY SERVICE PRODUCTS.
9. MEET OUR CUSTOMER'S NEEDS BY PROVIDING FULLY INTEGRATED SUPPORT FOR
SYSTEMS, APPLICATIONS, NETWORKS,AND SERVICE PRODUCTS.
10. MEET OUR OPERATIONAL OBJECTIVES WHILE INVESTING TO ACHIEVE OUR
LONG-TERM GOALS.
11. ENCOURAGE CLOSE COOPERATION, TEAMWORK AND INTERDEPENDENCE AMONG
INTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS WITH THE GOAL OF PRESENTING OURSELVES AS ONE
COMPANY TO THE OUTSIDE WORLD.
12. ENSURE THAT ALL EMPLOYEES ARE ABLE TO MAINTAIN DIGITAL'S COMMITMENT TO
QUALITY AND PRODUCTIVITY.
13. ENCOURAGE WIDE PARTICIPATION IN DECISION-MAKING PROCESSES AND
DISSEMINATE ALL RELEVANT INFORMATION TO THE APPROPRIATE GROUPS IN A
TIMELY FASHION.
14. ENSURE FULL DEVELOPMENT OF THE SKILLS OF EACH EMPLOYEE TO ENHANCE
CURRENT JOB PERFORMANCE AND EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION, AND TO ENABLE
EMPLOYEES TO SHARE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MATCHING THEIR CAPABILITIES WITH
CHANGING BUSINESS NEEDS.
15. MEASURE EACH EMPLOYEE ON THE SATISFACTION OF OUR CUSTOMERS AND ON THE
QUALITY OF SERVICE RENDERED TO OUR COLLEAGUES.
|
| 1300.16 | | ASABET::COHEN | | Wed Jan 02 1991 13:42 | 13 |
|
Fifteen?
Accepted communication theories agree that more than three
messages are confusing and ill-conceived. So, let's assume
there are three objectives, there should be three supporting
messages per objective (if that).
Bottom line: If you have too many objectives and too many
messages you have nothing.
|
| 1300.17 | Vision - thats a book! | ITASCA::BLACK | I always run out of time and space to finish .. | Wed Jan 02 1991 15:21 | 14 |
|
Shouldn't a vision be something with value to society or at least to
someone other than DEC and DECees?
I keep thinking of the soap company whose vision is to 'bring sanitation
to the third world' or something like that. I keep thinking that ours
should be something like 'to solve business problems' and you can add '...
through application of appropriate technologies and practices' if you
want. Our vision should not have to include lines like 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 7,8, 10 - 15 ... most of those should be implied and/or included in
a mission or as strategies etc.
|
| 1300.18 | | ALOSWS::KOZAKIEWICZ | Shoes for industry | Wed Jan 02 1991 18:42 | 23 |
| The following is printed on the back of every GE Plastics business card
and hangs framed in many GEP offices:
QUALITY POLICY
--------------
"We shall strive for excellence in all our endeavors.
We shall set our goals to achieve total customer
satisfaction and to deliver defect-free premium
value products on time, with service second to
none."
Signed
Glen Hiner
Senior Vice President and
Group Executive
GE Plastics
Pretty much tells everyone what they want to be. Short, sweet and to
the point.
Al
|
| 1300.19 | Deja who? | MIMS::PARISE_M | Southern, but no comfort | Tue May 12 1992 16:43 | 12 |
|
It's a peculiar feeling replying to a note string which has been
dormant for a while, but there is another attempt at a revision of
Digital's Vision circulating since the beginning of May. Has anyone
seen it. There was also a solicitation for input and comment.
From the draft I saw, it looks like very little of the message of
the previous replies entered here was heard. I did volunteer my
input. Has anyone else responded?
Mike
|
| 1300.20 | Care to summarize the latest "vision" ? | ZENDIA::SEKURSKI | | Tue May 12 1992 16:55 | 3 |
|
|
| 1300.21 | DRAFT - FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY | OFFPLS::GRAY | | Tue May 12 1992 17:53 | 103 |
| Following is a vision statement from Dallas Kirk, and comments are
welcome. Note that it is Version 6, April, 1992.
In reference to some comments, there is no vision statement if none is
perceived, but there are visions if one chooses to embrace (and
contribute to) those that exist.
Perhaps we are not lacking in visions, but lacking in believers....Dave
Subject: (I) DEC's Vision Statement (6th Version)
From: NAME: DALLAS KIRK
FUNC: CORP. PUBLIC RELATIONS
TEL: 223-4562 <KIRK.DALLAS AT A1 at CORA @ CORE>
Date: 25-Apr-1992
Posted-date: 25-Apr-1992
Precedence: 1
Subject: VISION STATEMENT--VERSION 6 2
To: [deleted]
CC: [deleted]
Many of you have commented on the earlier version of the Vision
Statement (January 31, 1992). We have rewritten that statement
from more of a marketing perspective. It is attached for your
review, comment and discussion.
Please send your comments, changes, or ideas for discussion
to me @CORE or CORMTS::KIRK.
Thanks and regards,
Dallas
/pa
Attachment
DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION
... applying the ingenuity
and commitment of our people.
We provide the innovation and expertise to enable people
to work together around the world.
Working in partnerships, we know our customers so well
we anticipate their needs.
Our markets are those which we understand thoroughly and
where we add significant value.
We are a team of individuals dedicated to learning and
contributing.
OBJECTIVE
Digital helps customers turn information into knowledge
and achievement of excellence. Everyone in small and
large enterprises alike can get the right information in
the most useful form, from wherever it is around the
world...quickly and easily.
STRATEGIC INTENT
We will grow profitably in targeted industries by
producing the world's best integrated business
solutions. We will focus on products that do the job
perfectly for the customer, so we can guarantee results.
We will lead in the services required to integrate
people, business, and technology.
We will achieve this by organizing the Company around
our core competencies, investing in the technologies and
people to implement our strategies.
Our business includes:
o full responsibility to plan, design, implement, and
manage customers' information systems;
o local and worldwide systems, networks, and
applications;
o standard systems and components that lead in
function, quality, and price;
o a full spectrum of service from consulting to spare
parts.
We are strategic partners with our customers and
suppliers.
VALUES
Our customers' success is our success. Every activity
adds value to the customer and profit to our business.
Our employees strive to contribute their creative powers
to all our stakeholders (our customers, investors,
suppliers, industry, neighbors, and each other). Their
success is our success.
DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION
...people come to us for results.
|
| 1300.22 | .21 unhidden | SCAACT::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow | Wed May 13 1992 16:27 | 3 |
| .21 has received permission from the author to post the vision statement.
Bob - Co-moderator DIGITAL
|
| 1300.23 | | CREATV::QUODLING | Ken, Me, and a cast of extras... | Wed May 13 1992 16:44 | 5 |
| A Mission statement that is up to version 6, and is subject to changes
every few months. Sounds like indecision, not mission, to me.
q
|
| 1300.24 | | MIMS::PARISE_M | Southern, but no comfort | Wed May 13 1992 20:58 | 12 |
| re: .21
I want to be a believer, but what I need is an interpreter.
It's difficult to sort through. It reads like an insurance policy.
What does core competencies and guaranteed results mean?
And what the heck is a stakeholder???
I know Digital wants to make money, but surely there's a less
circuitous way to state it.
Mike
|
| 1300.25 | With the sound of puking fading into the background | SMAUG::GARROD | Floating on a wooden DECk chair | Wed May 13 1992 21:52 | 13 |
| Re .21
YAWN.
Anybody have a vision statement from Microsoft or something to post
beside .21.
Talk about pure unadulterated fluff. Doesn't even mention ANY of our
core competencies. Doesn't mention software, doesn't mention anything.
Basically just says:
"we're great guys, we'll work well with us; trust us"
Dave
|
| 1300.26 | | ALOSWS::KOZAKIEWICZ | Shoes for industry | Thu May 14 1992 01:22 | 19 |
| re: -1
I still like the GE Plastics vision statement I posted in .18. I also
like Microsoft's 'Information at Your Fingertips' and Scott McNealy's
'One arrow, all the weight behind the point' (or whatever the hell is
is - at least I remember the basic message).
Digitals visionary messages have always tended to look like that thing
in .21 - obtuse, verbose and incomprehensible. The only thing that
ever came close was the 'One company, one architecture' message (in our
region where facilities was busy implementing a now-dead concept called
office of the future, the words 'one desk' were always appended to this
slogan).
It was bad enough when engineering ran the show. Now that they work
for marketing, God help us....
Al
|
| 1300.27 | I'd like to think SW is there too | IW::WARING | Simplicity sells | Thu May 14 1992 11:10 | 17 |
| "Information at your fingertips" is one take at Microsoft's strategy. MS here
have a slide that articulates their product strategy; it shows one shrink
wrapped box, with the word "Windows" above it.
As for Digital, the long term strategy seems to be:
- World Class Seminconductor Processors
- SI/FM
and the rest is designed to leverage one or the other.
Still, we've got the right guy in Strecker to articulate the true strategy as
seen from the top. The one time I heard him talk about Digital's Product
Strategy (it must have been '85/86), he did it in 30 mins and most people left
the room thinking that we wouldn't dare work for anyone else. Great to see
him back in his old role.
- Ian W.
|
| 1300.28 | | DCC::HAGARTY | Essen, Trinken und Shaggen... | Thu May 14 1992 12:10 | 3 |
| 1300.29 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Thu May 14 1992 13:21 | 5 |
| re .24:
> And what the heck is a stakeholder???
A vampire killer?
|
| 1300.30 | Pfui | STAR::FARNHAM | Life's a niche, and then you die. | Thu May 14 1992 17:00 | 7 |
|
re: .21
Useless.
Doesn't inform, doesn't inspire -- either internally or externally
(employees or customers).
|
| 1300.31 | | CHRCHL::GERMAIN | Improvise! Adapt! Overcome! | Thu May 14 1992 19:48 | 23 |
| Deming has a little story about this:
Seems there was this company that manufactured carburetors. They did
fine because all cars had carbs.
Then auto manufacturers started to put fuel injection in their autos
and the carb company started to feel the pinch. They did EVERYTHING
possible to stay alive: cut costs, built better carbs, layed people
off.
They closed their doors.
Problem was, they though of themselves as a carburetor manufacturer
instead of thinking of themselves as a company that builds devices
that puts a stoichiometric ratio of fuel and air into a cylinder.
If they would have enlarged the way they thought of themselves they
might have been looking for better ways to serve the client and might
have grasped the fuel injection invention.
So, what is Digital's mission in life?
Gregg
|
| 1300.32 | we have for sure blown the KISS principle | HEFTY::CHARBONND | Mediocrity _is_ achievable | Thu May 14 1992 20:01 | 11 |
| re.31 That reminds me of a basic management course I took a few
years back. They used the example of one company who distilled
their mission to the statement, "We coat things." That company
is Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing, or 3M, who, if you look
closely, do exactly that - coat things. Paper, tape, diskettes,
all coated by 3M. They excel at what they do, because they *know
what they do well and stick to it.*
Remember when DEC _was_ minicomputers? Remember when DEC _was_ VAX?
(Hell, remember when Apple _was_ PC's?) What is DEC today? In five
words or less, please.
|
| 1300.33 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Thu May 14 1992 20:15 | 5 |
| > all coated by 3M. They excel at what they do, because they *know
> what they do well and stick to it.*
^^^^^
Groan!
|
| 1300.34 | | FIGS::BANKS | This was | Thu May 14 1992 21:11 | 11 |
| I see two problems.
One is very nicely illustrated by .31: Unwillingness to try different
businesses.
The second, and related is an unwillingness to really go after a market until
someone else has already saturated it. (Or so it looks from where I sit.)
When you're playing "catch-up" in a market, which by your own rules is the part
that's shrinking, there are guarantees. It's just that none of them are very
positive.
|
| 1300.35 | It's Simple: DEC Empowers the User | BIGJOE::DMCLURE | When the going gets tough... | Thu May 14 1992 22:15 | 33 |
| Why can't we build on the legendary DEC mission of old,
which was to break through the fishbowl and bring the power
of the computer directly to the user?
The early days involved long lines of users all waiting
to feed their punchcards into card readers, only to wait yet
again for the computer operator in the fishbowl to retrieve
their job and deposit their paper print-out in the appropriate
slot in the wall. Heirarchical structures evolved to protect
the computer from the unwieldy users, and armies of datacenter
employees acted as defenders of the castle which contained
the untouchable computer. DEC changed all that with the mini-
computer, together with VT100 terminals & DECwriters, which
brought the power of the computer directly to the user.
Another evolutionary phase occurred when users began
to need faster ways of sending data from site to site. Once
again, DEC was there to provide state of the art networking
capability bringing compute power to the [remote] users as well.
To translate the same paradigm to today's problems, DEC
needs to focus once again on bringing the power of the computer
to the user to solve their problems. Users of today need the
power of computerized voice messaging systems. They need the
power of Desktop teleconferencing technology (so they can work
at home just as effectively as they can from an office). They
need compute power which is open and industry standard. They
need compute power without worrying about network viruses (i.e.
enhanced security products). Etc., etc. In short, users need
compute power in a form which, once again, solves their problems
and revolutionizes their lives. DEC empowers the user.
-davo
|
| 1300.36 | | JMPSRV::MICKOL | Winning with Xerox in '92 | Fri May 15 1992 06:19 | 47 |
| Here is Xerox' Vision Statement, what do all of you think of it?
XEROX 1992 DIRECTION
Putting It Together
1992 Priorities
# Customer Satisfaction
# Motivation and Satisfaction of Xerox Employees
# Market Share
# Return on Assets
1992 Direction
"As The Document Company, we will strengthen our
marketing initiatives to shape and lead the
Document Services industry and we will drive to be
the most productive company in the industry."
1992 Objectives
# Continue to improve customer satisfaction with a
focus on making our customers very satisfied.
# Improve our ability to deliver, in a timely
manner, products and services that fully meet
customer requirements.
# Enhance the motivation and satisfaction of Xerox
people by realising their energy and creativity -
using their knowledge to add value for our
customers.
# Increase market share and revenue growth by
growing our current customer base and pursuing new
business through coverage and market development.
# Find new ways to make every operation more
productive both to fund our future growth and to
grow shareholder value.
|
| 1300.37 | Apple and Sun do that - we're the enemy! | COUNT0::WELSH | Just for CICS | Fri May 15 1992 07:13 | 32 |
| re .35:
> Why can't we build on the legendary DEC mission of old,
> which was to break through the fishbowl and bring the power
> of the computer directly to the user?
Mainly because it's already been done by people who didn't get
blinded by their own importance. While we were making plans to
overtake IBM (and working as hard as we could to be even more
pompous, arrogant and bureaucratic than we *thought* they were)
some small furry mammals were promoting
- The Apple way of life
- The IBM Personal Computer
- The UNIX way of life, mainly as seen by Sun
Those are the groups that are "breaking through the fishbowl".
As for us at Digital, now we're IN the fishbowl. Can *you* get
access to DCL from your friendly IS-administered ALL-IN-1 cluster?
Would you, as an end-user, trust someone to "bring the power of
the computer directly to you", when that someone sells high,
doesn't advertise because they have all the decision-makers
in their pocket, and charges far more than street prices for
perfectly simple commodity products?
Oh, and don't forget that the computer whose power will be
brought directly to you has to be a VAX!
/Tom
|
| 1300.38 | Time is not on our side | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | Patrick Sweeney in New York | Fri May 15 1992 12:06 | 20 |
| As recent as 1990, the very idea of a vision statement provoked
laughter among Mr. Ken Olsen and Mr. Jack Smith (see 1300.4)
As long as the target of Digital's marketing is the enterprise and not
the individual, then Digital is going to be fundamentally different in
character from Apple, or companies aligned to Intel platform personal
computing.
As far as empowering personal computing, as the history of computing is
being written in the 1990's, Digital's role is written like a "has
been".
1970's: Digital leads in "timesharing" as the replacement for punch
card batch.
1980's: Digital leads in creating a compatible proprietary family of
32-bit computers.
It's 1992 and it's time to get a post-VAX vision implemented not just
passed through the process of consensus-building.
|
| 1300.39 | see the difference? | HEFTY::CHARBONND | Mediocrity _is_ achievable | Fri May 15 1992 13:16 | 12 |
| re.36 You've just given a prime example of an over-worded mission
statement.
> 1992 Direction
> "As The Document Company, we will strengthen our
> marketing initiatives to shape and lead the
> Document Services industry and we will drive to be
> the most productive company in the industry."
Eliminate the verbiag : "As The Document Company, we will lead
the Document Services industry."
|
| 1300.40 | | CHRCHL::GERMAIN | Improvise! Adapt! Overcome! | Fri May 15 1992 13:18 | 15 |
| "leading the document services industry" is hardly a mission statement
in my opinion.
a mission statement says what the company DOES, not what it's market
share goal is.
What is it that DEC DOES? Or what should it do?
Manufacture computers? too narrow
make computers and software? too unfocused............
What is it we want to DO?
Gregg
|
| 1300.41 | | MU::PORTER | disadvantaged networks | Fri May 15 1992 16:07 | 8 |
| > What is it we want to DO?
Produce damn good products that people want
to use.
Didn't seem very hard for me to figure that out. What do
the rest of you want to do?
|
| 1300.42 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Fri May 15 1992 16:50 | 1 |
| Yeah, but what *kind* of products?
|
| 1300.43 | | MAJORS::COCKBURN | Craig Cockburn | Fri May 15 1992 17:10 | 7 |
| > <<< Note 1300.42 by NOTIME::SACKS "Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085" >>>
>Yeah, but what *kind* of products?
See .41 "ones that people want to use"
Craig
|
| 1300.45 | | CHRCHL::GERMAIN | Improvise! Adapt! Overcome! | Fri May 15 1992 17:23 | 12 |
| So does that mean that .41 wants to produce good tractors?
good radios?
good dishwasher soap?
What?
Good WHAT?
a mission statement has to be a bit more specific than that. it has to
be a wider statement than carburetors...........
|
| 1300.46 | a different opinion | LGP30::FLEISCHER | without vision the people perish (381-0899 ZKO3-2/T63) | Fri May 15 1992 17:27 | 18 |
| re Note 1300.27 by IW::WARING:
> Still, we've got the right guy in Strecker to articulate the true strategy as
> seen from the top. The one time I heard him talk about Digital's Product
> Strategy (it must have been '85/86), he did it in 30 mins and most people left
> the room thinking that we wouldn't dare work for anyone else. Great to see
> him back in his old role.
I thought that Strecker was essentially in charge of the
product strategy, through the STF, for most of the past
decade. Didn't that strategy get us to where we are today?
When I've heard him speak, I always felt that while he had a
keen grasp of what Digital was doing and what he felt Digital
should do, that he had little or no comprehension of the
industry and market as a whole.
Bob
|
| 1300.47 | Digital's strategy wanders with the parables | IW::WARING | Simplicity sells | Fri May 15 1992 17:46 | 25 |
| Re: .43
Which would suggest that we're putting all our (software) eggs into the PC
arena. We're not, so that's obviously not our mission.
We've gone from a producer of low cost computing ('60s to mid '70s) to higher
cost computing (mid-'70's to today) and into "solving difficult computing
problems for customers" - read: Integrated Information Systems. Now, we're
focussing on the big-buck niches where people operate like a communist state,
which is IBM's traditional territory.
There are only so many 100-person development teams out there, let alone
customers who really wanting to spend time trying to make computers fit their
real business need. The trend is towards convenience, timeliness and
applicability at the "right" price.
While we're out there spending zillion$ trying to earn the big bucks, look
at the cottage industries that Borland, Microsoft et al revolve around. Quite
a heavy portion of them are hiding within the enterprises we know as our
"installed base".
We need firm direction from the very top and to conciously polarise to where
there is value we can provide - and execute it. To do anything else is a slow,
painful death.
- Ian W.
|
| 1300.48 | Not my understanding | SMAUG::GARROD | Floating on a wooden DECk chair | Sat May 16 1992 02:43 | 5 |
| Re .several
I thought Strecker got sent to Coventry in the latest birdcage bashing.
Dave
|
| 1300.49 | I know a good mission statement when I see one | SICVAX::SWEENEY | Patrick Sweeney in New York | Sun May 17 1992 02:33 | 7 |
| A mission statement should be the starting point for anyone in a
project, ie nearly every employee of Digital to ask "Does this project
contribute to the mission of the company?"
So just "be profitable" isn't good enough. "Make good computers and
the software and services that support them." is a good mission
statement for the 70's, but the wrong one for the 90's.
|
| 1300.50 | hire a speacilisits to do it? | STAR::ABBASI | i^(-i) = SQRT(exp(PI)) | Sun May 17 1992 02:45 | 6 |
| why dont we hire a vision statments consultant and let them help us
write one?
good idea, right?
/nasser
|
| 1300.51 | There is a vision, if you look for it | DWOMV2::CAMPBELL | Delaware Amigan | Sun May 17 1992 05:10 | 71 |
|
Maybe the vision wouldn't be very popular with some. It could
have a "One World" flavor to it.
Recently, I viewed a DVN and a video that both seemed to spell
out DEC's vision. The DVN was a practice pitch by a DECWorld
presenter from the imaging, etc group and the video was "The
Future of Computing". (or something close to that.
The video was done by someone from the UK, can get the name, etc.
Here's the picture:
Information technology history up to now...we are at the END of
the information age. The next is the knowledge age.
The educational and business worlds have done an admirable job
of tying themselves together, globally, to create the ability
to allow working teams to span geography. What has to happen
next is that we do this to society as a whole. That's why you
have a man in Congress fighting to have connectivity for all,
not just the technical elite.
The key is that up to now, we've made the user adapt his/her
work to how the system/application 'does it'. From here on,
we have to make the systems adapt to how the user 'does it'.
This will mean needed breakthroughs in imaging, high-speed &
cheap networks, input technologies, etc, etc. The goal?
To make the system allow the user to focus on what they are
doing and not how to make the system let him/her do it!
Applications, systems, and network technologies that allow a
user to access tasks, data, other people, without regard to
how "all that stuff" works. Up to now we've taught elementary
school kids how to program in Basic. We have to be able to
teach them how to think, create, and do so, while accessing amounts
of data that would boggle the mind, transparently.
Now think about our core competencies, our future open
product sets, and most of all, the relationships DEC has
made with various business and educational groups. Then
ask yourself what other computer company could be better
positioned to lead the industry into this future, with our
partners.
It may be that we don't have enough believers, but I've spent
a lot of my time looking for this vision and I guess by
entering this reply, I'm a believer. I don't think we've heard
this vision articulated through the ranks and we definitely
need to hear it!
DEC is in a wonderful postion now. If only we could have a real
evangelist at a VP (or higher) level that could travel the company
to bring the vision to us all. By the way, in this picture of
DEC's vision, the partnership with Microsoft would have to be
viewed as unavoidable. They have the rest of the pieces to complete
the package. Of course, from a purely business standpoint, we
only seek to penetrate each other's installed base/market. I
believe that's the short term goal that allows the building of the
long term vision. Even NASA can't do anything these days that
doesn't look like it will make lots of buks.
I'll see if I can get a part number or whatever the the video, if
anyone is interested.
Dennis,
Digital Services
Account Representative
(according to my new business cards, guess I'm not an engineer
anymore)
|
| 1300.52 | Good strategy, but we're still hiding behind the sscenes | IW::WARING | Simplicity sells | Sun May 17 1992 19:50 | 12 |
| While Digital are well placed on the "large backend integration" facilities
of today, i'd suggest that (collectively) Apple, Nintendo and General Magic
Inc are thousands of miles ahead on the client side.
What's the mean time to create a database on a DEC engine and "publish" it
to electronic subscribers everywhere? In the world of the future, quite a
few "clients" will be able to double as servers too.
Bring on a democratised, "all the world are clients", consumer electronics
version of Lotus Notes. Add Quicktime as a CDA datatype, and go retire on
the royalties while the low cost producers slug it out...
- Ian W.
|
| 1300.53 | the tip of the iceberg | SHIRE::GOLDBLATT | The Spectator | Mon May 18 1992 06:25 | 13 |
| A vision statement is only the starting point for directing a company's
activities. Sure, if there is one and everyone aligns his own
activities according to whether they support or not the vision, there
will be a kind of synergy that may lead the company as a whole in the
right direction. But only MAY.
All the processes, policies, procedures and metrics of a company must
be coherently aligned with the vision in order that the vision really
works as the company's leader. A vision statement without the
suuporting "implementation" work is only a facade. I think that we
have enough facades in Digital. We don't need another.
David
|
| 1300.54 | For under $30 | 4GL::DICKSON | | Mon May 18 1992 13:04 | 5 |
| No need to hire a consultant. Everything you need to know about coming
up with corporate visions, missions, and objectives can be found in the
book "Selling the Dream" by Guy Kawasaki. One chapter of that book.
The rest of the book is about how to make your vision into reality after you
have decided on what it is.
|
| 1300.55 | get real | TOOK::SCHUCHARD | Lights on, but nobody home | Mon May 18 1992 13:24 | 9 |
|
re:.49 - nice idea Pat, but when the bosses vision does not line up
with the (your view) of the company vision, the kicks to the head are
frequent and hurtful. There was a time when I preached that "if you
know you are right, damn certain you are right, fight the battle!"
I would NEVER say that again....not in this company!
bob
|
| 1300.56 | | COOKIE::WITHERS | Bob Withers - In search of a quiet moment | Mon May 18 1992 16:26 | 12 |
| I saw David Stone articulate the kernel of a vision statement when he spoke of
the "Information Utility." Like other "utilities", gas, electric, phone, and
meta-utilities such as oil-delivery, television, and so on, the world is moving
to have an information utility service.
I believe that we have tyhe talent and products to integrate DEC's offerings
with the aim of providing the "information utility." Like every other utility,
the prime mission is uninterrupted, reliable delivery of of the product to the
customer, backed up by sales, customer service, repair, and so on.
Thoughts?
BobW
|
| 1300.57 | | CHRCHL::GERMAIN | Improvise! Adapt! Overcome! | Mon May 18 1992 16:29 | 6 |
| Mine would be:
The mission of Digital Equipment Corporation is the capture,
processing, and distribution of information.
Gregg
|
| 1300.58 | With occasional breaks for mail and usenet | ERLANG::HERBISON | B.J. | Mon May 18 1992 17:41 | 7 |
| > The mission of Digital Equipment Corporation is the capture,
> processing, and distribution of information.
I like this description--it allows me to spend all day in notes
and still be directly contributing to the success of Digital!
B.J.
|
| 1300.59 | one way to tell | SALSA::MOELLER | snarling NETcrank | Mon May 18 1992 17:53 | 3 |
| Truth is SHORTER than fiction
karl
|
| 1300.60 | | CHEFS::HEELAN | Cordoba, lejana y sola | Mon May 18 1992 21:55 | 5 |
| My vote is for:
"Integration-anything, anywhere, anytime"
John
|
| 1300.61 | How does "Info Utility" differ from MULTICS? | MAY21::PSMITH | Peter H. Smith,MLO5-5/E71,223-4663,ESB | Tue May 19 1992 02:05 | 22 |
| Re: back a few
Stone cut his teeth on MULTICS. How does his current vision of an
information utility differ from the MULTICS vision of a data
processing utility? Can anyone recommend a good book which covers
MULTICs and whatever happened with it?
By the way, there's a Stone video tape floating around which gives
his impressions of what will and won't make money over the next
few years, problems he sees with our current software process and
career paths, where we should be heading in the software arena, and
what needs to change at Digital.
I got to see it today; it has content similar to earlier presentations
he has made, and covers a lot of ground. If you haven't seen his talk
about the "domain process", where the margins are going, how much we
need in volume in order to break even on an OS in the 90's, etc. you
should check out this tape. I think he has a lot of good ideas, and
a good chance of making them happen. I'll probably be even more
enthusiastic when I've had time to think about what he said, and see
some of it starting to happen...
|
| 1300.62 | Boeing's vision statement | WHELIN::CASHMAN | | Wed May 20 1992 13:38 | 19 |
| FWIW, here is an example of a REAL vision -- short, to the point,
comprehensible by ANYONE, gripping, and realizable:
"The Boeing policy is to so develop airplane design and
construction that today's spectacular feat of bravery
will become tomorrow's accepted mode of transportation --
inexpensive, dependable, safe!"
This first appeared in "Aero Digest" magazine in December 1927 --
seven months after Lindbergh's "spectacular feat of bravery."
Any and all vision statements I've seen from Digital or any of its
constituents (including, mea culpa, some I've had a hand in
composing) are stiff, lifeless, uninspiring, and prolix in comparison
with this little gem. I don't know if Boeing's vision statement has
changed in 65 years, but the fact is that this could *still* serve
as their vision.
-- Paul
|
| 1300.63 | | ACESMK::CHELSEA | Mostly harmless. | Wed May 20 1992 15:17 | 9 |
| It looks like a mission statement is either what you do ("we connect
all the dots in your organization") or how you want to change the world
("any information you need, when you need it, how you need it").
There's an excellent book on teamwork (so excellent that I haven't
gotten it back) which talks about the one distinguishing facet of
successful teams: a clear, measurable, empowering goal. The Boeing
goal in .62 is empowering, in that it's inspirational. Classic example
of a good goal is "To put a man on the moon by the end of the decade."
|
| 1300.64 | ...and return him... | SAUTER::SAUTER | John Sauter | Wed May 20 1992 16:41 | 6 |
| re: .63
Actually, it was ``...put a man on the moon by the end of the decade,
and return him safely to earth.'' Yes, that was an inspirational
goal.
John Sauter
|
| 1300.65 | a good mission statement | WHELIN::CASHMAN | | Wed May 20 1992 16:44 | 6 |
| A good mission statement I once read was that given by President
Franklin D. Roosevelt to the general who had just been named head of
the US Army's Logistics Command in 1942: "Find out what the Army needs,
and get it."
-- Paul
|
| 1300.66 | | MAJORS::ALFORD | Shipwrecked and comatose... | Wed May 27 1992 13:00 | 20 |
|
A vision in 5 words or less ?
Digital is a Solutions Provider.
A customer has a problem, we provide the solution to that problem, what the
nature of problem is, shouldn't make any difference to this company, it
shouldn't make any difference what means are required to provide the solution,
even if that means providing third-party hardware/software/services; we should
be acting as a broker. This is where the money is today and this is what
customers of the 90's want.
Many groups already do this. Digital is no longer a "Manufacturer", we moved
beyond this years ago. To try to stay in this limited niche will kill the
company.
|
| 1300.67 | | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | Patrick Sweeney in New York | Wed May 27 1992 15:13 | 11 |
| This is classic "begging the question".
You've just shift the question from "What is Digital's vision?" to
"What is a solution?"
And it's obviously false, the corporation has committed itself to
compete with Intel, IBM, Sun, etc. in the design and manufacture of
RISC microprocessors.
Designers and manufacturers of RISC microprocessors do not describe
themselves as "solutions providers".
|
| 1300.68 | my 2 cents on the solution prvider vision | STAR::ABBASI | i^(-i) = SQRT(exp(PI)) | Wed May 27 1992 17:19 | 9 |
| the "Solution provider" is just a fluff, a politically correct term,
but have little substance , every one in the world tells you that
they provide "solutions", but the truth is that no one can provide
all "solutions", not even DEC.
so we better go back and figure some vision that is more concrete and
has more real words associated to it that normal people can understand.
/nasser
|
| 1300.69 | | MU::PORTER | disadvantaged networks | Wed May 27 1992 19:36 | 6 |
| Omigod. I just found myself in agreement with both Pat Sweeney
and Nasser Abbasi.
"Solutions provider" is completely devoid of meaning.
Hey, we could even pee in bottles, sell 'em, and use
the same vision statement.
|
| 1300.70 | Some 'solutions' we can't provide | ROYALT::KOVNER | Everything you know is wrong! | Wed May 27 1992 19:45 | 17 |
| I agree that 'solution provider' is too vague. Perhaps 'provider of solutions
to information processing problems' would be better, but I still don't like it.
'solution provider' implies that we can provide:
solution to the customer who has a problem shipping widgets from one factory
to another.
solution to the customer who has a problem with the IRS because he hasn't paid
taxes for the last 10 years.
or similar problems.
For that matter, we would not be the company to provide a solution
of acetic acid.
No, 'solution provider' is so vague as to be useless.
|
| 1300.71 | Information: When, Where, How | LANDO::RAYMOND | | Wed May 27 1992 20:36 | 5 |
| Vision statement:
"Information: WHEN you want it, WHERE you want it, HOW you want it"
Ric
|
| 1300.72 | | COOKIE::WITHERS | Bob Withers - In search of a quiet moment | Wed May 27 1992 20:44 | 10 |
| I absolutely hate it. Solution provider is DECspeak at its worst. A solution
is what you have when you solve an equation for unknown values. Are you saying
our market is unknown? That our customers don't know what they want?
Alternaltely, you get a solution when you put a solute in a solvent and it
desolves. I can buy my daughter's caugh medicine in tablet form or in
solution. If the later, I have to make sure I shake it well before dispensing.
Then again, given DEC's financials, maybe we can hope something preciptates out.
BobW
|
| 1300.73 | How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? | HELIX::KALLIS | Pumpkins ... Nature's greatest gift. | Wed May 27 1992 21:01 | 29 |
| Representative Adam Clayton Powell once was asked, "What is the first duty of
a Congressman?"
He replied, "To get elected."
IMHO, stumbling asll over ourselves to define "Digital's vision," is, at this
juncture, a bit ... um ... autostimulatory. That is, it might even feel good
without producing much.
Rather than concentrating on the sloganeering, what's important is to look at
strategy and tactics.
Strategy: the company wants to survive and, as appropriate, evolve.
Tactics: find ways to increase sales.
find ways to increase market awareness.
find ways to convince potential customers to purchase and stick with
Digital's products.
To do all (or most) of the above means doing more than talking to ourselves.
It also means a more streamlined, less cumbersome way to respond to customer
wants and needs, and means of becoming more competitive.
Easy solutions? If I had 'em, I wouldn't be joining into this discussion. I'm
doing what I can to sensitize the people I'm in contact with about sales and
marketing opportunities. If we can do this company-wide, it will help.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 1300.74 | | WLDBIL::KILGORE | ...57 channels, and nothin' on... | Wed May 27 1992 21:15 | 3 |
|
.71 is headed in the right ddirection.
|
| 1300.75 | I think Steve (.73) has it right too ! | COMICS::BELL | Hear the softly spoken magic spell | Thu May 28 1992 09:22 | 78 |
|
While I dislike warm fuzzy statements, the fact is that a "vision" of this
nature is a prime example of a warm fuzzy statement ! It CANNOT be too
specific or else it doesn't apply to a large part of this [large, diverse]
company. It CANNOT be anything other than DECspeak because nobody in their
right minds uses a "vision statement" to live, it is just a single line of
blah that can apply to all employees to give some form of cohesion.
I'm not the author of .66 so the following responses are just from _my_
interpretation. It just happens that I agree with the paragraph that
followed the five word slogan in that reply that everyone has latched
onto.
Re .72 (Bob)
> A solution is what you have when you solve an equation for unknown values.
Correct.
> Are you saying our market is unknown?
Nearly.
> That our customers don't know what they want ?
No - simply that DIGITAL doesn't always know what they want. We have to
*listen* to them to find out the unknowns, then *think* about the problem,
then propose a solution (or a choice of solutions) rather than just
waving a price book saying "Pick one or I'll walk away". Over-simplified ?
I agree but the essence is there - we cannot keep assuming that Digital
has "all the answers that are worth knowing". We need to be flexible.
Re .70
> I agree that 'solution provider' is too vague. Perhaps 'provider of solutions
> to information processing problems' would be better, but I still don't like it
So that cuts us out of the growing facilities management market. Shame, the
reports I've read show that it's doing quite nicely in the UK.
> 'solution provider' implies that we can provide :
> solution to the customer who has a problem shipping widgets from one
> factory to another.
> solution to the customer who has a problem with the IRS because he hasn't
> paid taxes for the last 10 years.
> For that matter, we would not be the company to provide a solution
> of acetic acid.
Right stick, wrong end. We don't *manufacture* the acetic acid ourselves
but we can *provide* it to #3. We don't have the accountants that #2 needs
but we should be able to locate them and connect client to end-user. We
are not in the transport business but we use it enough that we are able to
make recommendations for different needs.
Re .69 (Dave)
> Hey, we could even pee in bottles, sell 'em, and use
> the same vision statement.
If that's what the customer wants, sell it ! Charge 'em for the beer and
recycle the bottle. Hey, even *I* could become a solutions provider :-)
Re .71 (Ric)
> "Information: WHEN you want it, WHERE you want it, HOW you want it"
Unfortunately you omitted "WHAT you want" ... which, ironically, makes it
particularly suitable for Digital at times ... we are good at the "where",
improving on the "when", starting to discover that "how" is important but
are permanently in catch-up mode on "what" - but that's a different topic
really. The above is every bit as warm, fuzzy and PC as the "solutions
provider" one, just looking at a different angle, one that cuts out the
market outside of IT. If you make it sufficiently detailed to avoid the
"vague" tag then you have missed the target of a "short & simple" slogan.
Again, the above is just my view.
Frank
|
| 1300.76 | its not critical | SGOUTL::BELDIN_R | All's well that ends | Thu May 28 1992 12:34 | 13 |
| Some companies have failed for lack of a general vision statement,
others for lack of specific focus. No vision statement is a cureall,
it is only a tool to help you organize for the immediate challenge.
Railroads failed because they didn't realize that their competition was
in automobiles and electronic communication.
Many people attribute our losses to attempts to be everything to
everyone.
Timing is of the essence.
Dick
|
| 1300.77 | | MYCRFT::PARODI | John H. Parodi | Thu May 28 1992 12:51 | 30 |
|
"Solution Provider" isn't so bad. It's not as vague as "Do The Right
Thing" -- and I spent at least ten years (just as happy as a clam, too)
with that as the company's guiding light to actual success.
The point of "solutions" is that the vast majority of customers part
with cash _only_ in order to solve a business problem. The problem
arises when we try to think of our 45,000-part price book as the place
where solutions are found.
No one can be expected to: a) hold down a sales job and b) understand
all the technology represented by those 45,000 parts. And an approach
of: "Here, Mr. Customer, let's look through this price book for the
solution to your business problem and I'll have it delivered." -- well,
that just isn't going to hack it.
We need to focus on ways to take our off-the-shelf technologies and
assemble (or tailor or customize) them to solve a particular business
need for a particular customer. If that solution can be re-worked and
re-sold to other customers who have that same problem, so much the better.
So people with technical expertise are the lifeblood of this company.
They are the ones who can take what we have and deliver it in a form
that results in a happy customer. But they must be empowered to do
that, and measured on it. And they must have a greater role in
determining what goes _on_ the shelf so that that right components
are available for assembly into solutions.
JP
|
| 1300.78 | Boomlay, boomlay, boom... | WHO301::BOWERS | Dave Bowers @WHO | Thu May 28 1992 13:03 | 10 |
| If "solution provider" were a new slogan, I'd have fewer problems with it.
Unfortunately, we've been blathering on about "selling solutions" for as long
as I've been with the company and we haven't come anywhere near understanding
what it means.
I don't see how continuing to beat a very old, worn drum will turn anything
around.
\dave
|
| 1300.79 | S&T and Goals | DYPSS1::COGHILL | Steve Coghill, Luke 14:28 | Thu May 28 1992 15:01 | 22 |
| 1300.80 | Goal - let's create the most fun | BIGJOE::DMCLURE | New World Odor | Thu May 28 1992 16:19 | 70 |
| re: .79,
> S&T cannot stand alone. Just as Strategy is to Goal as Tactics is to
> strategy. Tactics implement the strategy. Strategy addresses the
> Goal. You cannot have a strategy apart from a goal. A vision
> statement should describe the corporation's goal in more well defined
> terms other than be the best, make money, etc. Goals are more along
> the lines of win the war.
Good point! Profiting and surviving as a business is akin
to surviving the battles in a war, but in itself says nothing
about actually winning the war.
Of course, even a goal of "winning the war" is somewhat
short-sighted, as all wars eventually end. Now that the world
is supposedly "beyond war", the goals of what to do after the
[cold] war becomes yet another question. In this extremely war-
focussed culture, we find ourselves clueless as to what to do next.
With no external wars to fight, we create internal wars (war on
drugs, war on crime, war on poverty, etc.). The goal is always
that of controlling some perceived enemy. The same war culture
translates itself to the business world in tactics and strategy
which are designed to defeat the competition and capture (i.e.
control) market share.
I'll admit to being just as guilty of using war metaphores
as anyone else (ok, so I'm brainwashed too). What if we all
took a step back from the war metaphores for a second however
and asked ourselves what it is that really drives a purchasing
decision. Look at the popular computers for example, what is it
about them that makes them so appealing to customers? Is it the
fact that they are winning market share? People are definitely
influenced to buy the standard items for fear of becoming obsolete,
but what is it that distinguishes the standard products from one
another?
I claim that the more popular computers and computer software
are those which are the most *fun* to use! Look at almost any
popular desktop computer (Suns, NeXts, Macs, IBM PCs, etc.) -
the key thing you notice is that they come fully equipped with
all sorts of toys! They typically have some sort of funky
graphic image backdrop and/or animated screen saver package
displayed at all times, they typically come loaded with a sound
package which includes all sorts of silly noises (toilets flushing,
dogs barking, etc., etc.), and the really good systems also come
with some neat windowing games and applications to get people
excited about the product.
Maybe Ken Olsen is right - maybe Unix, multi-media, video
conferencing, and all the new technologies are just toys. But
what if toys are among the most profitable products of the future?
Now that war weaponry and all the associated war making computer
products are becoming less important, isn't it time we began
refocussing on the "beyond war" marketplace?
I remain convinced that as serious as people appear to
be, they are always at least secretly amused by toys. After
all, everyone was once a child who at least dreamed of playing
with toys, so there is a certain amount of playfullness in each
and every customer. I think DEC can succeed by capitalizing
on this hidden playfullness. I think we should master the art
of high-tech toymaking.
Now that the world has won all the wars, it is time to play.
In this vein, perhaps our vision should involve the goal of
making computing fun and/or making fun computers and products.
I say we set about to create some profitable, serious products
which are more *fun* to use than any other!
-davo
|
| 1300.81 | | SUBURB::THOMASH | The Devon Dumpling | Fri May 29 1992 15:40 | 14 |
|
> Railroads failed because they didn't realize that their competition was
> in automobiles and electronic communication.
Failed? when we're thinking of privatising them?.........it looks more
like they are getting better and going from strength to strength, whilst
the cars get jammed in our ever-conjested road system.
> Timing is of the essence.
and so is flexability - it's not the same for everyone, or everywhere
Heather
|
| 1300.82 | | CVG::THOMPSON | Radical Centralist | Fri May 29 1992 16:33 | 9 |
| > Failed? when we're thinking of privatising them?.........it looks more
> like they are getting better and going from strength to strength, whilst
> the cars get jammed in our ever-conjested road system.
And Americans get accused of US centric thinking. :-) Railroads appear
to be doing far better in your part of the world then they are in the
US.
Alfred
|
| 1300.83 | 50 million people can't be wrong | DECWET::MCBRIDE | It may not be the easy way... | Fri May 29 1992 19:06 | 4 |
| re: .80
What company has the largest installed base of computers in the world?
Nintendo!
|
| 1300.84 | "computing should be fun" | LGP30::FLEISCHER | without vision the people perish (381-0899 ZKO3-2/T63) | Fri May 29 1992 19:10 | 16 |
| re Note 1300.80 by BIGJOE::DMCLURE:
> Maybe Ken Olsen is right - maybe Unix, multi-media, video
> conferencing, and all the new technologies are just toys. But
> what if toys are among the most profitable products of the future?
> Now that war weaponry and all the associated war making computer
> products are becoming less important, isn't it time we began
> refocussing on the "beyond war" marketplace?
Ken is famous for saying -- about 6-7 years ago -- that
computing should be fun. If only he and DEC had followed the
wisdom of this statement we would possibly be in the
forefront in at least some of the coming revolutions, rather
than defending the past.
Bob
|
| 1300.85 | NEWTON mean $$$ | RT95::HU | | Sat May 30 1992 05:04 | 10 |
|
I heard information from APPLE's vision instead of DEC's.
It's called NEWTON, and claimed to be greatest innovation since
Micontosh was introduced on 1984.
Let's wait and see how it can wrap the market. John Scully seems
transform himself from marketeer into technologiest.
Michael...
|
| 1300.86 | is this what NETWON is? or ami on the left field? | STAR::ABBASI | i^(-i) = SQRT(exp(PI)) | Sat May 30 1992 05:32 | 9 |
| ref .-1
what is NEWTON? was it the hand helpd computer the APPLE came up with a
day or two ago? there was something on CNN tonite about somthing like
that, i think they said it was APPLE who introduced it, it is pen
based, cost less than $1000
/Nasser
|
| 1300.87 | | ASICS::LESLIE | If I wanted visions, I'd take LSD | Sat May 30 1992 10:21 | 8 |
| I coined my p_n yesterday in response to yet ANOTHER vision statement
on my desk.
Personally I'm damn sick of visions, paradigms and the like.
Can I get on with the work now please?
/a
|
| 1300.88 | if the statment is real, it could be usefull, else it is a waste | STAR::ABBASI | i^(-i) = SQRT(exp(PI)) | Sat May 30 1992 21:56 | 17 |
| ref .-1
i guess the idea of having a *real* vision statement, is to give a general
guidelines of the direction the troops are supposed to be heading
for.
some need to know that, some might not, and they'll just follow those
at the front who are supposedly know their way.
i think too that not just DEC should have a vision statement, but each
department should have its own too, and each group should have its own
too, heck (..opps , sorry iam getting excited) , i think every person
should have their own personal vision statement figured out too !
.. now if i just remember where i wrote my last one...
/nasser
|
| 1300.89 | The Teamwork Company | PIPPER::DOANE | | Tue Jun 02 1992 03:10 | 93 |
| I think a worthwhile vision warms the blood a little, fires the
imagination with what life's about. Making a contribution in other
peoples' lives. Making a difference on the planet. That's fun.
To make that kind of difference seems to require two things:
1 A need nobody is meeting, that is worthy and widespread
2 Technical and managerial means to meet the need.
And others in previous notes have eloquently shown the challenge of
making it broad enough for all or nearly all of who we are and aspire
to be, while making it narrow enough to align us reasonably well.
I see a gaping hole in the entire computer industry: it's all focused
on one person at a time. Sure, we network those one persons. But
networked Lone Rangers are not the same thing as a Posse.
We can talk about Concurrent Engineering but I don't see how anyone can
do it without spending a lot of time with diverse team members in
meetings. And in those meetings, each person having one keyboard or
pen-based whatsit will absolutely not get the job done. Big long
meetings, as most of my fellow DECies don't need me to remind you,
don't work--at least, not the way they've been designed in the past.
The generating principle behind the tools quaintly labeled "TQM" is
that they allow for a new kind of meeting design: one that has
everyone *see* what they are talking about. And at present, computer
technology contributes nothing to this kind of meeting. With our
present networked-Lone-Ranger style of thinking about "information",
you get to use felt-tipped pens whenever there is a meeting. In really
modern situations, you get to use 3" X 5" yellow sticky-backs. But
the hardware and sofware and user-interface technology to support more
than a 15 minute meeting-on-the-wall does not seem to exist, anywhere
on the surface of the earth. The most wall-size pixels I've ever heard
of is 6 million, in a super-expensive display at the Media Lab. The
usual overhead-projector-modulator doesn't far exceed 1 million. Any
well educated Team can use up 10 million pixels just making a simple
cause-effect diagram. If they meet for several days (building a QFD
matrix for example) 30 million or even 100 million pixels will be
created. And just having your own private copy for each Lone Ranger to
consult at their private desk won't hack it, a few years from now.
Customers who are learning TQM methods (I call it Managing-By-Eye) will
still be using giant whiteboards and felt-tip pens maybe? I doubt it.
So if Xerox wants to be the Document company, I say let 'em have that.
I'd like to work on being the Teamwork company. The company that
supports Lone Rangers, sure, and networks the heck out of them. And,
the company that can support them while they're a Posse too, not just
when they are alone.
Our customers all have teamwork problems. Some of them are
international, so the teamwork has to be international. Some customers
team with their suppliers, so the teamwork has to be inter-company.
But the key thing that shows up missing for me: they need to support
teams when and as they work *as* teams, not just after they have made
the team work on the whiteboard and they need documents on their desk.
Teamwork is kind of vague, I suppose. But what I call "optical
management" is a little less vague I think. It begins with the "7
Basic Tools" and the "7 New Tools for Management", all of them optical
methods. Necessary, for any team that has to grapple with complexity
and get it handled right up-front, without a lot of straw-horses and
reviews and revisons (scrap and rework, you see...)
What if computer technology could support optical teamwork someday?
Could actually *participate* in Concurrent Engineering rather than just
collect the "information" and pass it around afterwards?
What if "war room" displays (I hate the metaphor, but it communicates)
were cheap, available, and really did the job in every room we now call
a "conference room" which is today nearly devoid of any technology?
What if when we need an around-the-wall kind of meeting, the walls
assisted us in problemsolving instead of just sitting there passively?
Would we be less prone to sit around a table and talk and argue
ineffectualy if it was really easy to not only draw diagrams but also
edit them, annotate them, develop them, store and recall them full
size, and send them for full-size sharing with the other half of the
team in another part of the world?
Would the Arabs and the Israeli's reach accord faster? Would the north
and Irish? Would the Yugoslavs (well, I guess I'm getting a little
carried away here....) But the ear hears conflict where the eye sees
possibilities.
Can any others see it like that?
Russ
|
| 1300.90 | | WMOIS::RAINVILLE | A clear and pleasant danger! | Tue Jun 02 1992 03:23 | 3 |
| Yes, i see it too it's radical, but it could work.
Now, where can we find an organization that can both use it and
bring it to market? One where teamwork superseded egos? mwr
|
| 1300.91 | I like it! | VAULT::CRAMER | | Tue Jun 02 1992 13:21 | 14 |
| .89 might be on to something here.
Imagine design meetings for anything from a chip to a business architecture where
the design tools ( Super CASE ) are part of the room itself! Input devices
could exist at every seat, or be hand held at the board/wall, or both. There is
a power and focus when one person is standing in the front of the room that is
lost if everyone is chained to and concentrating on a device on the desk.
Individual seats could support "scratch pads" where the notes to could be moved
to the wall if/when necessary. The possibilities seem endless
So...okay.... let's do it!
Alan
|
| 1300.92 | Telework | 4GL::DICKSON | | Tue Jun 02 1992 13:26 | 9 |
| Doesn't play to our strengths.
But allow the meeting to be taking place in several places at once,
with our technology tying those places and people together so they
work just as effectively as if they had travelled to be together;
now there is a place for DEC to make a contribution.
And also supply the development tools to make it easy for others to develop
applications of the same nature.
|
| 1300.93 | You play, we'll watch. | MIMS::PARISE_M | Southern, but no comfort | Tue Jun 02 1992 22:13 | 17 |
| Back around .19 I mentioned a memo for input for a vision statement.
I suppose not many either saw or replied to it. What caught me
about the memo was that the company's vision was not firmly in place
before embarking on a new architecture and technology such as Alpha.
But how could it be that a multi-billion dollar corporation wouldn't
have a clear vision of what it had to do well in advance of Alpha.
It seems to me, with all the reductions going around, that Digital's
vision has already been focused on a little street in lower Manhattan.
The goal of this vision is profit. The vision, if you will, is to be
the "Intel" of the nineties. We make the super chip and the rest of
the world can "play around" with the vagaries of a fickle marketplace.
DIGITAL - Watching you play.
/Mike
|
| 1300.94 | | INDUCE::SHERMAN | ECADSR::Sherman DTN 223-3326 | Wed Jun 03 1992 17:24 | 15 |
| How about:
"DIGITAL makes it work."
The problem that industry seems to me to have now is that there are lots of
"standard" applications out there, but getting them to work as promised
can be another story. To quote Mike Jittlov (not sure if he's the
first with this) as he complained about his small computer system and
it's problems with doing "simple" things, "Why doesn't it just ... work?"
I wonder how many of our customers are asking the same question about
their "standard" configurations and are willing to pay someone serious
money to make it all work.
Steve
|
| 1300.95 | what was the "super chip" of 1981? | LGP30::FLEISCHER | without vision the people perish (381-0899 ZKO3-2/T63) | Wed Jun 03 1992 18:44 | 13 |
| re Note 1300.93 by MIMS::PARISE_M:
> The goal of this vision is profit. The vision, if you will, is to be
> the "Intel" of the nineties. We make the super chip and the rest of
> the world can "play around" with the vagaries of a fickle marketplace.
Of course, this is nothing like the route that took Intel to
its present position. The 8088 was hardly a "super chip" --
just adequate. The use of their chip by a little
three-letter company determined to make its product dominant
is what dragged Intel along.
Bob
|
| 1300.96 | Or maybe... | GIAMEM::MUMFORD | Dick Mumford, DTN 244-7809 | Wed Jun 03 1992 18:49 | 1 |
| "DIGITAL - More than just a watch!"
|
| 1300.97 | | ASICS::LESLIE | Andy Leslie | Wed Jun 03 1992 21:02 | 1 |
| DIGITAL - just watch us.
|
| 1300.98 | | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | Patrick Sweeney in New York | Wed Jun 03 1992 22:29 | 3 |
| An advertising tag line is not a vision.
DIGITAL. THE OPEN ADVANTAGE.
|
| 1300.99 | | HELIX::KALLIS | Pumpkins ... Nature's greatest gift. | Thu Jun 04 1992 12:58 | 8 |
| Re "What is Digital's vision?":
Myopic.
IMHO, a "vision statement" won't help solve Digital's current problems; teamwork
and a more streamlined bureacucacy would.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
| 1300.100 | legally blind..... | NECSC::ROODY | | Thu Jun 04 1992 16:20 | 9 |
| Re "What is Digital's vision?":
20/20000 in hindsight.
20/infinity in foresight.
???
{Sorry, I'm having an attack of attitude today}
|
| 1300.101 | It's My Ball... | CGOOA::DTHOMPSON | Don, of Don's ACT | Thu Jun 04 1992 19:16 | 6 |
| ...PARK!
... and if you don't play my way, you'll all have to go home!!!
are initials really necessary??
|
| 1300.102 | | HEFTY::CHARBONND | I hate to say it, but, Clinton | Fri Jun 05 1992 20:13 | 9 |
| re.99 The vision statement helps teamwork by ensuring that the
team is all playing the same game toward the same goal. Streamlining
a bureaucracy is easier if you have a clear and simple statement
of what the bureaucracy is _for_. Look at all the reorganizations
done, not towards achieving the ultimate goal, but for the mere sake
of reorganizing. What is the net effect? Zero.
A vision statement is the goal towards which _every_ action is
directed.
|
| 1300.103 | Jack Schofield's views on Digital | COUNT0::WELSH | Just for CICS | Mon Jun 08 1992 08:04 | 97 |
| Transcribed from the June edition of "Digital Today" (Digital
Europe's internal newspaper), the following article by Jack
Schofield, computer editor of "The Guardian", reveals an informed
outsider's view of this issue. Schofield is not by any means a
Digital fan, and is turned on to open systems and PCs. However,
in his articles for "Digital Today" he usually tries hard to
be constructive, and so I think this article deserves serious
attention as the opinion of an unbiased industry watcher. The
article runs about 90 lines.
/Tom
HOW JFK PUT A MAN ON THE MOON - AND WHY DIGITAL CAN PROFIT FROM IT
==================================================================
Last month the Wall Street Journal published a long article about
Digital, raising questions about future directions. It began with
an interesting revelation: that last spring, Ken Olsen "met in
secret" with Aplle's chief executive, John Sculley, "at Mr Sculley's
request".
Note that I say "interesting", not "surprising". With so many
customers using Macintoshes linked to VAX servers, with both firms'
support, it would only have been surprising had they *not* talked
before Apple got into bed with its arch-enemy. What shocked me was
the comment buried near the end of the article: "Mr Olsen dismissed
the talks with Apple. "It just never came to fruition. It wasn't
that important to me".
There is only one universe where the failure of the talks wouldn't
matter: one where Digital was a minicomputer company propagating
the VAX. That was, indeed, the winning strategy of the 1980s,
which took Digital from being a $2.3 bn minnow with problems to
a $13 bn giant.
But I thought all that had changed. I thought we'd all agreed that
the 1990s was a new decade, with new requirements. A world of Unix,
open systems networks, and client/server computing.
Indeed, Digital seems to have prepared for this new world. It has
put some beef behind Unix. It has made VMS "open" by building in the
Posix interface, and incorporated OSI communications into DECnet.
It has produced one of the best client/server strategies in the
industry with NAS, opening the door to a large systems integration
business. It has recognised the importance of Risc by announcing
the pace-setting Alpha processor, and of microcomputers by starting
to build its own PCs.
All this is laudable. But if this is what the company is doing,
shouldn't it be what the company is saying?
Journalists make fun of Japanese companies for their "mission
statements". Sharp, for example, dedicates itself to "Sincerity
and Creativity". But mission statements are a good way of motivating
large numbers of people to pursue a common goal.
The classic example was JFK's statement that America would put a
man on the moon by the end of the decade. He said nothing about who
would do it, or how, or what it would cost, or even whether the
man was to be brought back to earth. Details, mere details.
What Kennedy said contributed nothing of practical value. But
as a mission statement it was vital. America would never have
put a man on the moon without it.
Obviously, computer companies don't work to such simplistic
slogans, but Digital ought to be able to devise something suitable.
I'd suggest: "Digital is dedicated to becomeing the world's
leading supplier of open, client/server computing systems".
This would, I believe, have strong support from Digital employees
and from the majority of customers.
If Ken Olsen could say it and mean it, such a slogan would clear
away all the confusion that some people think they see in Digital's
approach.
If you look at today's successful computer companies, they have
clear and simple strategies, even if these are not summed up in
a mission statement. Dell sells direct and keeps cutting prices,
to offer the best possible service at the lowest cost. Novell aims
to be the leading LAN supplier and the glue in multivendor networks.
Sun has focused on client/server networks. Microsoft's message is
Windows, Windows, Windows.
Sun's boss Scott McNealy expressed the idea nicely when he talked
of "putting all the wood behind one arrowhead". Digital is, of course,
considerably larger than Dell, Sun and similar firms. It sells a
wider range of equipment in a wider range of markets.
But the company did extremely well when it put all the wood behind
the VAX arrowhead, and I don't see why it shouldn't do just as well
out of open, client/server networks.
But if Digital doesn't have such a strategy, and doesn't have a leader
that believes in such a strategy, then it is never going to convince
the customers, no matter how good its products are.
|
| 1300.104 | | SDSVAX::SWEENEY | Patrick Sweeney in New York | Mon Jun 08 1992 11:43 | 16 |
| Schofield is wrong on many points.
The meeting with Apple was a failure because Digital did not see itself
in need of a partner in the same way that Apple saw that Apple needed a
partner. It wasn't a personal whim of Ken Olsen. An alliance with
Apple in 1991 would have undermined that Open Advantage message which
is practically the only clear post-VAX message we have.
JFK's statement regarding sending a man to the moon, included "...and
safely returning him to Earth" in the initial message to Congress and
the people.
The point with which I agree with Schofield is that Digital needs a
statement of strategy that's accessible to all employees that is
convincing and inspirational on how Digital will be restored to
profitability and grow.
|
| 1300.105 | | NOTIME::SACKS | Gerald Sacks ZKO2-3/N30 DTN:381-2085 | Tue Jun 09 1992 19:41 | 9 |
| I could swear that Scott Adams, whose comic strip Dilbert appears in the
Boston Globe, works for DEC. Here's today's strip:
Boss: What the department needs is a slogan to inspire us. Our new slogan
is "We are quality."
Glassy-eyed worker: Suddenly I feel like working long hours for no extra pay.
Boss, obviously pleased: It's working!
|
| 1300.106 | re -.1 | LARVAE::SELBY_M | | Tue Jun 09 1992 21:55 | 4 |
| Please send me a copy of the strip you mention. My mailstop is Mark
Selby @UCG
Regards
|