Conference 7.286::digital

I can't help thinking that there could be a relationship between what you
observe and what Zereski said about the "5" rating.  Perhaps these people
are the ones that he believes should be 4's and 5's?

jb

    Sometimes I feel like some of you haven't been paying attention to me
    all these years.  Good grief, of course Ken Olsen knows more about the
    products, the product strategy, etc.  He cares.
    
    Ken Olsen cares about the products.  He cares about the customers.
    He cares about computing and he cares about people involved in
    computing.
    
    Managers at Digital, for the most part, cared a few years ago about
    getting a big raise and promotions.  Today, they care about having a
    job.
    
    Managers at Digital worry about the bureaucratic/political aspects of
    being in the "minicomputer" business, a shrinking business in a 125,000
    person company where there's plenty of room to evade customers and
    accountability.                                                   
    
    An individual contributor accountable to one customer or to the
    achievement of one discrete task has far more in common with Ken Olsen
    than the ranks of management.  They are impervious to inspiration.

    From a middle manager:
    
    I started reading this notes file just recently; doing so has turned
    out to be an exercise in humility.  It's good for me to experience some
    management bashing.  Thank you for my lesson.

    For the most part I've listened quietly, but .2 motivates a reply.

    >   Good grief, of course Ken Olsen knows more about the
    >   products, the product strategy, etc.  He cares.

    Yes.  That's part of what makes him terrific, and part of what made
    Gordon Bell terrific.  In 1980 I had worked for Digital for 2 years,
    was a Software Engineer II, and Gordon appeared in my office twice to
    discuss details of a software performance question.  This has always
    seemed like an example that it's OK to care about some of the
    details of the products even if you're in management.

    Obviously it's futile to try to know EVERY detail, and attempts to do
    so would risk making employees feel like the boss is looking over their
    shoulders.  But I allow myself some healthy amount of detail attention
    because I care about my group and my group's products, and hope that my
    employees will understand that I care.  As Tom Peters suggests, a
    business succeeds when it is obvious that the leaders love their
    customers and love their products.

    > Managers at Digital, for the most part, cared a few years ago about
    > getting a big raise and promotions.  Today, they care about having a
    > job.

    Sure, I'm human, and care about whether I still have a job.  But I
    honestly believe I care more about my whole group having a job and all
    of Digital having a job and our customers having products that they get
    real value from and that they are happy with it.  If the layoff comes
    to me - so be it.  I'm ready to learn something new, including the Zen
    of Flipping Hamburgers if need be.  But in the meantime I'll work my
    tail off to make my group the best it can be, our products the best
    they can be, and our customers as happy as they can be.  Maybe that
    will be a small contribution to helping Digital stay in business.

    > An individual contributor accountable to one customer or to the
    > achievement of one discrete task has far more in common with Ken Olsen
    > than the ranks of management.  They are impervious to inspiration.

    Yes, be accountable to one customer.  It makes things much less
    abstract.  And, managers can do that too!  When thinking about one of
    my products which goes to 20,000 customers, it seems that I can't hold
    in my mind some abstract image of 20,000.  Instead, there are specific
    images of the last 2 or 3 sets of PEOPLE from specific customer visits.

    There are *many* other managers around who also care about their
    products, who care about all of Digital having jobs (not just their
    own), who care about specific customers.  
    
    	/john
    
    PS. The management bashing has value, don't stop.  But perhaps
        you might consider sometimes shouting a little less loudly?

    >                 <<< Note 1403.3 by ADTSHR::HENNING >>>
    >                       -< Managers can care too >-

    >Yes, be accountable to one customer.  It makes things much less
    >abstract.  And, managers can do that too!  When thinking about one of
    >my products which goes to 20,000 customers, it seems that I can't hold
    >in my mind some abstract image of 20,000.  Instead, there are specific
    >images of the last 2 or 3 sets of PEOPLE from specific customer visits.

    Working at the CSC you never see customers, just speak to them all day!
    
    A good lesson I learnt is when on the phone to a customer, imagin ethey
    aren't on the phone, but sitting across from you.
    
    Perhaps if more folks kept this in mind when discussing whatever
    (schedule, new feature, cust letter, anything!), then we'd bring more
    focus what we do? Next time your about to stand up in a meeting, and
    suggest something, think what the last customer you met would think of
    your idea, and whether it would help that customer? 
    
    Simon

    Hi John,
    
    There is no doubt in my mind that there are mid/upper level managers
    who care.  The problem is that he impression which is given (as I said
    not by all, but by many) is that they are all show and no go.  This
    amay or may not be true as I don't know all the managers.  I do know
    some who are worth their weight in gold but many more who aren't worth
    their in spit.  One thing I am fairly (99.9%) sure about is that there
    are way too many of them.  Nothing personal to anyone, but the problem
    needs to be addressed.
    
    Peace,
    
    Mike 

    
    Will all of you who ever had to face an employee and communicate the
    message (as nicely or abruptly as you desire) "Your job here will end
    as of ..." please step forward.
    
    If you've never done it, try to imagine it.
    
    This person has worked for you perhaps for several years.  As a person,
    they have some likeable and some not-so-likeable traits.  As an
    employee, the reason for loss of job we say is that s/he "doesn't care
    about our products?"
    
    Can you imagine yourself in that position?
    
    I would like all of the "worker-bees" to remember that when a manager
    is "let go", there is another manager doing it.  That higher level
    manager must be convinced that the company will win more than it will
    lose by his/her action.  
    
    We talk too callously about "purging middle management", in my opinion.  
    
    If you think that the managers who are required to select people for
    downsizing are insensitive to what they are doing, guess again.  Some
    of them have been taking Maalox for their ulcers and stress ever since
    the first downsizing effort.  
    
    Nobody deserves to be dehumanized as we have often done here.
    
    

    re: .6
    
    I regret the dehumanizing that goes on, both here and in casual
    conversations.  I'm responsible for some of it, when I lash out at
    an organization that seems to be hindering me rather than helping
    me do my job, as their charter indicates.
    
    However, some of the dehumanizing is the fault of the managers
    themselves.  A while ago I asked my Engineering Manager (two steps
    above me in the management chain) how Long Range Plans (a euphemism
    for the budget) gets translated into funding.  He didn't know, because
    he doesn't have visibility up that far.  All he knows is that he
    submits an LRP, and some time later he is told what his budget is.
    
    When you don't even know the names of the people who are approving
    or disapproving your plans, it's hard not to dehumanize.  I'm glad
    I don't have his job.  In fact, I think I'm tempermentally unsuited
    for it.
        John Sauter

    re: .7
    
    John,
    
    I to am tempermentally unsuited for my managers job. And I think I have
    a very good manager who works #$$@#@ hard for his people. I have been
    in management before (different company - managed 42 people) and I know
    I wouldn't want my managers job.
    
    However, I will NEVER quite lobbying for change where it can help us 
    all.
    
    Rgds,
    
    Gene.

    Perhaps our problem is not simply that we have to many employees, but
    that we have too many who are doing the wrong things, and if we moved
    them into more productive positions we would be better off.
    
    This applies to managers too.  If we decide we do not need as many as
    we have now, we give them the option of taking a non-management job.
    Just like if we decide we do not need as many, say, CPU engineers, we
    give them the option of doing something like training FS people.

I attended Net U. the week KO spoke. The talk was wonderful.
I think we got into trouble when we dismantled the DNT (District Network Teams)
across the country. We seemed to take for granted that our network technology
is the best...
IMHO, I think when you win the network, you win the account.... I see CPUs as
network peripherals... ;-)
--Ginger
  District Network Team, Great Lakes