| Title: | The Digital way of working |
| Moderator: | QUARK::LIONEL ON |
| Created: | Fri Feb 14 1986 |
| Last Modified: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
| Number of topics: | 5321 |
| Total number of notes: | 139771 |
I heard today that there's a 75% chance that the "pooled" Sales Support
resources (those not assigned to specific accounts) at our location
would be given the package. If this happens, we'll lose almost all of
our technical expertise in Networks, All-in-1, Imaging, PC Integration,
and a couple of oth areas.
The inmates are really in charge of the asylum if this is allowed to
happen.
And the spiral continues......
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1617.1 | Wouldn't surprise me | SCAACT::RESENDE | Digital is not thriving on chaos. | Mon Sep 30 1991 00:48 | 28 |
>Note 1617.0 <More Insanity in the name of NMS> > I heard today that there's a 75% chance that the "pooled" Sales Support > resources (those not assigned to specific accounts) at our location > would be given the package. If this happens, we'll lose almost all of > our technical expertise in Networks, All-in-1, Imaging, PC Integration, > and a couple of oth areas. Well, this could very well be true, given the NMS and AST focus on direct accountability back to accounts. It's clear that the writing appears on the wall for the DCCs, and they fit that bill. Whether the "technical resource centers" will also fall to this trend isn't clear yet ... at least to those local here that belong to the TRCs. What is sad is that this change (ASTs and NMS) is likely a good thing. But it is being done without adequate supporting information to base solid staffing decisions on. There are not yet adequate admin tracking systems in place in the field to track accurately and capture effort in given accounts to base staffing levels on ... apologies to SBS/BARTS/FACTS et. al. Bottom line is that the sales support staffing in accounts is being done by SWAG. *If* the company had the ability to do so, it should declare a 1 FY moratoriam on sales support RIF, build the account teams, track and make the necessary adjustments, and once real information was available, then decisions could be made on some rational basis. Perhaps that is a luxury the company can not afford. However, I can not help but wonder if the company can afford to lose the technical sales support people it is under the current approach. Steve | |||||
| 1617.2 | OK Here | SUBWAY::DILLARD | Mon Sep 30 1991 12:08 | 13 | |
As the manager of a local 'resource unit' I can state that my group has
not been disproportionately impacted by recent events. My group is
funded by the accounts we support.
Re. .1 - I agree that there is not a good baseline of knowledge of
actual support used though I can't fault the systems but rather the
reporting into the systems. Under NMS the decision makers on the mix
of sales to support are the account managers. From my interaction with
account managers most seem to feel that they have enough data to make
the decision on sales/support staffing within the constraints they
face. Wether they're right or not....
Peter Dillard
| |||||
| 1617.3 | Doesn't Surprise Me Either | HAAG::HAAG | Mon Sep 30 1991 15:40 | 11 | |
Would not suprise me either. We have 9 sales support people left for a
district office. I'm betting that some will go in the next RIF in Oct.
We haven't got nearly enough support people to take care of the
installed base let alone pursue many new business opporutnities. This
almost fanatical approach to short term profitability is killing us.
Re. -1
Amen brother. Amen.
Gene.
| |||||