Conference 7.286::digital

    I strongly agree that we are paralyzed by fear.  We own that and
    therefore we can solve that problem.  It is difficult, though, since we
    have become spoiled by the benefits a large corporation can provide. 
    We do lose a certain edge and maybe that's why we are afraid;  we've
    numbed our ability to cope.  After all, if we thought of the prospect
    of a layoff as improving our circumstances - getting a raise, or
    whatever - then none of us would be worried by the prospect.  

    Peter Block (The Empowered Manager) says it eloquently when he notes
    that final responsibility for fulfillment on the job rests on the
    individual.  So let's get on with it.  We cannot look to our corporate
    parent to solve our problems.  We have much more control over our
    individual circumstances than we admit to ourselves.

    
    yes, DEC *is* getting on with it. 
     
    today in the VMS partners meeting here in Nashua, many learned that 
    DEC has now the fastest microproessor chip in the world (Alpha EV4), 
    at 5 nanoseconds cycle time, that gives 200 MHZ, a corp consulting 
    Engineer (soory i cant recall his name) , one of the designers, stood up,
    and took out from his pocket the chip and said to everyone, this is the 
    fastest microprocessor in the world, and DEC build it. 
    every one stood up and applauded with pride.
    
    now, if we can also improve the quality of some of our software as
    well, we'll beat anyone out there. iam sure.
    
    i really believe the answer is simple.
    
    deliver the highest quality software on the best hardware. simple.
    
    we seem to have the second part in control, we'll have to work more on the
    first part, it seems.
    
    now the hard question, is how to do that ? what do we need to change
    at the software side to also produce the best software in the world ,
    in the shortest time possible. 
    
    every thing else to above seems to me to be secondary. 
    
    there was an article today i got in e-mail that talks about the high 
    software quality in Japan, and that some software companies out there 
    have reached 6 sigma. (  1 customer reported defect per 100,000 lines of 
    code ?)
    it also said that they spend only 10-15 percent of the software cost
    on maintinance, while in the US the cost is 50% !
    
    ok, i better go back to debugging...i'll find this bug one day..
    
    /Nasser
    

  
  Re -.1
  
  Thanks for the good news (but not sure if this is the right forum to
  say so ? WTH, thanks anyway)
  
  > there was an article today i got in e-mail that talks about the high    
  > software quality in Japan, and that some software companies out there   
  > have reached 6 sigma. (  1 customer reported defect per 100,000 lines of
  > code ?)                                                                 
  
  Although I tend to be a vocal critic of the [lack of] quality for certain
  software products, to be fair, when you consider the quantity of code that
  this company ships, we do pretty well in the scoring for *number* of defects.
  Unfortunately, we tend to make each one count ...
  
  If the bugs were only affecting an obscure part of the product that only
  a few customers hit and they were fixed quickly and competently, I doubt
  that anyone would dispute that Digital produced very high quality software.
  When the bugs hit the majority of users, can result in severe disruption
  of work and take forever to even get a workaround, then we lose the
  reputation for quality products and we end up where we are today, sliding
  slowly but surely down the scale from the "Trusted primary vendor" to the
  "Hackem & Bodge graduate school" who just ship code out without testing it.
  
  >  it also said that they spend only 10-15 percent of the software cost
  >  on maintinance, while in the US the cost is 50% !                   
  
  I'd also question how much of that 50% actually goes on software maintenance
  rather than administration and "ancilliary functions". [ Thinking here of
  the lack of support engineers in many areas which impacts critical customer
  problems - a vicious spiral as the remaining ones pick up more problems,
  more pressure, which burns them out quicker, which leaves fewer people
  to carry on, etc.. ]
  
  Frank

    re .0  Very inspiring.
    
    I am glad you're feeling "safe" where you are.
    I do not, and I know folks a few levels up from me do not either.
    
    Paranoia in my dictionary is characterized as a "well-rationalized 
    delusion of persecution"
    
    Fact, not delusion is...
    -1.1B restructuring charge :== a lot of dead bodies.
    -Digital Review no less, quoted 20K to 25K when it's all said and done.
    
    REAL FEAR can only be dispelled by FAITH.  
    
    I know that we can't expect a job for life, but at the other
    extreme, we don't want to feel like we're going to be shot in
    the head either.  Somewhere in the middle is faith to me.
    
    Blowing sunshine where the sun never shines ain't gonna do it.
    
    Mark
    

        
     re: 6
      
        Funny you should mention Xerox, Unisys (Old Sperry Corp) and Wang.
    I worked at all three until things went bad. (no! I'm not jinxed)
    
        Xerox was a great job, until they lost their copier patent around
    1975 or so. That same year they shut down their big MFG site in Irvine
    and let everybody go. The competition was killing them, their quality
    was poor.
       
        Unisys (Sperry)- Their mini business in Irvine lasted about 4
    years. They couldn't compete with others, mostly Dec. They spent
    millions in improved mfg and systems improvement. It was too late.The
    shut down there German mfg plant and ours too. Everybody was let go.
    
       Wang - I saw the handwriting on the wall, left 1 year before they
    started going down the tubes. Went to Dec.
    
         I see the same symtoms, but on a larger scale since Dec is a large
    company. Been here 8 years, plan to tough it out if they let me. The
    changes must move faster. You would be amazed how fast a company can
    bottom out. My friend at Unisys said they been having continous
    lay-offs for 3 years, it's a way of life there. Sad.
    
         I don't see paralysis, just some worried people. Especially in
    today's lousy job market.
    
       Dave
    

    .2's comments and obvious excitement about some whiz-bang new chip
    typify what is wrong with this corporation.  The Inmates (engineers)
    are still in charge.
    
    Our customers don't give a good healthy damn about the latest hot
    product.  They want our sales folk to understand their business....
    they are looking for us to be partners....and most of all they
    want real solutions to their business problems/needs.  The attitude
    in .2 is 180 degrees out from that.
    
    Also, PULEEEEEEZE, get the damned lay-offs over with so we can  all
    get back to work.

    
    Re: -1
    
    Amen, Amen, Amen.
    
    In the words of Darth Vader:
    
    "Don't be too impressed with this technological marvel you've 
     created.  The ability to destroy a planet (or crunch numbers for
     matter! -Ed) is insignificant compared to the power of the Force."
     (Sales Force?)
    
    -Ed
    

    ref .7,.8
    
    having the fastest microprocessor in the world is not mutually
    exclusive to having the best sales force in the world. 
    i cant see how it could .
    
    so what is your point?
    
    /Nasser                   

    >>   they are looking for us to be partners....and most of all they
    >>   want real solutions to their business problems/needs.
    
    > Please explain what the above _really_ means.
    
    People buy from people.  I'll admit that UNIX has made price/performance
    a bigger issue these days, but people still bought Sun machines when
    we had faster boxes than they did.  The reason was because customers
    see Sun as more "open" and committed to helping them.  Chip Pierpoint
    does a hysterical Scott McNealy imitation where he really tugs on a
    customer's heartstrings.  This pitch can be made to VPs and Engineers
    alike.
    
    I sense major salesrep hatred here.  You must admit that many decisions
    are made for "religious" reasons.  It is not as simple as who has the
    fastest box this week. 
    
    From a purely technical and rational standpoint, we should be kicking
    Sun's butt.  One could say the same thing for any number of our competitors.
    The reason we fail is that many DEC reps are outdated.  Few understand
    the climate.  I'd say that compensation might be a part of it because
    many good reps would rather have a few extra bucks in their pockets
    than go on a trip with a bunch of people they work with (Circle of 
    Excellence etc.)  
    
    Fortunately, the job market is pretty lousy these days and many good 
    reps are staying at DEC.  If the economy gets better, you could expect
    some problems.  As a sales support person, I find myself having to do
    some of the selling for the less savvy reps.  What do I do?  Acknowledge
    that HP might have a faster box TODAY, but suggest that the benefits
    of working with a company like DEC far outweigh the headaches you could
    get from someone smaller like Sun (no service force) or HP (less systems
    integration experience) or whatever.
    
    In summary, you must change the focus of the discussion from one of
    mips/dollar to one of "ok, now you have the machine, now what?"  
    Hey, they may not buy a DEC machine, but we can still sell them
    service or consulting right?  These are higher margin sales anyway.
    
    my $.02
    
    -Ed
    

    
    Re: .10
    
    I'm happy to know that we have the fastest micro in the world, but
    that is not the key to success.  Incedentally, Megahertz don't 
    mean that much to customers.  They would rather hear about Dhrystones,
    Whetstones, Specmarks etc.
    
    My point is that we may not have the fastest CPU next week.  Any 
    sale based on mips/dollar is clearly one driven by product.  This is
    a dangerous position to be in given the rate of change in technology.
    
    We need to sell Digital as a company.  Make customers feel good about
    buying from us.  This requires sales and marketing skill.  Most engineers
    don't have these skills.
    
    -Ed
    

    It wasn't my intention to express a dislike for sales.  Rather, I was
    hoping to stimulate someone to probe a bit deeper than the oft-repeated
    slogans.  From where I sit (EIS Consultant) terms like "partnership"
    and "solutions to real business problems" sound so fuzzy as to appear
    content free.  Especially when compared to "200 megaherz".

    IMHO, to succeed we need to understand what the fuzzy terms mean in
    real-world terms AND how that relates to things like "200 megaherz".
    
    
    -dave

    
    Dave,
    
    Did my reply help?  As an EIS consultant, *YOU* are precisely what 
    differentiates Digital from the "Hot Box" vendors.  Your knowledge
    of the "gotchas" involved in successfully deploying an application
    are critical to DEC's success. 
    
    Those of us in the field are the most important link in the chain
    right now (no offense to anyone in Engineering).  We must deal with
    whatever inadequacies (sp?) exist in the product line and minimize
    their importance.  It's not an easy job, I know!
    
    So, stress our commitment to *REAL* open standards (ACE, OSF etc)
    and capitalize on those non-hardware problems that we all know exist.
    Promptly return all customer phone calls.  Ask questions about what
    they are doing with our products and our competitors'.  Then brainstorm
    for some things Digital can do to fix them.
    
    Finally,  REPORT ALL YOU DISCOVER TO THE SALES REP!!!!!  if he or she
    is competent, you'll help them succeed and win yourself major recognition.
    
    -Ed
    

    I think you've raised an excellent point.  We talk solutions, but who
    amongst us really knows what that looks like in terms of customer
    business needs.  Also, how can a sales rep who has never worked in,
    say, the insurance industry, sell a solution to a problem s/he doesn't
    have the backgorund to understand?  Perhaps we need to articulate the
    specific solutions we can provide, or have provided, so that we can
    then turn around and look for opportunities to sell similar solutions
    elsewhere.
    
    I've heard the statement "sell solutions" for years, and neither I, nor
    when I was in the field, my reps could ever get a concrete answer as to
    what a solution looked like.
    
    Can someone help here?  

    
    Re: -1
    
    Don't want to dominate the discussion here, but I'd say a good place to 
    start is Industry Marketing.  We are forever beefing about what a lousy
    job Marketing does.  If it is a big enough sale, it should be possible 
    for a marketing person to help or pay a call or refer the rep to someone
    who knows the industry.  The second source would be Channels where I 
    work.  There are many software vendors and DEC resellers who focus on
    particular types of customers.  One of the nicest things about being
    here in Channels is that my customers are *VERY* diverse.  
    
    -Ed
    

    I've worked with EDS for for 4 years, and what they do there is to *learn*
    what the customer is doing, on daily basis, they sell what is called
    facility managment, which is more involved than just selling a software
    program, basically the idea is to be *part* of the customer team, for
    a while at leat, untill you learn *how* they do business, learn their
    process, etc.. and go from there.
    i knoiw that is not what DEC is in, but may be something along these 
    lines can be used to help up give the *right* solution to the customer.
    
    personnaly, when GM bought EDS, EDS shipped me to work inside a GM
    plant for one year, so that i learn about how cars are built (i.e. customer
    business), later on that was usefull for me when i was writing
    industrial applications for GM plants. i had an an idea about customer
    business.
    
    /Nasser
    

    
    Nasser's right.  This is precisely what solution selling is all about.
    Naturally sales reps can't do this because they are charged with 
    selling the solutions to the problems we discover.  
    
    Incedentally, I highly recommend the "Introduction to PSS Policies 
    and Procedures" course that gets offered now and then.  Sometimes
    you can even sell consulting to identify what is needed to address
    a customer problem.  It helps, of course, to have someone who has
    has experience in a specific industry.  
    
    Suggestion:
    
    How about a notes file for DEC EIS people or marketing people where 
    contacts can be made scanning for keywords based on industry experience?
    
    -Ed_who_seems_to_be_getting_out_of_a_rut!
    
    

    I liked Nasser's account of what happens at EDS.  It makes great sense. 
    Since it is unrealistic for a sales rep to do this, that might be how
    EIS consultants should be positioned.  Marketing never seemed to know
    the kinds of specifics we were looking for, although that may have
    changed.
    
    This also suggests that the bulk of our sales will still be of the
    hardware/software variety and that we do a disservice to our sales
    force when we don't attempt to articulate clearly what solution selling
    is and is not.  Nasser's account provides a rep with a direction - look
    for key opportunities where I can place an EIS consultant, learn the
    customer's business, and then define a solution.  Sounds like team
    selling to me.  And it has great possibilities.
    
    Is that the model we are currently advocating these days?  Do sales
    reps know this?

    
    >Is that the model we are currently advocating these days?  Do sales
    >reps know this?
    
    Maybe.  I know there has been a lot of emphasis on selling services
    and selling through Channels.  I'd say a good sales rep already knows
    how to do this.  Many are scared to work with other parties both
    inside and outside of Digital.  One clear fault some sales people have
    is a desire to have too much control.  
    
    I know that there are many Digital sales reps who like to find sales
    that are going through Channels and "unbundle" sales so that customers
    place their hardware orders with Digital instead of a reseller or 
    distributor.  KO threatened these folks with termination in the last
    DVN he did.  
    
    Working with a non-DEC consultant/reseller has been made much less painful
    recently because a DEC salesrep will still get credit for deals that are
    sold through Channels.  There are still "control manics" around though.
    
    It really helps to have a non-DEC person involved in the sale because it 
    is a great way to get specialized expertise and impartial opinions.
    
    -Ed
    

    
    
       I find it amazing how everyone wants to blame sales reps. for every-
    thing. People perform based on how they're measured/goaled. In this
    company sales people are looked at on a monthly, quarterly and yearly
    basis. It's very difficult, unless you cover one large account, to
    understand a customers business when you may have 25 customers, or
    more, and everything (your job, your salary review, your promotion)
    is based on how many $$$s you bring in.
       I've spent almost 8 of my 10+ years with DEC in the field as both
    an EIS and sales support consultant. What I see is a real lack of
    marketing. Prime example of this was when I.B.M. announced the AS/400
    series. All the advertisements on T.V. in different magazines, trade
    rags, talking about their "one operating system accross one
    archticture." Our long time customers thought this was funny, but there
    were a lot of people out there that thought this was a radical new con-
    cept in the computer industry.
       I'm sure everyone has heard the line about sushi?
       "If DEC sold sushi, we'd market it as dead raw fish!"
       We've got good/great products, a long term stratigy, the best
    services in the industry, we just need to get the word out in a more
    then one way. Currently that way is through word of mouth by the field.
    But with our huge range of products and services, nobody can know
    everything about all of it. 
       As far as SUN goes, SUN is where DEC was 15 years ago. They have a
    limited product set in a niche market with a small (relitively
    speaking) installed base. They sell their "hotboxes" to engineers who
    want the "screaming boxes" on their desks. Take the desktop and change
    it to department, and you've got us in the mid to late 70s.
       I believe in this company and in it's people. I'm just as frustrated
    as the next guy, but I agree with a lot of what has been said in this
    note, "Let's get these lay-offs over with and let's get back to
    focusing on the jobs we have to do to get DEC back into shape!"
    
    
                                       Phil... 

    I'd like to add some comments her.  We at Digital have vast resources. 
    We have people who (I would venture to guess) come from vast
    backgrounds and we are not taking advantage of it.  Before I came to
    DEC I worked (and recieved a degree in) the horticultural industry. 
    This has little to do with computers, but I ended up here at DEC.  I
    could be used in selling to this industry.  I guarantee that there are
    thousands of others who have diverse backgrounds which we are not
    taking advantage of.  
    
    DIGITAL NEEDS TO BE SHAKEN UP-SHAKEN UP SO SA IT WILL USE ALL OF IT"S
    RESOURCES IN THE OPTIMUM FASHION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    
    You know what makes me sick?  It's when I ask someone why our internal
    gear is so antiquated.  The reply I most receive is, "The cobbler's son
    is always the last one to get new shoes."  This bother's the heck out
    of me because our "old shoes" are making it real hard to do business
    wiht us, and our customers are going elsewhere.
    
    
    Mike

    I've attacked this problem head-on:
    
    We're not the "cobbler's son" but rather the cobbler's sales person.
    When we don't have shoes, or have shoes that are worn out or out of
    style, then what impact does that have?  Do you buy your good shoes
    from someone wearing old sneakers.

    I hear you pPat, I had one of my customers here (at our facility) and
    they looked at a VT220 that someone was using and said "we gave all of
    them away quite a while ago.".
    
    Mike

    "Partnerships"
    -------------
    
    
    Business partnerships normally mean sharing risks and benefits.
    
    
    Here are a couple of benchmarks that I have tried over the years
    with Digital and customers, both of whom wanted "Partnerships".
    
    
    	"OK (customer/Digital)... how about the customer not
         paying outright for the kit/support, but give us x%
         of the profits or savings generated by this customer
         project.... Hmmm ?"
    
    
    	"OK (customer/Digital).... you want this specific bit
         of hardware:software:application.... how about you (customer)
         sharing the funding of the design and development
         and we will share the profits from eventual sales
    	...... Hmmm ?"
    
    
    Guess what the answers were  (no prizes)
    
    John
    
    
    
    

re .4

I'm not feeling particularly "secure."  But when I examine why not,
I find much of my feelings fueled by a self-indulgent community angst.
It's easier to complain than to foment change, but we're riding the 
"easy" bandwagon and taking the company with us.  I think there's ample 
reason to recognize this and get off.  I'm not trying to blow sunshine.

As for "faith," that was going to be the last word in my note, but I 
thought it had too much of a religious overtone, and this is a pragmatic 
issue.  It's a matter of "getting on with it," as mentioned in .1.

re .5

Pollyanna?  You're response is exemplary of DEC's grinding doubt.  
Do you believe in self-fulfilling prophecy?  

No, of course no one took stupid pills.  Sleeping pills perhaps.
And now it's time to wake up.  I'm not saying we're going to succeed, 
I'm saying we *SHOULD* succeed.  There's ample precedent.

You say the info-tech market has changed and DEC never caught up.  On the
contrary, DEC has often been ahead of it's time.  The trick is to master 
getting in synch with the times.  Right now, with so much COMPETING talk 
about open systems and standards, it's not easy.  We're spreading 
ourselves too thin and sending out too many messages by less than
optimum channels.  I think management finally recognizes this and 
intends to re-claim some of our lost initiative, but the cost will be
high.  It can't help but be.

If DEC's history doesn't convince you that we have at least a modicum
of talent to control our own destiny -- to shape ourselves for success --
then we might all be better off finding new jobs tomorrow.  I just wonder
who will pick up the $13+ billion in loose change?

Should we automatically expect that success means returning to growth, 
expanding market share, and etc?  I don't think we can know that.  
The world economy will dictate what happens, and increasingly, global 
forces beyond DEC's control are pointing towards stabilization -- zero 
growth.  Which isn't to say there aren't tremendous opportunities to 
capitalize on changes in the Soviet Union and eastern-block nations, 
and I'm glad to see us positioning ourselves to do that...

Does the world need Digital.  Not if someone else does a better job
at offering what the world currently feels justified in shelling out 
$13 billion a year for.  And that's what this is all about.  We have
the momentum of success, but we can squander it if we don't live up to 
the challenge of perpetuating that success.  And living up to that
challenge "begins at home," with the *attitudes* of the people who 
comprise Digital Equipment Corporation.  

re .15

What does a solution look like?  Good question, and it seems to have
provoked some good debate.  Obviously, it depends on the context, 
but for us, it means focusing on how best to apply our 
products and services to meet customer needs, and in some cases, it means
educating the customer as to how we think our products and services 
will benefit them.  But we shouldn't be trying to brain-wash
anyone, and so we need to accept that other companies may offer better
solutions in many instances.  The trick is to then understand why 
and decide if we need to do anything about it.  We will never land
every sale.

re .18

A specialized NOTE; I'd say you should look into doing something like that, 
or seeing if it already exists.  The idea is good; run with it!  That's what
changing an attitude is all about -- taking initiative.

.21

I think you're dead right about Sun.  The success of new-comers 
can often be found in their newness alone.  It's easier to appear like
a breath of fresh air than it is maintain an entire weather system.
The question is, do we wait until Sun becomes what we are today to
recognize what we should have done to keep from becoming a shadow of
our former selves?  Maybe we could just change positions with them?
I suspect they'd be amenable.

I hear what you're saying about marketing.  Sushi = raw dead fish.
But I think the problem stems also from advertising.  DEC tends
to lump marketing and advertising together as one concept, but they
are distinct.  My pet peeve is that much of the world still doesn't
know who we are, let alone that we're the number 2 (what happened to
trying harder?) computer maker.  Apple has better name recognition.  
How big are they?  That's advertising.  And if you tell me "no,"
that's the nature of the market they serve, then I'll ask you to tell
me how they tapped -- helped to create -- that market so broadly.  I have yet 
to see DEC make a credible effort at promoting its own name.  "For instance," 
I recently sent a note to DELTA ideas about our PC strategy.  I won't 
repeat all of it, but the upshot was we aren't getting our PCs 
into the commodity stores and that's strike one and two.  We won't 
have a credible strategy until we're knocking heads at that level -- 
creating recognition.  In an industry that's going commodity, you've 
got to spend advertising dollars and you've got to be known in the streets.  
Even for industry sectors that have yet to "go commodity," -- like selling 
solutions -- name recognition is a BIG bonus.  I suspect IBM would agree, 
although they might not tell us!  After all, I'm sure they might think we've 
been dumb enough so far to not see this, so maybe we will go away?  Hmm, what 
does $60 billion and $13 billion add up to?

re all:

I hadn't intended to reply to my own note, but now I want to follow
through as best I can.  If I failed to, I'd be a pretty lame character.  
I'm not saying I'm right about anything or that this is a comprehensive
response.  (That's a problem I have, addressing a cohesive response to
a myriad of voices, but then, that seems to be a problem for DEC too.  
Just imagine how successful we'd be if we could truly master and manage 
the wealth of information we create and then package the process...  We 
could call it "distributed" thinking.  ;)  Anyway, what I am saying is 
don't give away the store because the sign needs replacing.  

Think of this company as a huge start-up.  Is there so much difference 
between the challenge of getting off the ground and staying in the air?  
It behooves us to change, yes, but in so doing don't belittle what we've got 
in our favor.  Use it.

Yours,
    Dean F.

I guess what bothers me about this entire string, or at least part of the 
premise of the base note, is that some miracle hot chip would save the
company.

Or the statement that if our s/w could match the quality of our h/w
engineering, everything would be rosy.

Our problems are based on complex sets of changes and problems.  Simple
fixes won't fix them.

We missed the RISC boat ... and now we're playing catch-up with an architecture
perceived by the industry as proprietary (Alpha as VAX-Plus).

We grew our overhead too far and fast ... and now we have to fire people (do
you *really* think it's a layoff?) to get our organizational balance back.

We produced software products too slowly, and with features which were not
competitive to equivalent products on the market ... so now we have to buy 
products and technology "outside" to become competitive again.

We missed opportunities to capture niche and emerging markets (i.e. image) ...
and allowed other vendors to take something that we by all rights should
have made our own.

We lost focus on profitability in our race to become bigger than IBM ... by
3:45pm on March 17th, 2007 (or whatever the date was a few years back during
our "window of opportunity").

It's a mixed bag.  We do not have stupid people.  We have good h/w engineering.
We have questionable marketing and competitive research.  We have a SI
capability that is *finally*, after more than a decade of trying, beginning to
gain recognition of its capabilities.  We have a leadership problem in
corporate management.  We certainly have the lowest morale in the general 
employee population ever.

A hot chip alone won't solve our problems.  But addressing all of the problems
on all fronts will.

David Stone's work with TNSG is a start for s/w engineering.  The NMS and AST
are good steps to provide accountability and keep the focus on profitability,
altho the implementation of the one plan and matrix nature (redline/blueline)
is diluting the accountability in ways that I'm confident that KO never
intended.  The work with the new Alpha chips sounds like we may have an
attractive engine ... if we make the decision to price it right and, even
more important, position it as more than just VAX-Plus.

So the seeds are there to get Digital back on top.  But much work needs to be
done to get us there.  And, unfortunately, a lot of loyal and good employees
will not be there to enjoy the fruits of this pain.

Steve

    Re: -1. 
    
    Steve,
    
    I did not intend to imply that a "hot chip" could save the company.
    That was discussed in subsequent replies to my base note.  I don't
    really like that tangent as it diluted the debate I'd hoped to provoke.  
    I was trying to focus on attitude and to get people to examine their
    own and hopefully take some initiative to stem this erosion in corporate
    morale.  Otherwise, we will not have the fortitude or the creative
    spark to tackle the complex problems that beset our company.
    
    If the brains are still here, then so are the means to getting back
    on track -- if the will is intact.  The power of positive thinking?
    Perhaps.  But I feel there's ample precedent to have greater faith
    in this corporation than is currently popular.  And that's the rub.
    
    Ever yours,
    Dean Fachon

    I'd like to share a couple of stories.
    
    1)  About a year ago, The Gartner Group had a meeting attended by CIOs
    from many of the Fortune 500 companies. They posed the following
    question to the audience:
    
    Your IBM Sales Rep comes in one day for a meeting.  You put your arm
    around his shoulder and say, "I have this problem that I'd like you to
    help me solve."  How many of you think he could help?
    
    Audience:  85% raise their hands.
    
    Okey, now your DEC Sales rep comes in for a meeting.  You put your arm
    around his shoulder and say, "I have this problem that I'd like you to
    help me solve."  How many of you think he could help?
    
    Audience:  When they stopped laughing, not many raised their hands.
    
    2)  A business aquaintance has a relative that works for one of
    Digital's largest customers.  This relative asked their Sales Rep for a
    short white-paper study on how Digital would propose to solve a certain
    business problem.
    Three weeks later, the Sales Rep called back and asked, "Do you need
    any hardware?"  The person asked about the white-paper.  The Sales Rep
    responded that nothing had been done, but they needed to book some
    orders, so did they need any printers or terminals.
    
    I personally wish the "rightsizing" would be completed so everyone
    could get their eyes looking forward (instead of over their shoulder)
    and working toward getting profitable again.
    
    Let's get rid of the 'certs-per-minute' metric.  Selling point products
    can be measured that way.  We don't (or at least shouldn't) sell point
    products anymore.  If you can't tie what your selling back to your
    customers business objectives, or business problems, then you're
    probably selling the wrong thing, and they won't value what you're
    selling.
    
    I guess you could say that my definition (not Webster's) of solution
    selling is helping customers solve business problems and meet business
    objectives.  
    
    Hey, hey, remember......let's be profitable out there.
    
    Rambling over....back to work.

    It might be that IBM sales reps are better solution sellers than
    DEC sales rep. (I'm not in sales).
    But as someone pointed out earlier, when you sell DEC boxes, services
    ... solutions you also got to sell DEC (the company) and I assume that
    the customer wants to buy DEC (the company) from DEC and not IBM
    (the company) from DEC.
    
    Pier Carlo recently said something like:
    "In the future there should be only two IT companies left: IBM and us.
    I don't mind beeing IBM number one, as otherwise DEC wouldn't have
    anyone left to compete with"
    
    I guess that competing doesn't mean "cloning IBM" but rather
    taking advantage of the differences.
    
    One of the differences might be DEC's high tech image (Is it still
    so ?) which the customers buys together with whatever box
    or solution. 
    In this case, a new zillion VUPS chip is definately VERY USEFUL,
    even if it's direct contribution to the "solution" isn't that
    much.
    
    Or do you think that people who buy Ferrari's only buy a "solution"
    for their transport, image, leisure "problem" ? Don't they buy
    as well a bit of Ferrari as certain company with a certain image
    and history ?
    /fred
     
    

    Re. - .30
    
    >One of the difference's might be DEC's high tech image (Is it still
    so?).....
    
    I believe DEC's image was we a high tech box "VENDOR".
    
    >But as someone pointed out earlier, when you sell DEC boxes, services
    ... solutions you also got to sell DEC (the company)...
    
    BEFORE you sell DEC boxes, etc., you've got to sell DEC (the company),
    and you've got to sell it as a business partner that wants to help
    solve business problems and meet business objectives.
    
    We need to alter the image to "DEC is a 'solution provider'."
    
    IBM is better at selling solutions....even if they don't have one. 
    That's because they have the image of being a partner that provides
    solutions.
    
    When you have the 'solution provider' image, you're in it with the
    customer for the long run.  When you have the 'vendor' image, you sell
    point products.
    
    I hope no one thinks I'm saying don't sell point products.  We've still
    got to sell anything we can, but we've also got to change the image.
    
    Mike

    re: .13
    
    I hope you weren't serious when you said that "solutions to real
    business problems" sounds fuzzy and content-free.   Coming from an EIS
    consultant, that is really frightening!
    
    Partnership is a little trickier, partly because the Law department
    frowns on use of that term, since it has very specific legal
    connotations.
    
    Below are five 'real-life' business problems (none of which can be
    solved by a 200 megaherz box alone):
    
    1  Company X has purchased company Y and is trying to merge their
       operations. One company is automated with "mostly blue," the other 
       is "mostly DEC" systems."  The two companies are running different
       applications and operate very differently.
    
    2  A company is facing fierce competition within its industry and is
       beginning to lose customers.  It needs to find ways to lure its
       old customers back and entice new customers, in order maintain its 
       leadership position.
    
    3  In order to keep growing, a company needs to expand its operations
       from U.S. to overseas.  It has no prior experience in international
       business operations, no infrastructure in place to support 
       international operations, etc.
    
    4  In order to maintain its leadership position, a company has
       determined that it needs, among other things, to improve its internal
       communications.  It currently has a hodgepodge of PCs and e-mail.  It
       tried to impose a "blue" corporate mail system, which resulted in
       an end-user revolt.  Employees now use their preferred mail systems for
       local mail and re-key memos and documents into the corporate system if
       it needs to be circulated outside the work group.
    
    5  Company X is facing increasing competition, resulting in lower
       profits.  It has determined that it needs to streamline its operations
       and improve time-to-market of its products if it is to survive.
    
    
    Real-life 'solutions' to the above problems:
    
    1  Digital and an SCMP worked together to perform a 'business needs
    analysis' for the customer, then designed and proposed a VAX 9000-based
    solution running five off-the-shelf applications with custom
    integration software.
    
    2  A Digital consultant researched and wrote a white paper, proposing
    improved services that would increase customer satisfaction.  Digital
    designed and developed an integrated system that provided new and
    improved old services.  The system has also proved to provide better
    internal services to the customer's staff.  BTW, we own the new
    software and are now reselling it, and not only in the original
    industry.
    
    3  Digital helped the customer become an international business,
    providing the needed infrastructure through our own worldwide
    offices, as well as automating the customer's facilities.
    
    4  Using customized Mailbus as a platform, Digital provided the
    customer with an e-net backbone that allows its end-users to use the
    mail systems of their choice -- including Profs, a Unix-based Mail, 3
    Com mail, MACintosh mail, VMSmail and other systems -- to transparently
    send and receive mail to and from any system.  Digital also helped
    'market' the new system to end-users to prevent another revolt.
    
    5  I'm aware of a number of these.  They usually entail an integrated
    solution that drastically reduces the time (and paper) spent in QA or 
    in Engineering Change Order or MRP or other shop floor processes.

    There's a long psychological distance between designing circuit boards,
    power systems, and communication networks and the one-of-a-kind
    concept+design+software+hardware+training+installation solutions.  It
    is hard to find language that includes all of the systems integration
    and consulting activities without being "fuzzy", espcially if your
    forte is of the very concrete variety.  Don't let your fur rise when
    someone doesn't understand your part of the company.  They probably are
    part of the silent majority within the company.
    
    Dick

    Re .32
    
    I like it. This would make near perfect 'ad' copy. I'd love to see this
    turned into an ad for Datamation or some such rag. It would be a great
    way of showing what our SI business can do for customers. How about
    talking to the PR department and finding out who in the company could
    work with you to build an advert.
    
    Just an idea,
    
    Dave

    Q1 results look pretty good.  That's the corner, my friends.
    Hope there's a few more optimists out there today!!!
    
    Cheers,
    Dean F.

    
    re. -1
    
    read the fine print in the Q1 earnings statement... hate to rain on
    your parade but it seems to me that we've got a long way to go before
    feeling all kinds of warm/fuzzy and otherwise gleefully delighted...

    I did.  No rain fell here.  Yes, a long way to go.
    I'm gonna do my part to get there.  And you?

    Word here from distribution is that the numbers looked so good
    because we pushed shipments into Q1 originally slated for Q2.
    Wall St. knew that as well, hence the poor performance.
    
    John

We *always* push Q2 shipments into Q1 in the last several days to make the
just-ending quarter look good.  That's nothing new at all.

What I found worrisome is that gross product sales declined slightly, but
costs still are increasing.

--PSW

    I agree, but not to this extent, from what I hear. I heard we even
    dipped into the following qtr as well.
    Regardless, it was worse than expected, despite the positive
    numbers.
    
    John

    I also heard that we accrued for taxes at a higher than normal rate. 
    The ostensible rationale was to make the upturn (when it occurs) look
    more dramatic.
    
    Dick

    
    re: .37
    
    
    	i've been doing my part to get "there" for the past 13 years..
    	i wish i could giggle and jump for joy but the Q1 numbers from
    	where i sit just don't make me wanna do that and as Jack Smith
    	said, the next two quarters look kind of gloomy (hint, hint).
    	gee, could it be that we pulled in some CERTS from as far out as
    	Q3 to help bail out Q1?? nah...