Conference 7.286::digital

>>    If people left on projects are let go, then it is not comforting to
>>    work in a place where you can lose your job if you are in the wrong
>>    place. However, if across all projects, the bad least performs are let
>>    go, then it leaves those of us left with more purpose and would make
>>    us less concerned that a potential project may be a target.
    
   Being affiliated with one of those projects we heard it was the latter.


						Mike			
						----

You may be told that layoffs will be based upon performance. It would also
make sense that there is some relationship between performance and 'value to
Digital'.  Thus, you would think that the best performers who are most valuable
to Digital would be safe.  Unless things are radically different in Engineering
than in the field, it probably won't be that way.  I suspect that Personnel
will have veto power over any decision, along with a strong dose of politics
thrown in for good measure.

I'm not trying to be overly negative about this, I just want to warn people
that it may not happen the way you expect it.

Bob

Can anyone tell us, without violating any confidences, which projects have been
cancelled?

Thanks,

Bob

    From experience that I have seen in the field.  Dont be in the wrong
    place at the wrong time.  It has nothing to do with performance. 
    
    
    Rick
    

    back in 1972, a colleague I knew was working a a project that was
    either cancelled or completed (i think the former). She spent about 3
    months looking for another job in Digital. She finally had to leave.
    The memory is a tad hazy, but the clear impression was "you have a
    while to find another job, but if you don't you will have to leave."
    
    
    				herb

    I would think that politics would be the primary factor.  It seems to
    have been in the past.  I know of one plant being sold to XXX/XXXX
    maybe, and the senior managers somehow all secured other jobs within
    DEC as if by magic.  If I tried to pull strings like that all I would
    get is a keeeer-flush.
    
    Dave

    
    VAX 9000 was dissolved (basically). HPS people were told they had until
    Sept. 30 1991 to find new jobs. If they didn't they gone. Some didn't
    and they're gone. 
    
    

    Re: Note 1957.6 by SGOUTL::RUSSELL_D
    
>   I would think that politics would be the primary factor.  It seems to
>   have been in the past.  I know of one plant being sold to XXX/XXXX
>   maybe, and the senior managers somehow all secured other jobs within
>   DEC as if by magic.  

    Yup, I've seen this same phenomenon. It is called "jobs for friends".
    The question is, do you have the right friends? 

.0>    Cancelling projects is one thing, but since only some projects will be
.0>    cancelled to bring back efficiencies by deploying people to more
.0>    important projects it makes me wonder about who will be let go.
    
    hunh?
    
    let me get this straight, when projects are cancelled the resources 
    invested in them (in expectation of yielding return on the investment) 
    now yield no return, and this is to "bring back efficiencies" ???
    

    re: .9
    
    I interpreted it to mean that projects would be cancelled because the
    people were needed elsewhere, not because of the project itself.  This
    seems a bit farfetched, but then so does most of what is happening ...
    
    Geoff
    

    
    Re: Which projects cancelled
    
    I know the follow-on product for the 433MP (Vanguard) has been 
    cancelled.
    
    -Ed
    

    Let's not change the subject to which projects were cancellled.
    
    Re .9,.10 When you have multiple projects starving and some have much
    more promise than others but cannot hire because resources are used
    everywhere, you cancel your unfavorable projects to divert the
    resources to the most profitable one so that it can succeed. This is in
    spades throughout TNSG, many marginal projects and no ability to add
    resources to key system management products for grwoth to broader
    offersings.
    
    In .9 you asked why the work is thrown away. This is the subject of
    sunk costs. All costs already performed are sunk, you must decide from
    today which work you want to invest irregardless of sunk costs. This
    means you throw away work that will not yield the most profit.
    
    Now as far as the other notes with regards eliminating people, the
    commentary is sad. I understand the personnell veto which is their
    thought that lawsuits are minimized by just canning those that are
    affected by the cancelled projects. However, as the bean counters,
    personnel are not business managers. Unless the bad performers are
    given the let go and unless throughout the good projects the bad
    performers are not let go, then as a business decision, the largest
    possible good people are not being left to help the company out.
    
    Tom

re: .12

>    Let's not change the subject to which projects were cancellled.

I'm not suggesting changing the subject, but if I have postponed solving
a problem that affects my organization that product XYZZY was supposed
to solve, and it is cancelled, I need to know so I can make alternate
arrangements.

Bob

    re -1
    
    "xyzzy".  *poof*
    
    you are in a twisty little maze, with passages all alike.....