Conference 7.286::digital

When I resided in software services, I worked with sales reps as well as
sales support, marketing, engineering, and external customers.  Over the
past 2 years, I have seen Digital outsource more of their work - services,
products (agreements with 3rd parties).  This trend seems to be reinforced 
as the company reduces headcount.  

What does this mean to sales and the rest of Digital?

I envision a much smaller Digital that remains competitive by concentrating 
on system development and system services.  A common complaint (outside
of Digital) 5 years ago was that Digital was involved in the development of 
too many products, and was not able to remain competitive in product 
functionality, support, and selling.

Leave end user products to the client machines.  Digital will build products 
that require more resources and knowledge than the smaller shops have.  
Digital will focus on a smaller, product set and sell it through sales reps 
(both internal & external) who have the best skills of our current sales 
reps and sales support people (think of them as the sales hit team).  
There will be no need for the 'generic' sales rep who sells a number of 
products.  There will be no need for sales support people.

The market will certainly influence Digital's course, and we do have some
ideas of where that is - based on current buzzwards that the customers 
seem to like - "open systems", "client/server", "free",... 
                                                         

>> I envision a much smaller Digital that remains competitive by concentrating 
>> on system development and system services.
    
    As much as I agree that this makes a lot of sense, some of the other
    things that are happening make it appear that we aren't even doing
    this.  Cuts in both software engineering and the services organizations
    seem to be as bad as anyplace else.
    
    It seems that we have jumped on the outsourcing bandwagon for
    everything -- even our supposedly "core competencies".

Reducing the sales force is a huge mistake.  We may have a lot of overhead
built into our corporate structure, but I don't think that we have too many 
sales representatives.  While we often hear of revenue per employee comparisons,
as a measure of effectiveness, I would like to see this contrasted with a revenue 
per sales rep comparison. If that comparison is competitive with other companies
(which I think it would be) we might see how bloated we are with overhead.

Cutting the sales force goes completely against the idea of listening to the 
customer and providing products that customers want. In fact customers are
expressing concern about losing their representatives. Sales and sales support 
are the closest Digital representatives to the customer.  They see customers 
day in and day out and know what they need, why they need it and what the 
value is to them. One of our problems has been that we have ignored input 
from customers that has been received by the sales force.  

Our customers are everywhere, not concentrated in Maynard.  Some customers are 
comfortable buying from a 1-800 number, but most need someone to help them 
understand their problem and explain the options available.  

The pancea of distributors and ISVs selling our systems for us sounds great but
in reality, today, most applications run on multiple hardware platforms.  If 
your application runs on HP, Sun, IBM, Digital, and NCR which platform do you 
recommend?  Why would you prefer one over another?  Why do we think they are
going to recommend ours?   

Simple ideas may kill us.

My two cents,

Steve Farlow

    One group is sure they've seen the future, and it's chips and software
    being sold to other companies who in turn will sell to customers.  A
    smaller Digital won't have to mess with the end-user customers anymore. 
    (See note 2242.63 for a good statement of this vision).
    
    It will all be very clean and surgical, don't you see.  A few focused
    sales people, knowing everything there is to know about their chips. 
    Selling to a few customers who also are experts on chips.
    
    Our customers will sell to the end-users.  The difference is that each
    of our customers will concentrate on a slice of the market:  how to do
    medical case tracking, or retail inventory accounting. 
    
    There will be companies that will advise end-users on how to solve big
    problems, like how to hook all the heterogeneous platforms together. 
    But Digital won't be one of them.   Those companies will be providing a
    service that isn't really SI (because it's not complex enough or
    customized enough).  Not every customer will need this level of help,
    and some will need it but refuse to buy it.  
    
    The companies that provide this service will need to understand the
    customer's over-all problem, and be able to quickly provide the right
    expertise and advice.  
    
    The companies that provide this service will be customer-driven.  They
    will understand that only the customer's satisfaction with the level of
    service will bring them back for a return engagement.
    
    The companies that provide this service will be comfortable in dealing
    with confused customers, ones that don't really understand what they
    are asking for, because that is exactly the condition that creates a
    need for the service company.
    
    These service companies will get their business by having some of their
    people develop contacts with some of the customer's decision makers,
    establishing credibility by learning the way that customer does
    business, and then occasionally offering suggested improvements that
    just coincidentally can be implemented by the service company.  In
    other words, they will have a sales force.
    
    These service companies will not be beholden to one technology or one
    equipment manufacturer.   They will live or die on their ability to
    provide excellent solutions from whatever source, and whip them
    together with just enough expertise to get them to work together. 
    No brand loyalty, no missionary work, no uphill battles to convince the
    customer that another road is the only right way to go. 
    
    The chips and technology companies, like Digital, will live or die on 
    the raw speed and low cost of their product, and on the excellence of 
    their software.  No brand loyalty expected, no quarter asked or given. 
    They too will have a sales force, but of a totally different kind.  At
    the low end will be order takers, those familiar with part numbers,
    billing policies, shipment schedules, and end-of-life closeout
    specials.  At the top end will be highly technical ambassadors, able to
    talk one-on-one to the technical gurus of the VARs and OEMs to convince
    them not to use the competition's chip.
    
    The Digital sales reps reading this description will realize that they
    have been doing all three types of sales:  Strategic Selling, Order
    Taking, and Technical Selling.  In the future, you'll specialize.  
    You'll specialize by deciding which type of company to work for. 
    
    Digital moved away from Order Taking and Technical Selling as it moved
    away from selling boards and components.  The problem was that
    management still thought of Sales in the old way:  "if we could just
    help reps get the quote printed while they're still in the customer's
    office, we could shorten the sales cycle."     
    
    Now Digital may move back to the old way.  In doing so, it will settle
    for a new niche.  In a fragmented market, it will compete with
    down-sized sub-units of Baby Blues, and would likely no longer be
    "Number Two" -- or hope to be.  
    

    
    re: .-1
    
    Best summary of what's going on that I've seen. The vision you describe 
    
    is just what I think they have decided to implement. Good luck. 
    
    

    Last june I was in school in atlanta and noticed what I thought was an
    unusual class posted on the monitor showing classes and there location.
    It was called 9wk sales training or something like that. Already having
    heard of layoffs in the sales force I thought this was most odd so when
    I returned to class I asked the instructor what was going on. He just
    turned and looked at the two other instructors in the class and
    kind of looked funny then told me we would talk about it later. At the
    beginning of lunch he told two of us that it was an ongoing class
    hireing and training young college grads. to make them salesmen. His
    comment was that this was an ongoing class and in fact it was going to
    or had been extended to include support people also. 
    
    Just thought this might fit in with the question about what type of
    salesman for the future.
                                                         

    What a company.
    
    We move seamlessly, almost invisibly, from "we don't need salespeople
    because our products are so peachy keen they sell themselves" to
    "salespeople are obsolete, let's dump all but two or three of them."
    
    I tend to think the vision of the world expressed a few replies ago is
    probably close to right. However, I think its view of sales is a little
    too antiseptic; it hints too much of a technologist's fantasy world. As
    I understand it, this coming world order is still to be filled with
    human beings who will, for the most part, continue to act like human
    beings. 
    
    The entities that buy from whatever remains of Digital will still be
    "customers" and we will still be completely reliant on them for
    existence. Honesty, relationship building, personal credibility,
    shrewdness, attentiveness to customer satisfaction are all going to
    continue as important characteristics of the most successful
    salespeople (and their employer!) whatever the future holds. 
    
    John H.

    . Hire Lee Iacoca, VP sales, marketing, AND ADVERTISING. Pay him 20
    mil.

    . Get away from the name "digital" on our consumer products. People
    still think digital is a watch and get confused when they see a digital
    computer. Go with DEC, or something like Sapphire, or anything people
    can relate to a little better.

    . Advertise, advertise, advertise. How can people buy what they don't
    know is for sale? 

    . DON't cut the sales force. Sure we can sell to resellers, but where
    is the profit margin. And if you loose a sale, it's big bucks, not one
    or two machines.

    . More commission and less salary for the sales force. One really learns
    how to sell if he/she is trying to put bread on the table.

    If these don't work, we could go into real estate.

re: .8

Few of the items you mentioned are necessary if we are to embrace the new
paradigm of silicon and software. Advertising and name recognition will
become unimportant in a commodity market.

Lee

I suppose that's why Intel is spending big bucks on the "Intel Inside" campaign.
This "commmodity" mind set is going to be the death of us.  Chips and systems 
aren't commodities.  They are differentiated by quality, reliability, service,
support and, most of all, buyer perceptions.

Wheat is a commodity.

\dave

    
    	Re: .10
    
    >I suppose that's why Intel is spending big bucks on the "Intel Inside" campaign.
    >This "commmodity" mind set is going to be the death of us.  Chips and systems
    >aren't commodities.  They are differentiated by quality, reliability, service,
    >support and, most of all, buyer perceptions.
    >
    >Wheat is a commodity.
    
    	I suspect that if we were a bunch of wheat farmers discussing
    "life", we would consider wheat to be a finely differentiated product
    given all its different varieties and that computers are "just that box
    over there that I use for our spreadsheet and to check on wheat futures
    prices".  We differentiate computers because perhaps we're too close
    to them to see them as the commodity tool that they are.  Just two
    weeks ago I finally bought a PC for home.  I didn't buy it because I
    wanted "it", I bought it because there are some job skills that I'd
    like to learn, and to learn them requires a chunk of hardware to run
    C++ and Windows 3.1 on.  I bought it used, and frankly can't tell you
    who made the case, motherboard, memory chips, hard drive, floppy drive,
    monitor or any of the other whizmos stuffed inside the case -- or even
    if they were all originally sold together as the exact package that I
    now have.  I _can_ tell you that when I bought it, I made sure it had
    a standard CPU (for software availability) of reasonable power to run
    Windows and that it has enough disk space to store everything that I
    want to store.  Beyond that, "the box" is a purely commodity tool to
    me like a box of nails at a hardware store would be.
    
    					 		-craig

If that's the case, we should be cloning the 486 and P5 as fast as we can 
instead of messing around with Alpha_AXP.

\dave

    "commodity" is just shorthand for "don't bother me with the details,
    just get results"!  I'm sure that there are folks who consider all
    wine a commodity, even though there are others who can distinguish
    between different vinyards by taste.  If the customer wants the
    details, we need to send a salesperson who knows them.  If the customer
    thinks computers are commodities, then send a relationship building
    salesperson.  Bottom line is we've got to know our customers better. 
    And working in Maynard doesn't build that kind of competence.
    
    Dick

    It would probably be a book-length document to fully develop the idea
    that computing is a "commodity".  It is and it isn't.
    
    At one level, the ability to run or not run applications that are
    described as "IBM PC compatible" informally divides all computing
    hardware in the world into two parts.
    
    For many people at the end of the value chain, only the finished
    product, namely the ability to run 1-2-3 or Excel matters, so it's
    correct to say they have a commodity view.
    
    Typically though, behind that person, there's a person who realizes
    that it isn't a commodity and that there are many attributes besides
    price and the ability to run 1-2-3 or Excel that matter greatly.
    
    DEC's 8-years-too-late recognition of commodity aspect of computing
    still is not well understood internally.

    It's very depressing to read how easily people are giving up the vision
    of being a full-service company.  It makes me think that we were never
    deeply committed to that idea -- it was grafted on to a board-level
    mentality that we never shook.
    
    From the field, we've always felt that the corporate structure was
    self-absorbed and isolated in its own world.  I think that same
    self-absorption is still at work.  For those comfortable with building
    chips, the antiseptic user-less "brave new world" is oddly comforting.
    
    Digital as a chip-maker would be a tough competitior, but I wonder how
    it will make the transition.  It needs volume to reach economic
    production and profitability on chips alone, and that won't come
    quickly. 
    
    Digital's growth was fueled by end-user computing, and that is still
    the bulk of the revenue and profit.  How do you maintain market
    position and morale in the face of a going-out-of-business mentality?
    Because the ideas being presented are, indeed, a plan for going out of
    the end-user business.
    
    I had hoped that Digital would come out of this smarter and more
    efficient, still reaching for the brass ring and still trying to be
    the best computer services company in the world.  We could still do
    that.
    
    We don't have to design and build everything ourselves in order to
    be the best customer-oriented, service-oriented company in the
    business.  We do have to have a commitment to jump when the customer
    needs us to jump.
    
    Many of the opinions I'm reading in Notes about Digital sales people
    unfortunately don't reflect a good understanding of what Sales in this
    company is all about, or what it requires.  I fear that that lack of
    understanding extends all the way to the top, and our leaders don't
    know how their own business works down where the rubber meets the road. 
    Their views are the ones that are antiseptic, and lead to "simple
    answers," the ones that Steve Farlow said will kill us...like doing away
    with 1-(800)DEC-SALE support.
    
    Getting out of the end-user business is one of those "simple answers."
    
    I know that I don't fit in the brave new world of chip making.  I work
    best in applying technology to solve real-world (i.e. messy) problems. 
    When Digital reaches that brave new world, I will move on.
                                    

re Note 2253.15 by MAIL::ROGERS:

>     From the field, we've always felt that the corporate structure was
>     self-absorbed and isolated in its own world.  I think that same
>     self-absorption is still at work.  For those comfortable with building
>     chips, the antiseptic user-less "brave new world" is oddly comforting.
  
        Yes, I strongly feel that what's happening in Digital these
        days is that the people who exercised the greatest degree
        over strategy for the past decade or so are consolidating
        control under the guise of "downsizing".  The core will be
        what it has always been, but everything else will be gone.

        The irony of the Board of Directors' "firing" KO is that KO's
        greatest failure perhaps was that he wasn't in control (or
        didn't exercise it).  So letting Ken go allowed those who
        really controlled Digital simply to gain total control. 

        Bob

Re: .8

>    . DON't cut the sales force. Sure we can sell to resellers, but where
>    is the profit margin. And if you loose a sale, it's big bucks, not one
>    or two machines.

Let's play some real numbers here. I can sell my software through an average
CSO here at 30-40% off list. Or I can sell via another distribution channel
that carries a 37% cost of sale *and* gives discounts+allowances averaging
42% on top. Now, which one is more profitable for Digital?
								- Ian W.

    
    	This may have already been addressed, or may not belong here,
    	but...so what? Jerry asked, so here goes.
    
    	The thing that amazes me about the Digital sales force is that
    	they typically couldn't be bothered with what they consider
    	'small potatoes' accounts. So many times during my DEC career
    	I have heard stories of a small customer that called DEC in 
    	order to buy a system and was never accorded the courtesy of
    	a return telephone call.
    
    	Now, I'm kinda aware of the numbers that the sales force needs
    	to make, and the amount of time that they have available to them
    	to 'invest' in one sale over another. And maybe there are other
    	forces at work here. But any system that can afford to let us
    	ignore any sale under X amount of dollars is a flawed system,
    	in my account, and smacks of a certain arrogance. Call it my
    	old-fashioned (and poor, money-wise) upbringing, but I never
    	could understand this way of thinking.
    
    	John

    RE: .18
    
    Here, here John!!!  My sentiments exactly.  No potential sale is ever
    too small, nor should any lead be overlooked.  That guy who today wants
    to buy one station may one day be the guy who signs the cheque (or
    "check" in the U.S.) for a multi-million dollar order.
    
    Always been one of my pet peeves too...
    
    Otto.

    
    
    John, I have to agree with you too.  I have never understood how we
    could pass up a sale just because it is small.  It's arrogance and that
    is something I'll probally never understand. Act arrogant to me and
    I'll never deal with you again.  Kings of other countries may be
    somewhat arrogant but they still collect the taxes on everyone.  If DEC
    had "collected the taxes" from all the small customers, we might not be
    in the shape were in now. 
    
    
    Ken
    

From another point of view, I don't know why:

- Engineering don't always ship new products on time
- Marketing don't know the total addressable market we're losing through
  not having 32 bit support on OSF/1
- Stuff often doesn't get delivered to commit
- Finance...
- IM&T...

sheesh! It's a common courtesy to have phone calls returned and for the
appropriate distribution channel to be engaged to handle the lead. If it's
not happening, name names and complain. Anecdotes like this don't help the
cause of team Digital to move forward...
								- Ian W.

    re: .21
    
    >From another point of view, I don't know why:
    >
    >- Engineering don't always ship new products on time
    
    Probably because Engineering is sometimes told that they have to ship
    by X if they are going to be funded.  X may or may not have anything to
    do with how long it actually takes to design a product.  But, since it
    is easier to get forgiveness than permission ...  BTW, "no excuses
    management" won't fix this problem.  Any engineering group that knows
    it can't make the deadline will still commit.  It's better to be funded
    now and cut off later than to not be funded at all.  Standard rule
    applies: good, cheap and fast -- pick two.
    
    I have no "solution" to the problem.  But, from what I understand, a more
    successful approach involves having a patron lined up to buy a product
    and allowing Engineering to work closely with this customer.  That
    frees up the deadline as necessary, allows for customer feedback and
    participation, and has a better chance of resulting in a product that
    the customer will be happy with.
    
    Steve

	Well, here's what the new DEC Sales Rep *won't* be like:

	My wife ( just quit DEC and went to work at MCI ) met a
	prominent VP at a company function last week.

	This guy carries an MCI "Friends and Family" application
	form in his suit pocket all the time.  He's always promoting
	the service and the company -- at the club, on a plane,
	etc.

	When one of the MCI folks at the function mentioned an aging mother
	that had balked at switching to MCI, the VP asked why.

	"Well, she thought she would have to rip out all her phones,
	 get new wiring and that sort of thing," the son answered.

	The VP offered to call her himself, to reassure her that the
	changeover would not be anything like that.

	Anybody seen a DEC VP that interested ?

	Steve H

	P.S.  Three guesses where this guy worked before he started
		with MCI....

    
    Like some DEC salesreps, DEC VPs offer help where:
    
     potential_revenue > $X 
    
    Where:
    
    X >= $2.0M for VPs
    X >= $100K for salesreps
    
    My $.02
    
    -Ed
    

    
    
    The New DEC Salesperson....
    
    Young, Single, Childless and Hungry.

    re. small sales getting dropped
    
    Please don't assume this is happening as often as it use to. As a DEC 
    sales rep I get several small sale inquires from customers every week. 
    If its a PC sale I pass to Desktop Direct and have found them to be 
    quite good. If it looks like something more complex I send it to one of 
    my distribution reps and they handle it. The nice thing now is we have
    somewhere to hand the small opportunity where it will be handled
    professionally.
    
    My budget is big. I do have to focus on the large opportunities.
    Digital trains me to do that.
    
    BTW, I know no offense is intended. I just wanted to make the point that 
    we are getting better in the field at handling this kind of thing. 
    Unfortunately, some small sale opportunities do still get dropped. That 
    is reality as well (human nature).
    
    Curt

    Curt mentions something that has been discussed here many times, i.e.
    the reason we have ATDs is to handle the smaller accounts.  Talk to
    any sales rep and they'll tell you of the countless times they've
    been backed into a corner and forced to quote to a small account
    (knowing full well this same "potential" customer is also shopping
    amongst several of our ATDs).  Many of you don't seem to understand
    that the ATDs can almost always come in under an identical quote
    (price) generated by an internal sales rep.
    
    Even when we had a large sales force it would have been difficult
    to follow up on all leads; now it's darn near impossible.  Our sales
    reps are NOT being arrogant; they are just following a strategy that
    has been in place for some time.  This type of lead is fowarded to
    ATDs on a regular basis.  If the ATDs are not responding to the leads
    DEC sends them, then perhaps some in the Channels organization should
    look at that particular distributor and see if it can be determined
    why the distributor is not sticking to their part of the bargain!
    
    Karen
    

    
    re .26 and others
    
    Desktop Direct is a step in the right direction. And I did not
    intend to make it sound like dropping small sales leads was the
    fault of the sales rep. I understand that, given the metrics that
    they are (were?) forced to work under, they often had no choice
    but to go after the larger sales leads. The *system* is what I had
    an issue with, not the people called on to implement the system.
    
    I once proposed that DEC have a portion of its sales force dedicated
    to addressing these small accounts (this was about 8 years ago). I
    believe now, as I did then, that there are lots of people in DEC that
    could adequately work these small accounts. The response I got was,
    'It would cost too much..not profitable enough' in so many words.
    
    John

While I appreciate the comments in .26 and understand the problems faced by
sales I think sales needs to understand the perception that is created by
this process on the "customer". 

I have had the distinct displeasure of watching Digtial work this process
from the other side twice. This was a public sector account, in fact a school
system. The competition was IBM and NEC. When I sat back and looked at the 
process afterwards I saw a few things that disturbed me as a DEC employee.

1. All 3 companies used a 3rd party but the difference was in how they were
   used. NEC simply sells their equipment to the 3rd party but provides both
   sales and technical training to that party. The vendor we dealt with was
   very familiar with both the hardware and software. IBM appears to do the
   same thing but stays involved with every sale. An IBM sales person 
   accompanied the 3rd party on every call. Digital, in both instances, bid
   the hardware and operating software itself and picked the 3rd party to 
   application software. 

2. Throughout the entire process IBM has maintained a relationship with the
   school system even though we have yet to buy a single piece of hardware
   or software from them (we did buy our business system from the NEC 3rd
   party). 

3. The impression that many people who worked on these processes have come
   away with is that Digital, at least in Massachusetts, is not familiar
   with the legalities of the bidding process in the public sector. 


4. This school system is out to bid again right now on a system package for
   technology education in it's elementary schools. IBM is out front because
   they've paid attention to what we were doing. I recently attended a statewide
   conference of school committee members and superintendents in Hyannis. At
   this conference there was a 2-day exhibition of education related products.
   IBM and Apple each had 2 booths at the conference. I watched them both
   for awhile and the one thing I was most impressed with was the number of
   superintendents and school committee members they already knew. DEC was not
   even represented by a 3rd party. 


The bottom line is that other companies appear to leave no rock unturned in 
seeking out customers. We appear to still be working under the old premise
that they'll come to us. 

While these are my impressions and they're based on a very narrow experience
I'm concerned that I'm not the only one with these impressions. 

    re. .28 (DEC's Small Business Sales Force of the past)
    
    That was back when we had larger profit margins on every sale. That
    margin is not there any more. 
    
    Now we have SME reps (Small-Medium Enterprise) of which I am one. We
    handle many, many accounts - everything that is not handled by large
    account managers (a lot of turf). 
    
    We have been given directions to leverage our efforts in an way we can
    through the use of distributors, VARs, etc. 
    
    The goal is to do a large volume of small sales, to small business', 
    and still come away with a profit. 
    
    I now spend as much time looking for good local VARs and Software
    Companies to partner with my distributors as I do working my large sales 
    opportunities.
    
    CV

Not being in sales, I don't know how it is supposed to work, but I do know
first hand, but I'm less than impressed with those experiences I'm aware of.
I too saw DEC's lackluster response when our school system went to purchase
equipment.

My husband, a former DECcie from the 70's, worked for a company in the
city known once known a hard core DEC customer.  Over the years, things
deteriorated (like the time DEC shipped them an 8700 to run ultrix on,
complete with the ultrix tape and a tape drive not supported by ultrix!).
Anyways, he found himself suppporting equipment from an ever widening array
of vendors, including APPLE, SUN, IBM, and HP along with some DEC equipment.

A year and a half ago, he left that company and went to a University.
Within 2 -3 weeks of being in his new position, his old reps from his
previous job met with him, introduced him to his new reps.  The new reps
came armed with such info, as this is all the diffferent types of equipment
you have, this is what's on order, this is getting obsolete and we recommend...
Well, the SUN, IBM, and HP reps, that is.

After being on the job for 3 months, he still hadn't found out who his DEC
rep was.  So he called his old rep to see if he knew.  The old rep said he
didn't know, and hung up.   Upset when I heard this, I called the 800 hotline
number in the front of our phone books.  The person who answered listened
patiently to my story, then asked me why my husband didn't call the hotline
number himself.  He didn't, because he's sick and tired of having to go find
DEC.  The person at the hotline seemed to think that either or both my husband
and I had attitude problems.  I was less than impressed, myself.
If DEC want's him as a customer, why doesn't DEC come to him!  And he
has no motivation to go looking for DEC with SUN, IBM, and HP in his face all
the time.  Well, his DEC rep did finally contact him after my call. 

Since that time, the DEC rep hasn't exactly been in his face, either.  He had
to call to get invites to the alpha announcment.  The rep didn't follow up
to see if they were interested.  The users group there finally called the rep
to come to a meeting to answer questions.  And the rep didn't have alot of info.
Those at the group who had gone to the announcement seemed to know more in
some cases.  It was suggested if they wanted to try a machine, that there
were some alphas on the internet that users could get free accounts on to 
try some stuff.  But the rep didn't know the names of the machines or how
to access them.  Or they could come to the office and try out the alpha there.
A less then impressive meeting with some folks who are trying to knock
on DEC's door and ask do you have something that might be worth it!

The world is not going to come knocking on DEC's door and beg us to let them
buy our products.  If we want to sell our products, then that is what we have
to do - GET OUT THERE AND SELL THEM, not sit around waiting for the customers
to come to us.  

I guess my impression is that while we may have some shining stars in 
the sales force, they're not where I see them.

Alice

RE: .30

	I honestly beleive that there are lots of sales people who do as much
or more than the competition. The problem is that the competition does it
consistently and they do it well. We don't. We need every sales person to do
it and we need to have people dedicated to small business markets all the time
not as much time as on large sales. 

    I've had 7 years of up front and close workings with sales people. I've
    said it before but I'm going to say it again.
    
    You get what your reward! Metrics drives behavior. And our sales people
    are treated, compared to our primary ceompetitors, like garbage. I have
    close friends that are sales persons for DEC, IBM, SUN, Apple, and HP.
    Frankly, I'd never really want to be a salesperson. Least of all at
    DEC.
    
    Gene.