[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference 7.286::digital

Title:The Digital way of working
Moderator:QUARK::LIONELON
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

2477.0. "BP DVN 4/27" by THEBAY::CHABANED (SBS is a crime against mankind) Tue Apr 27 1993 21:32

    
    
    My reaction to today's DVN was very positive.  BP came off as a little
    more "human" in this taped presentation.  I liked the fact he was not
    hiding behind a podium and it seemed there was a genuine effort to give
    us straight talk about the state of affairs.  I hope we see more DVN
    broadcasts like it.
    
    The only criticism I have is that the question and answer session could
    have been twice as long.
    
    -Ed
    
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
2477.1DVN Was Worth Viewing...MSDOA::JENNINGScompressed load/magnum primerTue Apr 27 1993 23:2314
    I agree - the DVN was well worth watching.  I hope, however, that the
    office in which I viewed the DVN was not indicative of the percentage
    of employees who viewed it elsewhere.  Although there was a fair number 
    of people in the office, and the DVN time was well published, only a
    small percentage came to see it.
    
    The thing that stood out in my mind was that this is the first time I
    have truly felt comfortable that BP REALLY understands that morale
    is in the pits (he mentioned the Field specifically) and until it 
    improves, sales are not likely to reach their full potential.  He also 
    understands that the primary factor for the poor morale is the job 
    security issue.  While he won't commit to "no-layoffs" after July 1, 
    he went out of his way to say that he wants managers to get the 
    down-sizing behind them by the end of Q4.
2477.2??????CSLALL::PGEARYWed Apr 28 1993 12:449
    
    
      I did not view the entire broadcast but I agree with the fact that
    the message was well delivered.  My question is that although I heard
    this second hand I was under the impression that what he said
    concerning what would happen after July 1st was that if there were 
    indeed lay-offs that there would not be any seperation compensation.\
    Is my information incorrect?
    
2477.3(-.1) ImpliedMIMS::HUNT_BWed Apr 28 1993 13:1915
    BP said that he would like to get the layoffs behind us in Q4.  He
    stated that if Managers suspected that an employee was not going to be
    needed several qtrs from now, that their mgr. would be doing the
    employee a great service by moving the layoff into Q4, where the
    employee could get the maximum pkg.  While he didn't specifically say
    that this would be the last pkg., it was implied that the pkg. would
    either go away or be reduced (he said he couldn't justify continually
    going back to the BOD asking for more separation money).
    
    BP also stated that we will constantly be upgrading our workforce (We
    need to find other companies for poor performers to work for).  He
    clearly wants to make Q4 the last major layoff.  After that it seems
    that separations will be more performance/skill set based.
    
    Bing
2477.4CARTUN::MISTOVICHdepraved soulWed Apr 28 1993 14:0513
    I hope some of the managers finally got Bob's message.  I know of
    specific cases where, when individuals volunteered for TFSO, the
    managers (who were told to cut their groups by at least certain
    percentages) refused to let the volunteers go, instead punished them
    for a quarter and then let them go in the next round (with a
    significantly reduced package).  These people were used as examples to
    the rest of the group (this is what happens if you volunteer for TFSO
    -- if you don't want to stay here, quit).  I've also heard these
    managers snarl that they don't believe in paying people to leave --
    what's the matter, didn't they get paid enough while they were here? 
    (With no consideration for the investment that they are losing, such as
    pension, vacation, etc., not to mention the fact that in some cases
    they had been underpaid or poorly treated.)
2477.5another perspectiveGOOROO::DCLARKnever compromise with mediocrityWed Apr 28 1993 14:065
    BP spoke here at HLO last friday. IMO it was a tremendous speech,
    by far the best I've ever heard at DEC. It's probably available
    throughthe HLO library or ETE.
    
    - Dave
2477.6Text of Bob Palmer's April 27 address to employeesCVG::THOMPSONRadical CentralistWed Apr 28 1993 15:26455
	Worldwide News                                 LIVE WIRE

                Text of Bob Palmer's April 27 address to employees 
 
 (Following is an edited text of Bob Palmer's quarterly address to employees, 
 aired over the Digital Video Network on April 27.  The address was videotaped
 several days earlier from the Mill's Doriot Auditorium.  In addition to the 
 following address, Bob answered questions from the audience and from employees
 from Europe and GIA.)
 
 Thank you.  Well, welcome.  And thank you for joining me in our ongoing 
 series of televised employee communications.  In this period of rapid change 
 your understanding of our situation and your commitment are critical to 
 Digital's success. I believe you add more value when you have some rough 
 idea of what's going on.  

 My goal today is to put our recent changes into perspective for you and to 
 share my honest optimism about our prospects for the future.  We're making 
 very good progress in the transformation of our company.  While this kind of 
 a comprehensive change doesn't happen overnight, we're well on our way to 
 making a turnaround in the enterprise.  Our customers are finding it easier 
 to do business with Digital, although we have a lot of opportunity in that 
 regard.  We're making good progress in our financial goals as well.  I won't 
 be satisfied, obviously, until we're solidly profitable and stay profitable.  
 In the meantime, it's encouraging to see that the things we're doing are 
 having the desired effect and that we're sharply reducing our losses.  If we 
 maintain the focus that we've had on reducing our costs and we begin to 
 emphasize more additional revenue, it's quite clear that we're going to be 
 profitable in the near future.  The issue will be to remain profitable once 
 we achieve profitability.  
 
 I want to talk a little bit about our Q3 financial results.  Digital's 
 financial health is preserved.  We're quite strong as far as our balance 
 sheet is concerned.  You probably know that our restructuring has reduced 
 our costs substantially.  Last October, we were losing about $3 million a 
 day, which is a large by any standards.  But we've now reduced that, in the 
 quarter just ended, to about $300,000 a day, a factor of 10 in six months. 
 This was more than the analysts expected we would be able to do, and in that 
 regard it's very positive, and of course that resulted in some positive 
 impact in our share price.  

 For the first time in six quarters we generated positive cash flow.  That's 
 even after all of our investments and the downsizing.  We have a lot of 
 cash on hand, about $1.5 billion.  We had the lowest capital spending that 
 we've had since 1984; just over $100 million during the quarter.  
 
 One of the battles that we had for the last six or seven years in this 
 company was how to get control of our engineering spending, and it was 
 thought that here at Digital engineering spending could only increase; and 
 indeed, that's been the case for most years of our history.  I'm pleased to 
 report that through our efforts we were able to reduce engineering spending 
 quarter over quarter by 19%.  We've gotten out more products than ever 
 before in our history, and better products.  So, reducing spending doesn't 
 mean reducing product for your customer; it means doing it more efficiently, 
 eliminating redundant platforms, providing what customers really want to buy 
 more efficiently.  That's what we've been able to accomplish.  
 
 In the SG&A area, or the general overheard area, we were able to reduce our 
 spending by about 8%, which is not near good enough.  Worldwide employment 
 now is below 100,000 for the first time in a long time, and that of course 
 helps us be more cost effective.  
 
 This is a slide that shows Digital's net operating revenue on the top line, 
 and the scale for that is on the left side of this chart.  The other chart 
 on there is the one that's preciptously headed downward.  It represents our 
 earnings per share.  What you see is that this has been a sustained decline 
 in our profitability.  This didn't happen overnight, nor is it going to turn 
 around overnight. Typically companies that have been in this shape, if they 
 do turn it around, take four or five years to do so.  
 
 The fact that we're recovering already is quite a surprise to many of the 
 analysts and people that follow our company.  And more importantly, it's very 
 reassuring to our customers that our company is returning to financial 
 health.  Customers want us to be profitable, and we are doing so.  
 
 Now, you'll see this little dash line here.  This is the analyst's forecast 
 of where we will go in the fourth quarter, and it's a reasonable forecast, 
 although I don't make predictions about when we'll return to profitability 
 because it's not smart.  I have a real concern. Q1 is a weak quarter for us.

 It's weak largely because because so much of our business is in Europe, and 
 Europe slows down a lot in the summer months, due to the vacations.  We 
 really have to put a full court press on Q4 and Q1 revenue.  Q1 is the one 
 I'm the most worried about.  During the quarter we doubled our PC business, 
 and our service revenues increased.  We're doing quite well.  
 
 This is a slide that describes what's been going on in the industry in which 
 we compete.  It shows a bifurcation, if you will, of customer needs.  On the 
 left side are commodity type products and base systems.  And the attributes 
 of that particular type of a market or demand are volume, very competitive 
 costs, features in terms of performance, price performance, things of that 
 nature.  It's more the traditional box business.  

 On the other side are the business units.  The customer business units 
 represent value from the point of view of solving a customer's problem. This 
 is a relatively new business for Digital.  We've been in it the last few 
 years, and we're doing very, very well there.  In total, our service revenue 
 during the quarter was up about 12%. Product revenue was essentially flat if 
 you back out the effects of currency.  Our quarter was better than most 
 analysts expected, and it was significantly better than our largest 
 competitor, IBM.  IBM's product revenue was off 19%, and overall the revenue 
 was down 13%.  Their losses were far in excess of Digital's, and on a per 
 share basis more than twice as large as Digital's.  So, even though we have 
 similar problems, we started addressing our problems sooner and the results 
 are showing up sooner.  

 What we've tried to do is recognize the way the market's going -- bifurcating 
 between traditional products and new services -- and to organize Digital to 
 reflect the market. Sometimes our own organization internally seems 
 complicated.  The objective here is to make sure that we're organized to be 
 effective for customers, not to be more convenient for the management.  In 
 fact, the more we get used to our new organization, the more convenient it 
 becomes.  As I go around talking to customers, I ask the customers what 
 problems they have.  They present to us our successes and our shortcomings. 
 I'm always asking if this new organization better address the problems that 
 these customers are talking about.  And I have to say that in the six months 
 I've been visiting customers with this organization in mind, it is clearly 
 superior to the current organization in meeting customer requirements.  

 This particular slide shows the business units that we have at the present 
 time. These are supported by the functions that you see below. Worldwide sales 
 and marketing, for example.  Professional service, engineering, manufacturing 
 logistics, that is, a supply chain, the various corporate functions and our 
 IM&T function.  That's the foundation on which all of the business units will 
 operate.  Even so, the business units are the way we're going to run the 
 company, and we've been quite clear about that.  
 
 Last October, I made a number of commitments about what I was going to do as 
 chief executive officer of this enterprise. It was very important to me to be 
 quite specific.  The issue was to say what you're going to do and do it, 
 because our company does not enjoy a reputation of credibility in the 
 marketplace.  We've been quite unpredictable.  We have a history of saying 
 one thing, doing something else.  Those days are over.  When we say we're 
 going to do something, for the most part, that's what we're going to do.  
 If there's new data, we might change the outcome.  So, you can always be 
 flexible.  
 
 One commitment I made was to bring some new talent into our company. Digital 
 had grown rather insular. All of the top management of this company had been 
 here for a very long time. They had the same background, the same point of 
 view. You couldn't have a very rich discussion at the senior level with 
 everybody sharing the same point of view. One other person and I were the 
 only "outsiders." I've been here seven years, and am still considered 
 something of an outsider.  

 I made a commitment to bring in new talent, and we've done so. You saw in the 
 last DVN the pictures of the various business unit managers, many of whom are 
 new to our company, with very impressive credentials. Most recently, we've 
 added two new talents to our company. Gresh Brebach will be running our 
 professional services organization. Gresh comes to us with a very 
 distinguished career. His background is in engineering. He has an engineering 
 degree and an MBA from the University of Illinois. He went to work for 
 Andersen. He rose to the very top of the United States services activity at 
 Andersen. He had 320 partners and 6,000 technical employees reporting to him.  
 He then started his own firm, which was quite successful. It was bought out by 
 McKinsey & Company, where he was a director. McKinsey and Andersen Consulting, 
 are among the very top companies, and he was a top executive in that company. 
 We were fortunate to be able to persuade him to come to work for Digital. He 
 could see the opportunity that we have in this market to be the best in 
 professional services.  
 
 I have very little aspiration to be less than the best -- just zero.  I think 
 we ought to be the best, we have the resources to be the best.  We needed 
 some talent to shore up the talent that we already have.  
 
 In addition, we recently announced probably the most difficult position that 
 I had to fill, which was that of Worldwide Sales and Marketing. Digital had 
 been criticized, and rightly so, over the years for a lack of ability to 
 market our products. I think in a sense we were so much driven by our 
 engineering culture. I'm from engineering myself, and I identify with that.  

 Even so, we're not very good at marketing the products, and explaining what 
 our products do in a way that customers can relate to. Very often we descend 
 into "engineering-speak," when what they want to hear is "business-speak." 
 They want to understand how what we provide is going to help their enterprise 
 be more profitable.  We're not too good at that.  
 
 In this case we were fortunate to recruit Ed Lucente. Ed comes to us from 
 30 years of experience at IBM. He also has a background in engineering. He 
 graduated from Carnegie-Mellon University, where he is a lifetime trustee. 
 His 30 years of experience is in all phases of IBM's business, including 
 product planning, quality, and running operations. At one time he ran all 
 of the Far Eastern operations of their company, which includes manufacturing, 
 engineering and sales and service in the Far East. He also ran the sales and 
 service organization in the United States. At one time, he was responsible 
 for 110,000 employees. More recently, he worked for three years as executive 
 vice president at Northern Telecom. So he has a very good appreciation for 
 not only the data processing side of the businsess and services that 
 companies like IBM, Digital and Hewlett Packard provide to customers, but he 
 also has experience as a customer in an important industry for us, 
 telecommunications. Ed is a tremendous find for us. Both of these individuals
 have been very highly written up in the press, and we've been very favorably 
 reviewed for having been able to attract them.
 
 Again, what attracted Ed to Digital?  Opportunity.  People see that we have 
 the talent, we have the technology, we have the financial strength.  We've 
 been lacking a little bit of focus here, and that's what we're bringing to 
 the new business model.  
 
 The business plan in process for Digital is a little more structured this 
 year than previously.  That is, we thought it might be a good idea to start 
 Fiscal '94 with a budget in place.  The budget is going to be done by 
 business units and territories.  We have nine business units, and we have 
 thirteen territories.  This is a flexible deal, by the way.  All of this work 
 is a dynamic business.  It's a dynamic environment that we're in and this is 
 a dynamic organization.  Some people try to describe a company like a 
 machine, with an engine and wheels and this and that.  It's not a very good 
 analogy. A corporation is more like a living organism.  It's something that 
 lives and develops and grows.  If you're successful, it's healthy and 
 expanding, and that's what we want to be.  There's going to be a lot of 
 change.  The business units fund all of the spending. That means that every 
 activity at Digital has to add value to our customers as interpreted by the 
 business units.  If we can't figure out how to add that value, then we have 
 to stop doing it.  
 
 We also are developing all the business plans by functional management and 
 to have checks and balances.  You have to have balance in an organization 
 or an organism, and we have balance here.  The idea is to have balance 
 between people that have sales and service responsibility, systems 
 integration responsibility, engineering, marketing, business units.  
 Decisions and funding are made by the business units.  But you need balance.

 So I respect the skills in all of the functions in Digital, and I know from 
 experience in my own career you're not successful unless every member of the 
 team is able to continue to develop and grow.  Our objective here is to 
 ensure that we have balance between the various functions of the business 
 units, that we work together as a team for the success of our customers.  
 And in that regard we're going to be successful, and we will grow.  
 
 Now, the issue is there's a little bit of accountability at Digital, and that 
 means we know what people have signed up for. I've seen the first pass [of 
 the budget], and it was closer than previous budgets that I had to deal with as 
 vice president of manufacturing that came along midway through the year in 
 progress.  So, it was already closer. It's good teamwork. We still have some 
 gaps to close, and I'm happy to say that current plans show a little bit of 
 growth. I'd like to see more. They show a profit; I'd like to see more. And 
 we're going to be working on that.  
 
 We're going to put in front of our Board of Directors on June 17 for the 
 first time since I've been in the company a business plan that ties out.  A 
 business plan where people have made commitments on what they're going to 
 deliver to our customers, and what revenue and profit they're going to 
 deliver to Digital, and where they have agreement from the sales and service 
 organizations that deliver those solutions and product to those numbers. 
 That's going to be an interesting exercise. We're not going to waffle on it.  
 
 And in addition to that, for the first time ever, we're going to have a 
 strategic intent for each of the business units. There'll at least be a few 
 paragraphs there about the strategy of that business unit to be successful in 
 their marketplace. That way we can test future investments against the 
 strategy, and we have some idea whether or not this investment supports the 
 strategy. 
 
 In the past we had so many good ideas, and we supported them all.  Even so, 
 that's not the way to have focus and to maximize the leverage on your 
 investments.  And we frittered away a lot of money by trying to do too many 
 things that didn't really fit a strategic intent.  The focus of all of this 
 work clearly is on the customer.  
 
 Let me describe a little bit for you what's going on in the computer industry 
 again. If you think about it, up and through the early '80s, there was an 
 opportunity for every company, including Digital, to add specific value by 
 doing some little thing better than anybody else.  In our case we did a lot 
 better, and particularly the architecture of the VAX was an outstanding step
 forward in 32 bit computing.  Almost in and of itself, despite all of our 
 other ineptness, that made us very successful.  In the current environment, 
 and the environment going forward, all hardware products are becoming 
 interfaced by standard interconnects.  All software products are becoming 
 interfaced by standard protocols.  What this means is that if you think 
 about a value chain in computing, every little component in there could be 
 plugged out, and a new one plugged in from your competitor.  This means that 
 the probability of you having the best of everything all the time is near 
 zero.  And fundamentally it means how are you going to make any money in 
 this environment?  That's what Digital's struggling with, and IBM and 
 others.  It's not going to be easy because you no longer have one dynamite 
 product that pays for all of your other weaker product.  That means that 
 there must be some other way to add value.  
 
 Well, there is, and fortunately Digital is positioned better than any other 
 company to do that.  And that is in analyzing a customer's business problem, 
 in integrating all of their operating systems and hardware and software 
 products, and in implementing that solution more effectively than our 
 competition.  That's why you see so much emphasis on customer-focused 
 business units.  That's really about applications, it's about solutions.  
 And those applications and solutions ultimately run, for the most part, on 
 Digital hardware and software products.

 But you don't start your sales that way.  The way we start our sales today, 
 with Fortune 1000 kinds of companies, is by going in and talking about what 
 business issue are they are trying to solve?  What problem do they have?  
 And not surprisingly, their problems are very similar to our own problems.   
 That's why our experience with our own company and supply chain re-engineering
 is very popular with our customer base, because not only can we talk about 
 it at a theoretical level, but we're doing it.  We're doing it here, and 
 we've made huge successes.  As you know, in 18 months we took out $700 
 million of unnecessary spending, and improved our performance to customer 
 needs.  This is what our customers need to do.  An enabler for that is 
 information technology:  provide the solution, sell them the technology 
 underlying that.  That's the way that would go.  Our objective is to be the 
 very best in class with our own supply chain effort by the end of Fiscal '95;
 to be the company that other people look to for success.  Our organizational 
 changes are part of our efforts, and there are many others.  
 
 You know that we are moving out of the Mill over the next couple of years.  
 We're consolidating the square feet that we have.  The Mill represents 1.1 
 million square feet of very inefficient space for our purposes.  We have 
 also 15 million additional square feet worldwide that we need to move out 
 of.  First we moved out of all of the leased space we could, now we need to 
 move out of our owned facilities and change those facilities -- tremendous 
 change in our asset position.  We're working on that.  We need to continue 
 to downsize our organization to an appropriate size for the revenues that 
 we enjoy.  To me personally that is the least attractive part of my job, and 
 I'd like to get that behind us.  I'd particularly like to get it behind us 
 in the current quarter.  The reason is that it is no longer sustainable for 
 us to provide the very generous transition packages that we have provided 
 in the past.  You may have noticed that our largest competitor, IBM, has 
 announced that they're going to a new program starting in July with a 
 maximum of 26 weeks of severance.  How likely do you think it is that I can 
 face my shareholders and tell them that we're doing better than IBM by 
 far so we can afford to do more.  I can't do that.  I'm not going to do that.
 Therefore if there is any probability that people in your organization will 
 not be with us past this fiscal year, you need to do everything that you 
 can as a manager to move that action forward and get it in this quarter.  
 You owe it to your employees to let them leave the company with the best 
 possible transition package that we can afford.  

 At this moment, and for that matter throughout this entire year, we've been 
 borrowing money.  Every bit of the $750 million of the first billion that 
 we borrowed has been used for transition.  I'm responsible.  This is not my 
 money, it belongs to our shareholders.  I'm borrowing money to give to 
 employees that are leaving our enterprise.  This is a balancing act between 
 what's the right thing to do for employees that are no longer able to 
 contribute to the enterprise, and the shareholders' value, shareholders' 
 money.  Now that balance is a little bit out of balance today.  We're going 
 to have to bring that back in balance in the future.  That's why I'm so 
 intent on trying to get all this downsizing behind us.  
 
 In any event we're continuing to work on the supply chain activity.  The 
 results of all of this activity are to make it easier for us to do business.
 We're focusing on being a partner with our customers. We're getting 
 organized by business units so that customers have a very short line of 
 sight to the management of this company.  Customer issues can be surfaced 
 easily.  The whole focus is how do we make it better for customers.  In 
 addition to that we're bringing out new products, all based on our Alpha 
 products.  Fundamentally we thought that something simple would be helpful.  
 Why don't we just go for number one in performance and number one in price 
 performance.  So, the objective is to be the best, the most competitive, 
 offer the most value for customers, and to regain leadership and to start 
 growing market share.  So, be competitive.  
 
 We just announced the world's fastest work station.  In this particular case
 it runs on a 200 megahertz Alpha chip.  It exceeds 100 integer spec marks 
 and 163 floating point spec marks, easily beats all of our competition.  
 It's our objective to stay ahead of our competition on all of that.  
 
 Here's a little graph that shows our product family versus those of our 
 competitors.  We used to enjoy pretty good market share here, but the last 
 three or four years every year we've lost market share because our products 
 were not competitive enough, nor were they marketed very effectively, and we 
 did not have the operating system that customers wanted to buy, which is UNIX, 
 for the workstation market.  Today we have a leadership unified UNIX, the 
 only 64 bit UNIX that is incorporating most of the standards that have just 
 recently been touted by COSE.  Digital is ahead of that group by almost a 
 year in terms of unified UNIX.  We have performance superiority at every 
 price span, and it's our intent to stay there.  We're working, as you know 
 on CMOS 5.  By the time they get their new chips out that begin to give 
 them similar performance, we'll be out with the next generation.  So, we're 
 six or eight months, maybe a year ahead of most competition as far as 
 silicon's concerned, and systems.  And if we run real hard, invest 
 intelligently, work real diligently, we can sustain it.  Otherwise we won't.
 But even so we have that as an advantage.  Our real value added, as I said, 
 needs to be in providing real solutions.  
 
 In terms of operating systems, I mentioned UNIX, that's what customers want 
 to buy.  We finally figured that out and got fully behind it and we're 
 investing heavily to have the most impressive UNIX.  They also want to buy 
 NT, the new operating system from Microsoft.  This chart shows that Digital 
 will be unique  among the large computer vendors in that we will support 
 equally all of these operating systems.  This is not a religious issue.  
 It depends on what problem the customer is trying to solve.  In situations 
 today, where the customer is moving around billions of dollars of currency, 
 if I'm asked to guarantee the integrity of that system, quite clearly I 
 want VMS.  I know it works, I know we don't lose a few billion dollars in 
 the ether.  UNIX is coming.  A lot of features are being added to UNIX.  
 And for many applications UNIX is a superior solution, or at least it's a 
 solution on which the application rides that the customer wants to buy.  
 We need to have the best.  In the case of NT, many of the commercial 
 applications appear to be going to migrate to NT; if they do they're going 
 to run better on our platforms than anyone else's.  But obviously the 
 advantage that we have in supporting all of these technologies is that when 
 a customer engages with Digital, we can sell them the best solution.  And 
 we can ensure better than any competition that all of this stuff actually 
 works together, and that is our value added.  
 
 Now, in addition to this we've started a new brand campaign, and you're 
 going to see some ads shortly.  The focus of this ad campaign is a slightly 
 different logo.  You probably can't tell too much about this logo. It has 
 to do with the size of the boxes and the size of the letters so it's easier 
 to see at a distance.  We're also going to freshen up the color a little bit.
 And this is the result of some data-driven analysis.  Over time we'll get 
 new business cards that have a slightly different color, which is sort of 
 like a burgundy.  We also think about, what do you think about when you 
 think about Digital Equipment?  What is it we're trying to do?  I've been 
 trying to tell you that this morning.  What we're trying to do is be 
 that company whose people -- the most important thing about a company --
 are dedicated to the customers' success through innovation.  We're an 
 innovative company.  We're going to continue to invest heavily in 
 engineering.  We're going to dis-invest in stuff that doesn't differentiate
 us, and we've been doing that.  We're going to invest in the things that 
 provide tools and capabilities so that we can be the best in providing 
 customer solutions through innovation and through the excellence of our 
 people.  That's what we're going to do.  
 
 Now by now hopefully you can see that I am quite honestly optimistic about 
 our prospects.  I feel better about the company today than I have since I got 
 this opportunity.  It's a privilege that I take very seriously and I'm quite 
 pleased with the progress that we're making and the teamwork that I'm 
 seeing among all of the people at Digital pulling together to try and bring 
 success to our customers, and therefore through our enterprise.  
 
 Consolidation and cost savings will be ongoing.  As I mentioned, I hope to 
 get the major downsizing behind us.  That doesn't mean there won't be a 
 continued, ongoing upgrading of the work force.  That will always be the 
 case:  bringing in new talent.  People who are poor performers will need 
 to find other companies to work for.  This is a competitive environment.  
 Each of us as an employee needs to ask what value we are delivering to the 
 enterprise.  We need to keep our skills up-to-date.  We need to make sure 
 that for the competition we have the best people:  the most up-to-date, 
 enthusiastic, and intent on solving customer problems -- doing what's 
 necessary so the customer is successful.  Then we'll be able to maintain a 
 large partnership with these customers.  And the fact that at any particular 
 time some other box might be faster or some other application might be a 
 little better won't be that critical.  
 
 As the chief executive of this company I know from personal experience what 
 I'm looking for when I talk to one of our vendors our partners.  We're 
 looking for a relationship where we have trust, where there's confidence 
 that the company that you're dealing with is going to treat you fairly, 
 where for the most part they have leadership technology and products, 
 recognizing that it's impossible to always be the leader in everything.  
 Where you're absolutely, unequivocally sure about the integrity of that 
 company and its people.  The most important thing about a company is the 
 values of that company.  For this company we have an exceptionally fine 
 heritage of focus on values that matter.  We value and respect individuals.
 We value and respect the diversity of our work force and of our customer 
 base.  We look to leverage that diversity for our competitive advantage.  
 We value competence.  We value innovation.  And we value teamwork. And as I 
 said, above all, we value integrity.  
 
 So, thank you, it's been a pleasure talking with you.  I'd like to say that 
 we're going to continue to have a lot of hard work.  It's fun, it's exciting, 
 it's challenging, we are turning this place around, and that's very exciting 
 and rewarding.  I think that we're all privileged to have the opportunity 
 to be part of Digital Equipment at this time. It's a privilege that I take 
 very personally.  I'm privileged to represent you to our customers.  
2477.7What happened to the Q&A?ROWLET::AINSLEYLess than 150 kts. is TOO slow!Wed Apr 28 1993 15:533
And why is this 'edited'?

Bob
2477.8SOFBAS::SHERMANFri Apr 30 1993 14:3314
>> Therefore if there is any probability that people in your organization will 
>> not be with us past this fiscal year, you need to do everything that you 
>> can as a manager to move that action forward and get it in this quarter.  
>> You owe it to your employees to let them leave the company with the best 
>> possible transition package that we can afford.  

I'm no lawyer, but ... doesn't this, a public, taped statement by the CEO of 
a company, become binding? I.E., in August or September you get the boot 
w/ no package. Could not a _very_ good case be made in court that management 
knew they wouldn't want you in FY94 but delayed getting rid of you to save 
themselves the added expense of TFSOing you?


2477.9It was live and then MemorexSUBWAY::DILLARDSat May 01 1993 21:3243
    I noticed a couple of comments that seem to indicate the audience for
    the DVN was 'stacked' with the implication being that BP would get easy
    questions or that the questions were screened ahead of time.
    
    I was one of the people invited to attend.  I have no idea how or why I
    was selected and the same is true for some other people I met at the
    meeting.
    
    I was not asked to submit my questions for evaluation and did not
    decide which of several I would ask till after Bob's remarks.  I can
    assure you that my question was answered by Bob in 'real time'.  There
    was no time shrinking done in the editing of the DVN.
    
    I did not take comprehensive notes during the taping, but from my
    recollection very little was edited.  There were a couple of technical
    glitches during Bob's remarks that were cut out.  There was a part of
    one answer re. Europeans on the SLT that was cut.  There was one
    question and answer that did not make the edited version that I clearly
    remembered.  It was related to people needing to 'have a life' and how
    to balance work vs. other areas.  I found Bob's answer very honest and
    straightforward.
    
    The live event ran over an hour.  I didn't clock it so I can't say
    exactly how long.  It did not seem that much was cut out, though I'm
    certain that anyone who asked a question would be disappointed if their
    question did not make the final version.
    
    I was in a meeting the week before the DVN (PSSM/PSC managers meeting)
    and Bob spoke to us the last day (good way to prevent early
    departures :-)).  I can assure everyone that in this live forum Bob
    handled the Q&A in real time with no screening of questions or
    questioners.
    
    I have been extremely impressed with Bob and the people I've seen that
    he's brought in from outside of Digital.  I was especially impressed
    that Bob seems to understand some of the issues that I see down at my
    level (unit manager).  I'm reminded of the Churchill quote about the
    'end of the beginning'.  I'm confident that the company is beginning to
    do the right things at the macro level.  The test will be how well we
    execute at the micro level.
    
    Peter Dillard
    NY Financial Account Group
2477.10i'd like to go to the next oneSTAR::ABBASIi scored 30 in bowlingSun May 02 1993 03:5814
    
    >I was one of the people invited to attend.  

    i'd love to get invited to one of these things, if i do, i
    promise to ask easy questions or better yet keep my mouth shut, just 
    PLEASE INVITE ME OVER !

    it must be really nice to be invited to big DEC meetings, i have been
    a DECeeee for like 4 years and not one time i was invited to a big meeting
    where cameras were present :(

    \nasser


2477.11ROWLET::AINSLEYLess than 150 kts. is TOO slow!Mon May 03 1993 13:096
Well, for those of us who may not have access to the video, could someone post
the Q&A session for us, as it wasn't in the LIVEWIRE transcript.

Thanks,

Bob
2477.12TOOK::CARROLLWed May 05 1993 13:549
    re .8
    
    I was told on 4/7 that I had no funding and to look for another job.  I
    sent mail to a senior person in my organization asking when and I got,
    in writing, a committement that if I am to be laid off, it would be
    prior 7/1.  Both memos are safely at home.