Conference 7.286::digital

    
    
    	The best thing to do would be to deflect the question with a 
    	comment something to the effect that many industries are going
    	through downsizing and we are no different. Then bring the 
    	conversation back around to business, and how you can best 
    	separate the customer from his dollars...er, how you can provide
    	solutions to his business needs/problems.
    
    	Bringing a bad attitude or low morale to the customer can only
    	drive them away. Better to maintain a professional manner at all
    	times.
    
    	John

                         -< The High Cost of Honesty? >-

    
>>>    But it does raise an interesting question:  Should this kind of thing
>>>    be shared with the media?  Should we discuss candidly the mental and
>>>    emotional state of the company when it is bad?  Will we lose business
>>>    because of our candor?  Will a competitor take unfair advantage of such
>>>    statements?  Will a customer be scared off because s/he read that
>>>    Digital people were down in the dumps?

	I personally don't believe that this should be shared with the press.
	This is something that needs to be dealt with internally (and dealt
	with soon!). I do think that this type of press will (and probably 
	already has) have an impact on current and future business. Our
	competitors are already spreading the word that Digital "won't be 
	around long", why add more fuel to the flames. I have had customers
	as me those very questions, to which I've responded "of course" we're
	going to be there, and start talking positively about our ALPHA 
	chip and how its the best in the industry (although deep down inside
	I am very, very concerned).

    
>>>    How should we respond if questioned by the press?  

	When asked, "Is Morale in the dumps", I respond that yea maybe some 
	people are down because of the layoffs (truth, no lies) and leave it 
	at that. "Everything else is fine", I don't get into anything else. 

	Rick

    
    	I just ran down as fast as my little legs would carry me and picked
    	up the Boston Globe but I'm having a problem finding the article
    	you've mentioned.  What page is it on?  Is it in the business
    	section?

    
    
    	I think it was the Boston Sunday Globe of October 10; the article
    	was featured on the front page.
    
    	I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong.
    
    	John

    
    i never believe anything i read in the papers.

    this been my motto over the years and it helped me well in difficult
    times.

    \nasser

    Was there an article about Bob Palmer getting a 20% raise this year?
    
    -sandy
    

    	In the article on downsizing, an economist was quoted as saying
    that "company loyalty is overrated" even though all the evidence points
    to many of the problems we're seeing here. Apparently, employee
    attitudes are pretty much the same thoughout corporate America these
    days. It was a pretty interesting article.

    re: how should we respond if questioned by the press
    
    Refer the question to your friendly corporate P.R. person, who is a
    professional and specialist in the arena of what to say and how to 
    say it to the press. 

    
    
    Doesn't that send a message as well?  Sometimes silence speaks volumes.
    
    
    Mike

Most of us don't talk to the press; but we do talk to and get queried by
customers and other employees.  The topic of morale is on the minds of
many and usually at some point in the conversation it gets addressed.
If the issue of morale cannot be dealt with honestly, then the onus is on
the corporation to see to it that it can.

It is better for the company not to answer questions about morale than to reply
the way they did. Customers know that morale is not good; some of the letters
about this have made it to this notesfile. Such customers, reading a statement
from upper management that morale is good, will feel either that the company's
statements cannot be trusted, or that management is completely out of touch with
what is going on at lower levels of the company. Neither will give them faith in
Digital.

    re: -1  
    
    An interesting point.
    
    Customers are not fools, nor are our competitors.  It is better to
    acknowledge the reality, however painful, and then point to what is
    being done about it, rather than pretend that the problem of bad morale
    does not exist.  When the problem is denied, all kinds of things come
    to mind - that senior executives are out of touch, that they are lying,
    that this company's word is not its bond, etc., etc.  But the point is,
    no one is fooled by the denial and therefore it can only create ill
    will.

    Another point of view is that morale among management is going up and
    that it just hasn't reached the lower ranks yet.  Is the quote from
    someone speaking for ALL of Digital, or was it maybe a manager of a
    segment of Digital where morale truly is improving?  Is there any
    chance that, GIVEN THE CONTEXT, the statement is credible?
    
    Steve

    re:-1
    
    The actual quote:
    
    "Digital officials deny there is a serious morale problem among workers
    and insist that productivity remains high."
    
    That's not a statement that captures the essence of what has been all
    over this conference.  Nor does it capture what I've been hearing
    everywhere else.  This is the kind of statement that creates a
    credibility gap and undermines the belief that the leadership of this
    company has their finger on its pulse.  We can only succeed with our
    people - there is no other way.  For that to happen, what they are
    saying must be listened to and, when mission critical, acted upon
    immediately.  When that is not done, nothing can prevent the ultimate
    failure of the organization.  Nothing, nothing, nothing.  
    
     

I recently attended a "town meeting" featuring Ed Lucente.  He talked about 
five key areas that management wanted to focus on.  One was customer 
satisfaction and another (toward the top of his list) was employee morale.

My impression listening to him speak is that he is keenly aware of the 
problems we face as a company.  And since employee morale is near the top of 
his list of focus areas, it would seem he is definitely in touch with the 
current state of mind of many employees.  He also comes from a company that 
knows how to market and manage perceptions (just look at how long it took the 
trades and customers to realize how badly they were falling apart at the 
seams)!

What we tell the world about life inside of our 4 walls will definitely effect 
their perceptions and (lack of) confidence in us.  They should expect us to 
continue to provide tremendous quality products and services, but they have no 
right to intrude on the "personal life" of Digital.  That is for Digital to 
sort out.  I just had a similar conversation today with the MCS (Field 
Service) reps in the office.  They spend a lot of time with our customers and 
need to present a happy, confident face, as do we all!

Our competitors are like vulchers circling, don't give them anything else to 
attack.  HP, during a sales pitch to attract new VARs, is even telling the 
software vendors that they don't consider Digital much of a competitor anymore 
(it's enough to make you wan't to kick their arrogant butts...probably how 
they used to feel about us)!

I've heard people outside of Digital say that no company spends as much time 
telling customers about their problems as Digital.  It seems to have something 
to do with that corporate value called "honesty" which I see exhibited in some 
of the replies to this note.

Airing dirty laundry is not "honesty", it's the beginning of a self-fulfilling 
prophecy!

Keep a lid on it!

Rick C

If you have poor morale rampant throughout the company and you expect employees
to keep quiet about it out of the company, you are suffering from potentially
terminal naivete. 

If you have poor morale rampant throughout the company, you will not be able to 
stop employees from talking about it outside the company.  Your business also
has serious problems, but that is another discussion. 

If you want employees to talk about how GOOD the company is, do those things 
necessary to improve their morale and you will not be able to stop them from 
talking about it.

Improving morale begins by instituting strong leadership - at all levels. 
Strong leaders do not ask people to "...do as I say, not as I do...".  Strong
leaders lead by example.  Dysfunctional leaders lead by example, also; but they
tend, as Tennyson wrote, to lead their people into unnecessarily unhealthy
environments. 

Of course, that is just my opinion.  And I would never presume to preach to our 
BOD.

Dave

    
    I remember a video which was shown in a Digital management class which
    I took.  It was of corporations who turned themselves around.  All of
    the examples pulled the employees in by increasing some sort of benefit
    to the employees.  They showed the employees that they (management)
    cared.  Why should an employee be dedicated to an employer when the
    employee feels that the employer couldn't care less about the employee?
    Maybe I am naive, but I think that if you get the employees involved
    the company will turn around.
    
    
    Mike

    
    
    	There are two issues here which are being co-mingled and confused.
    	The first is the morale among employees, and the quote given by the
    	senior Digital official in the Boston Globe.
    
    	Do you really think that any senior Digital official is going to
    	tell the press that we have a serious morale problem? We do have
    	a morale problem, and I do feel that this is acknowledged by many
    	if not all of our top management. Whether they are doing anything
    	to improve it is another matter.
    
    	So yes, we do have a morale problem. And not much is being done
    	from the top to improve it, especially when BP gets a 20% raise
    	while others have not had a raise in years. I wonder whether the
    	BOD realizes the blow that this raise gave to employee morale.
    
    	The second issue is whether we should talk to customers and the
    	press about the morale problem. Some people are saying that denial
    	is the wrong thing to do. I agree, but I don't think that anyone
    	is advocating denial. Some people are suggesting that we tell the
    	world how good the company is, and that this is dysfunctional. I
    	agree, but I don't think that anyone is advocating a Polyanna
    	attitude.
    
    	The best method to handle this is to follow the advice in replies
    	.1, .2, or .15.  Keep a professional attitude and manner about you
    	at all times. Whining in front of customers makes you and the
    	company look like losers.
    
    	John

    I agree with many of the replies.  THe only point I would like 
    to make is "never try to deny the obvious".  When you do, you lose 
    credibility. When you agree with the obvious and whine for hours,
    you also lose credibility.  You first acknowledge the obvious and 
    then explain why it is getting better.  It seems so simple, but 
    most just deny, deny, deny.  It makes them look like they are 
    out of touch and haven't a clue.
    
    JMHO
    mp

    
    RE: .19  Agreed.

I'm not a heavy reader of this notes conference.  I usually check it from time to 
time when I'm having trouble sleeping (like last night), since I do enjoy some of 
the issues that get raised here from time to time.

I think maybe the answer to all of our problems would be to make it mandatory for 
each and every Digital employee to contribute to this conference.  Maybe if we ALL 
whine our brains out here, we won't have the interest or energy to whine to our 
customers and the media.

Rick C

  All this debate about talking of morale inside the company assumes that
  the customers need to get this information from the press or from
  one of the employees by word of mouth.

  I can usually guess the morale of any employee in any organization from
  the way in which they interact with me. You can easily decipher whether
  that person loves the job they do, are indifferent to it or hate it
  very much.

  It doesn't take an Einstein and the trade press to figure this one out.

  Nari

If Digital had to say something to the Globe (other than "no comment"),
it would seem sufficient to say, "Digital shares some of the same problems
with morale that other large companies going through a downsizing have."
And then tack on the happy talk ("But, with our dramatic new initiatives
in Open Client/Server solutions on the fastest computer on the planet,
most of our employees are feeling re-energized to take on the competition
and win!" etc.).

Saying that there's no problem in a newspaper that is read by large numbers
of Digital employees (who are manifestly aware of the problem) just seems
like a bad imitation of the Ministry of Truth from "1984".
								- paul

    our dirty laundry is OUR dirty laundry. i have been more than vocal at
    expressing my opinions - WITHIN DEC. 

I agree that externally, we need to put positive spin on the company whenever
possible.

The fact that Digital employees are talking about low morale outside of Digital
is not a direct result of having low morale. I believe it is more of an 
expression of frustration at the lack of management focus and action being
applied to correct it.

Seems to me that a major goal of the SLT and Bob Palmer should be to improve
employee morale, and motivate the workforce.   If they fail to do that, then
the financial goals are unattainable also.

Part of the problem is that what motivates one person does not motivate (and 
may even demoralize) another.   So whatever you do, you will only be partially
successful.   However, if you do nothing (current state) you will be completely
unsuccessful, so something is better than nothing, and sooner is better than
later.

Management should give us a little credit for being able to handle bad news,
and even help solve the problems.

A simple recognition from Bob Palmer that he realizes morale is bad, doesn't
have a lot of money to fix it, but is looking for suggestions, would go a 
long way in my book.

Right now, it looks like they just don't care.

$.02

Bob

P.S. ... That's DIGITAL Gene, not DEC...  I don't care what all of our 
customer's, all of the trade rags, and most of the civilized world know us
as!   8^)

Based on the quote in .14, it's worth pointing out that the spokesperson did
*not* say that there was no morale problem within Digital - rather, it was said
that there was no *serious* morale problem.

This is clearly open to a lot of interpretation - what are the metrics by which
"serious morale problems" are measured:

- numbers of employee feeling blue?
- relative to morale at other companies experiencing layoffs?
- measurable effect of morale on the bottom line, or on productivity?

Since the quote went on to assert that productivity was high, the latter metric
seems to be the one used. In any event, reading "no serious morale problem" as
"no morale problem" is misreading what was stated.

    
>This is clearly open to a lot of interpretation - what are the metrics by which
>"serious morale problems" are measured:

    I sort of assumed that they meant that morale among senior managers was
    good. :-) If they were not happy it *would* be a serious morale
    problem. 

>Since the quote went on to assert that productivity was high, the latter metric
>seems to be the one used. In any event, reading "no serious morale problem" as
>"no morale problem" is misreading what was stated.

    Productivity *is* high. We're turning out VPs like never before. :-)

    		Alfred

    Regarding the question of honesty: 
    If the Boston Globe seriously wanted to determine the state of
    employee morale at Digital, I'm sure they would know whom to ask.
    On the other hand, if the Boston Globe wanted to make a Digital
    official look ridiculous, I'm sure they would know how to do that
    also.
    
    

Note 2703.25 by SYORPD::DEEP 
    
>P.S. ... That's DIGITAL Gene, not DEC...  I don't care what all of our 
>customer's, all of the trade rags, and most of the civilized world know us
>as!   8^)>
    
    allright Bob. don't go gettin your gander all in an uproar.

re Note 2703.25 by SYORPD::DEEP:

> The fact that Digital employees are talking about low morale outside of Digital
> is not a direct result of having low morale. I believe it is more of an 
> expression of frustration at the lack of management focus and action being
> applied to correct it.

        Isn't that what "low morale" is, essentially?  "Low morale"
        doesn't derive from a feeling that times are hard, but from a
        feeling that little is or can be done about it.  If
        management focus and action appeared appropriate and
        successful to those of us in the trenches, then morale would
        be OK even in the face of hard times.

        That is why it is so hard for management to acknowledge that
        morale is low, since low morale is a DIRECT result of lack of
        confidence in management.

        Bob

    Those of us with low morale want to hear that management KNOWS about it
    and is trying to DO something about it.  Instead, we hear that there is
    NO (serious) problem, which implies that NOTHING need be done.
    
    One way or another, dirty laundry needs to be cleaned.  It is far better
    to clean it in private.  But management must make it happen.  When does 
    the point come where it's better to air a problem in public rather than
    keeping it in the family?  Does that point not come until a company
    fails due to the unaddressed problem?
    
    		Larry
    
    PS -- No, I'm not as depressed as the above sounds.  But I've gotten
    the "nothing's wrong, go away" message personally from nearly the 
    highest level of the company, and it is rather frustrating!

    
    .31> When does the point come where it's better to air a problem in 
    .31> public rather than keeping it in the family?  
    
    You raise an interesting question.  If management believes that simply
    saying the problem is not serious will make it go away, we've got 
    bigger problems.  Also, if they believe that the "outside world" 
    hasn't yet realized that we've got morale problems, then that is
    being naive.  I hope that that's not true.  These folks get the
    big bucks to KNOW these things, and to DEAL with them.
    
    Our Customers know it - (their Sales Reps are gone or have been changed
    and they don't get the attention they used to get.  Sales Support?
    What Sales Support?  NOTE : Not a knock on Sales Support...It's just 
    the numbers don't match up.)
    
    Our Competetors know it - (a lot of folks are "jumping ship" and going
    to our competetors AND our partners).
    
    The Press knows it...
    
    We know it.
    
    As they say - The first step is acknowledging the fact that there
    is a problem.  Once that is done, recovery can be made.  Right now
    we're in denial.  That's normal, but unhealthy. 
    
    I disagree that we should not put a spin on it though.  I think it
    would be far more "productive" to provide a statement (when asked)
    such as :
    
    "We recognize that this is currently a critical issue within our 
    company.  We have taken the following steps to correct this...
    	[list steps here (please)].  
    Our untimate goal is to have this issue resolved by [some Date
    in the not to distant future.]"
    
    This provides customers, analysts, partners alike to see that we are
    mature and can face the harsh realilities of the day, yet do so in
    a constructive manner.
    
    But, I may be the naive one here.  Time will tell.
    
    Don
    

    re: last 2
    
    I think we're getting closer to the mark.  Glossing over serious
    problems often means either I don't know how to fix it or I don't want
    to fix it.  Neither interpretation augurs well for us. Russ Gullotti
    and Ed Lucente have both acknowledged the problem;  it is not clear
    what approach they are taking to fix the problem beyond hyping our
    current product set as being leading edge.  That's a good start.  I'm
    sure they are doing other things;  but these are not quite as apparent
    as the product focus.
    
    Denial in public is not a sign of strength when everyone knows you are
    lying.  Confront the issue, and assure the world that you are dealing
    with it.
    

While it's clear that a number of the SLT acknowledge that a morale problem 
exists there does not appear to be a plan in place to solve it yet. It's very
difficult to deal with an issue before the press when you don't have some way
to address the problem in place. That doesn't mean that you tell the press there
isn't a problem. There is one issue that hasn't been brought into this 
discussion. This is a publicly held corporation. For many of our shareholders the
press is one of the few avenues they have for information about the company's
performance. While it is unlikely that a public shift on this issue would
cause an enormous uproar among our shareholders it might certainly lead some
to wonder about what else they aren't being told. This issue, added to the BP
raise and the flap over the preferred stock seems to indicate that shareholder
trust in the board and senior management is not at an all time high.

re Note 2703.34 by FSDEV::MGILBERT:

> While it's clear that a number of the SLT acknowledge that a morale problem 
> exists there does not appear to be a plan in place to solve it yet. 

        A morale problem is not one you can treat directly.

        Morale problems come when there is little confidence that the
        business's other problems will be dealt with in a satisfactory
        and timely manner.

        You fix a morale problem by fixing the business's other
        problems (in a way in which the troops understand or at least
        have faith).

        If you don't seem to be fixing the business's other problems
        then you will have no success fixing the morale problem.

        To say to the press that there is a morale problem is
        equivalent to saying that the majority of your workers don't
        believe that you have a solution to the business problem --
        what managers would ever acknowledge that?

        Bob

    "what managers would ever acknowledge that?"
    
    Ones that aren't in denial?  Seriously, any manager who is in that
    situation is there because the employees don't trust the manager.
    Refusing to acknowledge the problem only increases the distrust.
    
    
    There are more alternatives than denial or saying "things are a mess".
    For example, consider a recent statement from Win Hindle that was
    quoted in the Globe.  The quote went something to the effect that
    there are no serious ethics problems at Digital, but we're putting
    new programs in place.  The quote raises the obvious question:  if 
    everything's ok, why new programs?  And it alienates those (both
    inside and outside) who think that there are probably real problems.
    
    Here's an alternative statement that Win could have made.  "Digital
    has always valued honesty and integrity, and our standards are among
    the highest in the industry.  But we're not content with that.  We
    are strengthing our ethics programs and ethics enforcement, and we are
    also aggressively moving to correct business practices that can create
    an appearance of impropriety."  
    
    
    The above could be improved, of course (I only spent a couple of
    minutes thinking about it).  But the key points are that it doesn't
    deny that there are problems, it does establish a reason to change,
    and it makes promises about what kinds of changes are going to occur.
    The statement should then go on to get specific about the programs 
    and changes that are taking place -- such details probably wouldn't
    make it into the Globe, but could be communicated to employees.  
    
    And, of course, there has to be visible evidence or data that shows
    that there is a real effort to change.  I think that's the real
    problem -- in tough times, everyone is from Missouri, and they have
    got to show us.  
    
    		Luck,
    		Larry
    
    PS -- Here's something else Win could have said for why we need more 
    ethics enforcement *now*:  "Tough times always reveal problems that
    are hidden in good times.  We intend to take this opportunity to 
    improve ethics enforcement within Digital, so that once we resolve
    our short term problems, the company will be stronger than ever."

    re -.1
    
           Larry, I'm looking for a speechwriter for my '96 Presidential
    bid.  You busy?
    
    
    Dave
    

    re: .36,.37
    
    Agree.  Why can't our Digital "officials" think and write as well?
    

    Will I be busy in 1996?  That's the question we're all asking, isn't it!
    
    I think .-1 misses the point, though.  The question isn't why they
    can't think of things like that.  The question is, whether they are
    willing to make the sort of commitment contained my earlier note.
    Palmer did -- he talked a lot about "zero tolerance for lack of
    integrity".  But what have the people working for him done about it?
    
    And that brings us back to morale.  I agree with .35 that a morale 
    problem can only be treated indirectly.  But that doesn't mean that 
    there need be any mystery how to treat it.  Show people that they
    have control over events.  Show people that you value them and that 
    you are competent and have a plan that *can* lead to success and they'll 
    follow.  Those who don't believe in the comptence of the leaders won't
    follow and those who don't feel valued won't follow.  Sadly, there have
    been several times over the past two years when I felt that my personal
    commitment to integrity and fair (but plain) speaking is definately
    *not* valued by managers at quite a variety of levels.  There are also
    many times when I do feel valued, which is part of why I'm still here.
    
    		Enjoy,
    		Larry