Conference 7.286::digital

          <<< ILBBAK::SYSB$:[NOTES$LIBRARY]US_SALES_SERVICE.NOTE;1 >>>
                             -< US_SALES_SERVICE >-
================================================================================
Note 191.11                     New $$$ Plan ???                        11 of 11
ODIXIE::RYANKE "Kevin Ryan @MTO DTN 360-5115"        11 lines   4-NOV-1993 09:51
                       -< Russ G. extends draw 1 month >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Russ said in his DVN yesterday that the draw would be extended one
    month.  The reason for the extension is accuracy of the reports.  He
    was very high on the systems folks making their deadlines, but the data
    was only 90% accurate so far.
    
    He said that today-
    	35% of the sales force would make more money.
    	25% are even or 10% below
    	40% would receive 10-20% less
    
    He encouraged everyone to work hard to achieve the making money level.

    I missed the REHEARSED ANSWERS to the "Top Ten Questions".  From
    what I heard IT went well.  However, the room in which the DVN
    was broadcast emptied after the answer to the sales compensation
    question.  The REALLY interesting segment of the DVN occurred
    AFTER the the Top Ten.  Russ G. began taking questions 
    called in from around the country.  I won't even try to describe
    how angry and frustrated Russ appeared to be by the end of the call-in
    portion of the DVN.  When (IF?) this DVN is put on tape it is a must
    see.  I felt bad for Russ.  Tactically, it was risky planning to have
    him exposed to unscreened questions.  He could not possibly answer
    some of the questions or issues raised.  At one point he was asked
    a question to which he replied; "AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHHH!!!".  Even
    the panel assembled to help with answers seemed overmatched by some
    of the questions.  
    
    Prediction:  Look for a new format if they try this type of DVN again.
    
    I know there have been other Q&A DVN's.  This one was very different
    in that people asked the questions that THEY REALLY HAD and not the
    fluff questions that are asked so often.  
    
       

    Were there actually 10 prepared questions that he answered?  If so,
    what were they (I missed the DVN)?
    
    Larry
    

I enjoyed what seemed to be a frankness about some difficult subjects.  For 
example layoffs were referred to as layoffs, where in the past they have 
been called "transitions" or "impacted employees".  However, I was somewhat 
turned off by the several references to how great morale seemed at COE!
What a surprise!!!

    
    
    	Russ talked about the feeling among employees that management was
    	not being impacted as much as the worker bees; he offered numbers
    	to show that this was not so. But one interesting thing he did say
    	was "Yes, we do read the notesfiles."
    	
    	FWIW
    	John

    
    
    	Here are the ten questions as recorded in my rough notes from the
    meeting. Following are "very brief" answers from my notes. Remember
    that the answers are from my notes, abbreviated, and are NOT quotes.
    
    The 10 Tough Questions
    
    1. Wiil there be more layoffs?
    
        Answered by Russ G.- { Yes, but not in sales, and not in numbers
    like last year.}
    
    2. Who is Scot Roeth?
    
    	Scot was present and gave a short personal background and
    introduction.
    
    3. What changes in the management ranks have been made?
    
    	Russ G. - { The numbers of the management ranks within Digital have been
    thinned, layers of mgmt. have been removed ( maximum of 5 now), and
    number of direct reports per manager has increased. The number of VP's
    has been increased from 26 in 1992 to 33 in 1933 because our customers
    want to work with high level management.}
    
    
    4. What are the roles of the sales specialists? 
    
    	Harry Finer, a branch manager, spoke about a successful business
    opportunity. 
    
    5. What is the role of the RMC ( Regional Market Center)?
    
    	Russ G. - { The CBU approach could not be efficiently implemented
    in all sizes of accounts. For reasons around cost of doing business,
    the RMC's provide resources on a geographic basis. With time there may
    be more resources deployed within the RMC's.}
    
    6. How does marketing work?
    
    	Answered by Bob Schmidt , VP of Marketing  { How does marketing
    work? "Slowly"... He then laid
    out marketings role and functions, and closed saying the next time this
    question is asked, he hopes the answer will be "GREAT!" }
    
    7. Why is sales support part of the Digital consulting organization?
    
    	A very brief presentation by Bill Horzempa, new US Sales Support
    Manager.
    
    8. How should we use channels?
    
    	Answered by Tom Colatosti, US VP of DMD and Ed Kamins, VP of
    Channels 
    
    9. What's the status of the sales compensation plan?
    
    	Russ G. {The necessary admin. reports are coming on schedule but are
    not accurate as of now, so we will extend the draw for one month.
    Account mapping has slowed us down, it was much worse than expected.}
    
    10. How can we improve collaboration in the office and the handling of
    office issues?
    
    	Russ G. { To some extent we have fragmented operations at local
    offices, so we have named 140 location
    managers to improve this. These duties will be incremental to the
    managers current assignments but are very important.}
     
    
    
                                                         
                                                    

    	IMHO, the 10 Tough Questions were well chosen and candidly
    answered. In addition, the "phone-in" questions that followed were
    frank and to the point. If you can get a copy of the tape, it is
    well worth watching.
    
    
    	Russ repeatedly asked for comments, and at one point mentioned that
    he reads the notesfiles. That he sees the value in open communications
    is not hard to see.

>>    AFTER the the Top Ten.  Russ G. began taking questions 
>>    called in from around the country.  I won't even try to describe
>>    how angry and frustrated Russ appeared to be by the end of the call-in
>>    portion of the DVN.  When (IF?) this DVN is put on tape it is a must
>>    see.  I felt bad for Russ.  Tactically, it was risky planning to have
>>    him exposed to unscreened questions.  He could not possibly answer
>>    some of the questions or issues raised.  At one point he was asked
>>    a question to which he replied; "AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHHH!!!".  Even
>>    the panel assembled to help with answers seemed overmatched by some
>>    of the questions.  
  

Russ runs the U.S for Digital, for crying out loud.  If he CAN't answer these 
questions, or at least handle them without being frustrated, he doesn't belong 
in the job.     

What frustrated Russ was not the question (Industry and Regional PSC's
fighting over revenue credit) but the fact that there still is this assinine
infighting that adds no value to our customer service.  What bothers me here 
is that Digital management established metrics for the different organizations
and apparantly have no clue how these organizations are behaving in response
to the new metrics.

    Um - are not some of Russ G.'s figures about the thinning of management
    obviously false? Like, the number of VPs seems a little off, by a half
    order of magnitude or so. At least he offered a not-easily-dismissable
    reason for the swelling of the VP ranks.
    
    I'd be flat astonished if the max layers of management was really 5,
    too, though I'm not sure what the ISO standard for counting layers is.
    
    Chuck

    
    
    	Russ mentioned that from where he stands, there is no morale 
    	problem. He went on to say that there was no morale problem
    	amount the people in Maui, Hawaii, where he recently attended
    	COE (groans from the audience at this point). Then he added
    	words about keeping COE to keep top performers happy, etc.
    
    	Now, I am not discounting the importance of the sales force. I
    	will say, however, that they are NOT more important than the rest
    	of us employees. They just happen to be in sales. I bring in money
    	to the corporation also; indeed, our particular org did very well
    	last quarter. But we have no recognition or awards programs. Why
    	then, is it considered important to keep the sales force happy but
    	too bad if the consultants and instructors leave in droves? It is
    	my opinion that many of the instructors and consultants that I know
    	would be able to sell as well as, if not better than, existing
    	sales people, especially given their technical and people skills
    	that they need to deliver technical courses successfully.
    
    	I don't mean to go down the well travelled COE rathole, but every
    	time I hear things like 'Hey, no problem-o here in Maui!', it makes
    	me wonder how much the front-line troops are being listened to, or
    	if anyone up there even cares.
    
    	John
    
    	

    re .10
    
    The COE in Maui was not just for Sales - it was for Sales, Digital
    Consulting, and (?) whatever what I call field service is now called
    (sorry, I forget).  Although I admit that the vast majority appeared to
    be sales. I'm in Digital Consulting.
    
    Interestingly, I recently received a memo stating that Digital
    Consulting is opting out of the COE program next year and will do
    something different.
    
    Now, I was under the impression that most of the company was eligible
    for COE, with the notable exception of the majority of administrative 
    personnel.  What group are you in that is ineligible?
    
    Wayne
    

    re .10
    
    The question of whether there is a "morale problem" in this company is
    moot, whether you look for it in Maui or Maynard.  We are all
    presumably concerned about the welfare of the company and all of its
    employees, whether we were in Maui or not.  And for those of us in
    Maui, we were hardly ignorant of the problems and struggles we are
    attempting to address every day.  But, realistically, do you think that
    if you accept a trip like that with your spouse or friend you will
    spend your time whining about Digital?  Especially to a Vice President
    in the company.  Instead, you might have time to make a brief
    constructive comment to such a person.
    
    COE never has consistently rewarded the "best" salespeople or whatever. 
    We all have up years and down years in sales, regardless of how good we
    are (unless you're lucky enough to be "set up" every year, and there
    aren't TOO many of those people).  But the opportunity to visit a
    beautiful vacation spot in a beautiful resort is a welcome one. 
    There's no point in being jealous of those people who one thinks
    shouldn't be there, or in being resentful of not being invited (or
    rewarded).  Life is inherently unfair, so is COE.
    
    As far as sales people not being "different"... Well, I don't see who
    anyone can deny that the person that the customer consistently sees as
    representing "Digital" is indeed in a unique (and risky) position. 
    But non-salespeople have their own unique abilities and
    responsibilities as well, without a 20% pay cut up front!  I hope that
    the best of these people are consistently rewarded with the best pay
    raises and promotions!
    
    
    

    
    re .11 - Can you say Engineering?  And Manufacturing?
    

    
        On the levels of management:  maybe that's 5 levels in his 
        organization, but it certainly isn't in the one I'm in.  
        A quick count says that it's 8 levels in the food chain from 
        head honcho (BP) to the trenches.  Presumably that's 7 levels 
        of management, unless there are some functional definitions 
        of management that change the count.
    
    
        On morale:  Yup, definitely depends where you stand - wouldn't 
        expect any problem at the SLT level; but how many of us are 
        there?        :-)
    
    
    
        Peter
    

    
    RE .12
    
    Sounds a little one sided.
    
    Yes, sales has a tough job getting the hardware and software in the
    door in the first place. Services is the one who has to maintain and
    answer all the lifetime questions for the customer. It is also the
    performance of the services organization that makes or breaks the
    ability of sales to come back in when more equipment is needed. We all
    contribute on a equal basis, so don't start this "Sales is better than
    the rest". I've heard this junk for 15 years and its NOT TRUE. You are
    NOT better than me or more important...BZZZZZZZ.....Wrong Answer.....
    
    The vast majority of computer sales in the industry has been on a
    commission basis for years now. If you are in sales, you should have
    seen the handwriting on the wall. 
    
    Average Field Service salary is probably somewhere around $43,000 a
    year. I imagine that software services is equal or above this. From
    what I know, average sales people make a significant amount more than 
    this 43,000 a year, so stop your griping please. Sales has made big 
    bucks for a lot of years, so we are not buying your sob story. Most
    Customer Services awards have been stopped over the last few years. The
    only awards type functions to exist seem to be in Sales only.
    
    Nobody in this corporation is more important than anyone else. Someone
    has to design, manufacture, sell, ship, install, and service the
    product. Without one, the rest cannot survive.
    
    MTS

    re -1
    amen. while i don't much care about awards and the like, i am big on
    fairness. the current awards and metric systems screw everyone. many a
    sales person works hard to earn the money and awards. unfortunately,
    many more simply slop into it. and i'm not just bitchin' or chain
    jerking. i've got LOTS AND LOTS of first hand experience. painful
    experience.

    
    
    
    re. .17
    
    		Burrrrrrr... try again.   Customer services at the field
    level, first line management, and regional support have been expressly
    excluded for two years now. 2nd level management and up can still go. I
    base this knowledge on the simple fact that I won, and then the
    invitation was canceled. "Sorry, but Customer service at your level..."
    I still believe that sales support, and some software groups can go. If
    you consider them part of "Services", then you could be correct.
    
    
    I tend to agree with the last couple of notes regarding equality. I
    don't think any Sales team would benifit if the services and contracts
    people made our customers unhappy enough to switch venders. I also
    think the 43K estimate is a little high.
    
    I have read several notes regarding "how rosy it is at other
    companies". I have a simple question for some of the Sales folks that
    look at these smaller budgets. I already know the part of the answer
    becouse I still remain friends with several people the sell for some
    other companys.
    
    	How much of your budget do you make becouse of Shadow-credits, or
    whatever they're called now?  The sales folks I refered to say that was
    a purely Digital invention. The sales folks I spoke of earlyer say
    there new budget is smaller, for sure. But there is no shadow-certs,
    cross-certs, back-certs or what ever. They are expected to sell, real
    honest to god product and bring in real, honest to god money. No
    excuses.
    
    	I can still give examples of whole groups making budget from the
    fruits of someone else's labor. 
    
    
    One person's opinion.
    
    
    jim
    

   re .18
    
    Customer Services (they're called Multi-vendor Customer Services, this
    week) here in Singapore are eligible. That is, real tool-carrying
    engineers. However, none of them were awarded this year apparently. But
    I knew two first-line managers went.

    I have followed this line of: who qualifies for COE?
    	what are the metrics that got them there?
    	how much did they contribute to Digital's bottom line/
    
    and can identify with most the arguments put forth. 
    
    However in my office two individuals attended COE in Hawaii this year,
    and that's the entire sales force in our office..
    It just happened to be the 5th year of 100% of budget, for both so they
    qualified. They deserved it! 
    
    Maybe, everyone in our office deserved it, but that wasn't something we
    were all striving for. Sales, particularly, is motivated, reviewed, and
    paid on immediate results,... It may not be perfect but it has gotten
    results for this company.
    jim
    

    
    Hmmmm -- Wasn't gonna say anything -- Then I thought - Awww -- What the
    heck! 
    
    COE:  In almost any company with a sales organization, in any industry,
    a perk of the organization is recognition prizes which can include a
    trip to some exotic la-la land.
    
    It's the nature of the beast and it is a reward to the sales person
    for the grief he/she has put up with in the process of
    achieving/overachieving their assigned budget for a fiscal year.
    
    Sales is treated differently because sales is different and we have
    seen in this note string and others the base issue involved -- It's
    called Job Security.  Within the context of the compensation plan
    discussions, you can net everything out to Job Security. 
    
    If you make your numbers in Sales, you have Job Security  -- If U
    don't, U don't have it!  Sooo that means for a sales person to have
    security, they have to make it themselves -- It isn't a right of the
    Job Code.
    
    I say this even with the cloud of TFSO --  IN normal times, non-bag
    carriers in most companies have more job security than bag-carriers. 
    
    That means that for that lack of security that other members of the
    corporation have with their position, sales is treated differently. 
    
    Prizes and compensation are a form of that difference.  And again,
    that's cross-industry.  
    
    If you have a hard time with that, come into Sales -- If U think it's
    so easy -- C'mon over  -- I B waitin'  I keep sayin' that nothin'
    happens until somebody sells something.  
    
    As a sales person, I believe prizes of any sort are appropriate to
    incent and direct a sales organization to achieve corporate objectives. 
    
    Now, before U all drop your lunch on this note, I also have to say,
    that COE's are unlike any other La-La Land trips I've won with other
    companies -- I'm struck with all of the non-bag-carriers in attendance. 
    
    I don't want to get into that one -- I figure that if that's the way
    Digtial wants to run COEs, then that's their business -- If I don't
    like it, I can always work somewhere else.
    
    Finally -- I agree with getting rid of all of that shadow booking bull
    -- It used to gall me when a person would call me to ask what I sold in
    my account so that they could claim credit --- And they didn't have a
    clue as to what sales activity was there.  Then again, they would also
    ask for my account plan because their manager wanted them to do an
    account plan and they either didn't have a clue about the company, or
    they didn't have a clue about how to do an account plan -- So to me,
    this is goodness -- If you don't work with the Rep on the deal, U
    shouldn't try to claim credit.
    
    My .02 
    
    Regards,
    
    
     

    One other point in why sales is different.  In what other role in life
    do you hve another individual working very hard to make you fail?  That
    budget does not just get done because you worked hard.  You had to take
    it out of someone elses paycheck and they are fighting that very hard.
    
    In most every other job you create something of value.  In sales you
    MUST destroy or curtail the value of the competitors product relative to
    yours.  Fun?........right.
    
    

    I just watched the two hour videotape of Russ Gullotti's 10 TOUGH
    QUESTIONS DVN. I found it very enlightening . He struck me as a man of
    integrity who speaks straight and is willing to listen. But throughout
    the DVN he seemed INCREDIBLY frustrated. He was trying to push the
    message that people needed to focus outwards and not inwards. It
    sounded like he feels he is personally doing all he can to improve
    morale. He actually addressed this point, quite correctly saying that
    morale can;t be addressed directly, it is all the things around it that
    once addressed would fix morale.
    
    After the top 10 questions had been answered (well and honestly in my
    opinion) there were phone in questions. Here is where it was forced
    home to Russ that there were still major problems to be worked. The
    good thing is that he seemed REALLY motivated to work the issues.
    
    I transcribed from the tape one of the questions's an Russ's answer.
    THese are the exact words. I won't be able to express the style of
    his answer but his facial expressions and tone conveyed GREAT
    frustration. Not with the caller but with the fact this crap was still
    going on. Here it is:
    
    Questioner from Piscataway New Jersey:
    
    Good afternoon. My question revolves around Territory PSCs and how they
    interface with Intrustry PSCs. I am an individual contributor in a
    territory PSC working on selling and delivering projects. That portion
    that can be claimed by other industry PSCs or vertical solution teams.
    Every time we interface with these organizations the first question my
    management asks is "Will you be getting revenue or will you be getting
    expense relief?" I really don't care. I want the revenue to go to
    Digital. But I think we are spebding far too much time playing these
    games internally and I'd like to understand what the metrics of a
    territory PSC are. Are we to be a body shop or not?
    
    Russ Gullotti's answer:
    
    AARRGGG
    
    I don't know the answer to that. I'll find out the answer to it. I
    can't stand it. We'll get clarity for you. You need to send me your
    name, you need to send me who you are. I'll promise you I'll get a
    clear answer. But huhh... When there is an opportunity to sell
    something to one of our customers and they want to buy, when the first
    question out of management is "Who is going to get the credit?". Let me
    just be real clear. I told you we were going to remove incompetence
    from this company. That is exactly what we will do. The person on the
    other end of the question should be saying, "Great, how do we deliver
    it?". If the measurement systems are wrong the management should turn
    back in, after we win that piece of business and say. "We've got a
    measurement problem here that we've got to fix."
    
    I'm at my wits end on this. I have ZERO patience for management who
    says "Who is going to get the credit?". While we are having that debate
    our competition is in there sucking that business away from us. And I
    am NOT going to put up with it anymore. You STOP IT. Those of you who
    are managers who ask that question. You STOP IT. In the meantime ma'am
    you send me your question, your name, your specifics and I'll get you
    an answer.
    
    Questioner:	Thank you.
    
    I'd be really curious to know what came of this. Guess I wouldn't
    relish being the manager that asked that metrics question. I wonder if
    he/she is still employed by Digital. Russ sounded like he meant
    business. It was certainly nice to hear some direct straight talk.
    
    By the way the absolute WORST answer was the answer given to the
    question on tuition remimbursement. Very sensibly Russ deferred to the
    question to a woman from personnel who gave a really mealy mouthed
    answer. The questioner asked for the reasonings behind stopping tuition
    remimbursement given the focus on training. Russ then followed this up
    by making the strong implication that he didn't agree with the policy.
    As we all know the ill thought out policy was withdrawn a few days
    later. It kind of shows how ill thought out it was when if it had been
    well thought out Russ would have felt HAPPY to support the policy
    change.
    
    All in all I think the broadcast was positive. It showed to me that
    Russ and his staff understand real peoples issues and they gave the
    impression that had and were doing something about them. There was even
    concrete data given out on how management levels had been cut. Numbers
    of managers who had left Digital from the US Area etc. The only thing I
    fault is that this information should have been published MONTHS ago.
    
    Dave

    re .23
    
    Russ wants the questioner's name and organization? I'd personally like
    to know what he will do to ensure that the questioner does not end up
    being victimized. My admirations and respect for the questioner,
    whoever she may be. Thanx for asking.

re: .23
 

The situation as described is a direct response to the way metrics are set
these days. As the old adage goes ... if you hold up hoops, don't be surprised
if people jump thru them ...

A more interesting question would be: who set the metrics this way? 

<<< Note 2763.23 by SMAUG::GARROD "From VMS -> NT, Unix a future page from history" >>>
                              -< Russ on metrics >-

>>    I'd be really curious to know what came of this. Guess I wouldn't
>>    relish being the manager that asked that metrics question. I wonder if
>>    he/she is still employed by Digital. Russ sounded like he meant
>>    business. It was certainly nice to hear some direct straight talk.
  

Well, NOTHING has come of this (yet).  The competition between the territorial
and industry PSC's for revenue is still at a fever pitch, and possible getting 
worse.  What gets me is that this situation is WELL KNOWN in the field, yet
Russ appeared suprised.  As a member of the SLT, he must know how the field is
organized and measured.  Yet senior Digital management seem isolated from the
realities of the organization they hath wrought.

Bob

re: .23

Unfortunately for me, Russ' response to that question was the only item of his
presentation that disturbed me.  How many instructors have told their students
"don't be afraid to ask any questions" or "there is no such thing as a dumb
question"?  One flair-up and you begin to shutdown the channels of communication
your DVN's are trying to build.  A previous reply wondered if the caller would
be 'victimized' for asking the question.  What does this kind of response tell
you?

I think *ALL* Digital employees know we have to sell-sell-sell.  Show me someone
who doesn't think this.  I think anyone in Sales would make *any* sale their
number one priority, especially since their paychecks are riding on it. 

The caller had a concern and made Russ aware of it.  If you can get an answer
from a VP who is broadcasting to potentially 90,000 employees and the response
affects many others (i.e. tuition reimbursement), it's worth the 1-800 call.  

I think a different perspective is needed.  It's like setting up your sales
force at the starting line barefoot and having the road ahead full of broken
glass.  They'll run through it for you, but take a broom and sweep some of the
glass away and they'll run faster.

>    If the measurement systems are wrong the management should turn
>    back in, after we win that piece of business and say. "We've got a
>    measurement problem here that we've got to fix."

What about being proactive?  It seems like we are always playing catch-up.  This
is what separates the 'good' from the 'very good'.

    re: .25
    
    	Exactly!!  The question of who gets credit for a sale is only a
    sympton of the more serious problem, that being our metrics and
    organization structures.
    
    	Having been in sales within the field for several years, I can tell
    you that there are valid reasons for asking the "Who gets credit?"
    question. This is not to say that we can be successful where this issue
    persists for more that a minute or two, but the actions that Russ will
    need to take are mighty  undertakings and go way beyond the scope of the
    particular case and the individuals referred to by the caller.
                                             

    re .26
    
    I believe there has been some action as a follow up to the comments from
    NJ.  There is not a solution yet howver.
    
    Peter Dillard

Note 2763.28 by CSOA1::BROWNE
    
    >	Having been in sales within the field for several years, I can tell
    >you that there are valid reasons for asking the "Who gets credit?"
    >question. This is not to say that we can be successful where this issue
    >persists for more that a minute or two, but the actions that Russ will
    >need to take are mighty  undertakings and go way beyond the scope of the
    >particular case and the individuals referred to by the caller.
     
    having been in the field here in minneapolis (in sales and digital
    consulting) for about 8 years, i'd say this problem is worse than ever. 
    by far. i've seen wholesale infighting and cheating over "who gets credit"
    for what. consider:
    
    1. i've seen us lose business to competitors while in the process of
    backstabbing and working the system.
    
    2. i've seen individuals alter numbers that make them look like
    superstars to the company when in fact they accomplished very little.
    (e.g. taking credit for a $200K order when in fact their portion of the
    sale was <$20K).
    
    3. i've seen (and continue to see) people who contribute NOTHING to
    DEC's bottom line and spend their entire time "generating good
    numbers".
    
    4. i see us continually PENALIZE people for doing what's best for DEC.
    i'm a network consultant and get virtually NO credit for selling the
    VAST majority of DEC's networking products. it's a long story. trust me. 
    but it's more ridiculous now than ever.
    
    5. i see, and am forced (under implied "OR ELSE" threats) to use, time
    consuming abysmal accounting systems that are a joke and easily
    manipulated to distort the reality of sales, certs, metrics, etc.
    
    6. i see those that dare speak up about what's wrong being retaliated
    against big time by many paranoid levels of management. i personally
    was threatened with termination for the 1797.* string in this
    conference. i only feel semi comfortable now because those that did the
    threatening (Bob Hughes, Don Zereski.........down the chain to me) are
    mostly gone now. look at 2782.* here! people are afraid to speak up.
    they are afraid to associate their names with comments that could be
    labeled as critical to management.
    
    i was going to document the information i have that substaniates all
    this and try to talk to Russ about it. but i'm just to tired. i can't
    "fix" DEC. and those that can either don't know how or refuse to do so.
    
    if Russ is listening i have just one message for him. the metrics are
    killings us and are tearing this company apart.
    
    and i don't think that statement is over blown.
    
    gene haag, network consultant
    mineapolis, minnesota
    
    i don't mind signing my name anymore. i've nothing to lose.
    

    
    Does anybody know if Russ Gullotti ever resolved the PSC question from
    his top 10 questions of last November? Specifically:
    
>Note 2763.23                DVN:  Ten Tough Questions                   23 of 31
>SMAUG::GARROD "From VMS -> NT, Unix a future page f" 85 lines  13-NOV-1993 14:40
>                              -< Russ on metrics >-
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...
    
>    I transcribed from the tape one of the questions's an Russ's answer.
>    THese are the exact words. I won't be able to express the style of
>    his answer but his facial expressions and tone conveyed GREAT
>    frustration. Not with the caller but with the fact this crap was still
>    going on. Here it is:
>    
>    Questioner from Piscataway New Jersey:
>    
>    Good afternoon. My question revolves around Territory PSCs and how they
>    interface with Intrustry PSCs. I am an individual contributor in a
>    territory PSC working on selling and delivering projects. That portion
>    that can be claimed by other industry PSCs or vertical solution teams.
>    Every time we interface with these organizations the first question my
>    management asks is "Will you be getting revenue or will you be getting
>    expense relief?" I really don't care. I want the revenue to go to
>    Digital. But I think we are spebding far too much time playing these
>    games internally and I'd like to understand what the metrics of a
>    territory PSC are. Are we to be a body shop or not?
>    
>    Russ Gullotti's answer:
>    
>    AARRGGG
>    
>    I don't know the answer to that. I'll find out the answer to it. I
>    can't stand it. We'll get clarity for you. You need to send me your
>    name, you need to send me who you are. I'll promise you I'll get a
>    clear answer. But huhh... When there is an opportunity to sell
>    something to one of our customers and they want to buy, when the first
>    question out of management is "Who is going to get the credit?". Let me
>    just be real clear. I told you we were going to remove incompetence
>    from this company. That is exactly what we will do.
>    [rest of answer deleted]
    
    and:
    
>Note 2763.29                DVN:  Ten Tough Questions                   29 of 31
>NYOS02::DILLARD "Happiness is a 1300 with one end to" 6 lines  15-NOV-1993 14:48
>                       -< Follow up to revenue question >-
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    re .26
>    
>    I believe there has been some action as a follow up to the comments from
>    NJ.  There is not a solution yet howver.
>    
>    Peter Dillard