Conference 7.286::digital

    elevate this to Gullotti, copying every manager between you and him - 
    be sure you and the salesrep have adequate documentation of his
    efforts.
    
    If Russ is as good as his word he'll fix this problem - we have people
    climbing out of the woodwork to claim credit for work not done all the 
    time and our reps have become masters at proving they, and only they, 
    did the 'selling' work.

Give me your permission to give this to Bob Palmer and I will personally
hand this note to him next week, when I see him.

Dave

    those that think the story in .0 is somehow unique or an "isolated"
    case should think again. i see it all the time and frankly, i'm mad as
    hell about it. we are never going to turn this company around if we
    continue to allow the damn leeches to feed off of the work of the few.
    harsh words? perhaps. but i have seen, OVER AND OVER again, this kind
    of thing happen.
    
    To: Russ G.
    
    Russ,
    
    If we don't fix this kind of behavior it's not likely this company will
    become what we all want it to be - growing, prosperous, a company that 
    people agressively pusue as an employer. We are so far from that
    scenerio, I am concerned we may never again atain it. Please fix this
    mess.
    
    Rgds,
    
    Gene Haag, Network Consultant
    Minneapolis
    
    

    Reg .2
    
    I have forward this note to the sales rep, as far as my permission, it
    is granted. But I would like to wait and make sure the sales rep feels
    comfortable with my observation of this certing issue.
    
    William J Sevic
    Grand Rapids,MI

I suggest that the problem be elevated to John Rando, also.  After all, it is
an MCS sales rep who is getting shorted.

BobW

>================================================================================
>Note 2898.4              Certing for not doing anything.                  4 of 4
>GJOVAX::SEVIC                                         8 lines  12-FEB-1994 22:47
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                         -< This would be APPRECIATED >-
>
>    Reg .2
>    
>    I have forward this note to the sales rep, as far as my permission, it
>    is granted. But I would like to wait and make sure the sales rep feels
>    comfortable with my observation of this certing issue.
>    
>    William J Sevic
>    Grand Rapids,MI
>
> 
> 

    Reg .2
    
    Dave.
    
    Permission granted.
    
    William J Sevic
    Grand Rapids,Mi

    Wait.  What are you all (exclude the author) basing your advise and
    rath on?  What do you *KNOW*?  Very little.
    
    Who else is getting credit?  Other MCS reps?  Industry Reps?  DC?
    
    The fact is that if the MCS rep is a "Generalist" (Sells on or off
    base break fix) then he/she will get credit for that part of the deal. 
    Staging and other PCI services will go to the PCI sales rep, within
    MCS.  If SPS is involved, then there is another MCS sales rep
    responsible for that piece.  People within the MCS lines will
    traditionally work together on a project of this size and predifine
    effort and split ratios.
    
    If an industry rep is trying to take a piece....well, "break-fix he
    gets no certs and revenue for, though he can get some bonus money. 
    PCI is shadowed 100%.  
    
    If Digital Consulting is challenging MCS for revenue (typically where
    the friction is), then thats an issue that will never be resolved,
    (IMO) until the two groups are merged.
    
    Don't send letters all over the place ....  YET.  

    It seems that your note is exactly indicative of the problem.
    
    .0 says that the sales rep was solely responsible for a three million
    dollar sale.  Yet you say a PCI rep should get credt for the "Staging"
    or whatever it is.  Then, you add in an SPS rep who may never have
    talked to the customer.
    
    Meanwhile, the author of .0 describes people picking overthe bones of
    what should be a celebration of a sale.
    
    Maybe that's why the stock is struggling to break 30 rather and
    striving to break 200.
    
    Sadly,
    BobW

Ok, I work in engineering and what I know about sales can easily be written
on the back of a stamp but this sounds like somebody's been spending too
much time stirring the alphabet soup:

>    The fact is that if the MCS rep is a "Generalist" (Sells on or off
>    base break fix) then he/she will get credit for that part of the deal. 
>    Staging and other PCI services will go to the PCI sales rep, within
>    MCS.  If SPS is involved, then there is another MCS sales rep
>    responsible for that piece.  People within the MCS lines will
>    traditionally work together on a project of this size and predifine
>    effort and split ratios.

"Predefine split ratios?" Sounds like the sales guy has been had before he
starts.

    There are many, very valid reasons for a cert to be 'split' between
    multiple reps. For example, it is not at all uncommon for an order to
    be taken in one location and work performed in another in the execution
    of the sale. That work can take many forms - the 'split' is intended to
    compensate the local rep for work to be performed. There are many other
    reasons for 'splitting' an order.
    
    I have no knowledge of this particular sale. But then, neither do most
    of the respondents. I suggest building a somewhat better understanding
    of selling, and the selling metrics, before jumping to any conclusions
    about what should be done.

    I have an opportunity for a large MCS win.  There are several parts to
    the sale.  There is break-fix maintenance, PCI staging, SPS contracts
    and Network Integration services.  I happen to be a PCI sales
    specialist and as it happens, the person with the best relationship
    with the account/decision makers.
    
    Should I, all by myself, attempt to close this sale?
    
    Yes?  Then what should happen to me if I lose?  I failed to bring in
    the people who specialize in 3 out of 4 areas; failed to put our best
    resources on the opportunity.
    
    No.  I should involve the best people for the win and distribute the
    certs/revenue by product or by effort or both.
    
    

    I have to jump in here, because we get caught in this cycle more often
    than not.
    
    Our group provides VTX consulting services to external customers.  It
    irks me every time I have to quote an internal price to a local
    sales/account team and see them double the price to the customer.  We
    can't bill the customers directly, but must go through the local
    account.  I can understand that the account folks have spent lots of
    time making contacts, etc., but why should they get so much money when
    we deliver the service?
    
    It irks me even more when the customer later comes to us directly and
    asks for additional work.  In this latter case, the account team has
    not had to do any footwork to generate the consulting effort, yet they
    get as much money for it as we do.
    
    In many cases, due to the high mark-up costs, the customer can only
    afford a portion of the consulting service that we could provide to
    them.  I've seen this having a detrimental effect on the perception of
    the product's ease-of-use and usefullness to the external company.
    A job 1/2 done is sometimes worse than not doing anything!
    
    Just my .02 cents....
    
    Gita Devi
    VTX Consulting Services

    As anyone who is currently getting either certs or revenue credit these
    days, they better KNOW what seg codes they get credit for and have the
    order booked appropriately.  Was the Customer Support Consultant for
    this deal involved?  If not, SHAME on the MCS sales rep.  The Customer
    Support Consultant is there to help anyone involved with a sale to
    coordinate and potentially "steer" the booking based on appropriate
    part #'s which fall under seg codes., i.e. Seg code 009 goes directly
    to MCS and Industry sales reps get shadow at 100%.  Sounds like this
    whole thing could have been alleviated if the Bid Win Team and the CSC
    were involved. 
    
    Just my $.02 worth.
    
    JP
    Customer Support Consultant

    
    I have been wondering about this for years.  I've seen some orders
    credited out to different orgs that total in excess of 200%.  I don't
    care what the breakdown is, but the total credit given for any one
    order should not be above 100%.
    
    
    Mike

    .13
    
    Yes.  You have the idea.

    re .12
    
    Your problem will not be solved until you develop your own sales force.
    And then, you'll develop the overhead associated with it.  And then
    you'll have a better appreciation for those nasty uplifting slaes
    folks!

Other companies seem to be successful in selling/rewarding/etc... 

Are things unnecessarily complex here at Digital? Is it our organizational
structure that creates the need for various numeric 'games' that have
been mentioned in this topic? If so it sounds like a form of bondage to
me.

Lee

    I'm hesitant to jump in here, but...                       
    
    See, I'm normally the one who is bitching about leeches in the system,
    sucking the blood and giving no value to the company.  For all I know,
    that may be exactly what's happening here.  If so, shoot the guilty and
    let's move on.
    
    However (comma)..
    
    A general blasting of the splits policies and "shadow booking" policies
    should not begin until you understand the implications.  Remember the
    "Rule of Unintended Consequences" is the most common pitfall in making
    policy decisions.
    
    I've been on both sides of the issue:  there have been years when
    "shadow bookings" were prohibited or highly restricted.  Folks, it just
    didn't work.  Like it or not, we cannot follow the sales credit
    policies of a Fuller brush distributor. 
    
    I have also been on both sides of the issue when there was a splits
    policy and/or a shadow booking policy in place.  I literally have sent
    people to DECathalon who had no real part in the sale.  Did it chap me? 
    In some cases, quite a bit.  But it is a cost of doing business.  I
    have seen the BIGGER damage it can do to our company not to have such
    policies.
    
    Part of it is just caused by a mindset or narrow point of view.  I had
    to just get over it, and accept the fact that the real world is messy. 
    I proved (at least to myself) that the alternative does not work.  One
    thing that helped was to realize that if you allow (for very valid
    reasons) the concept of shadow booking, you merely adjust budgets
    upward to account for this fact.
    
    For example, I have been told that each industry sales rep would really
    only need to sell $1M per year for the corporation to make its numbers. 
    In reality, we carry $2M to $3+M budgets.
    
    There are a number of things that any individual sales rep does not get
    credit for, like maintenance and support contract renewals in the case
    of an industry sales rep.  That rep may still get involved in
    representing the company to the executive levels, or will field
    customer satisfaction issues, but it is just overhead activity -- part
    of a general assignment to build and maintain good customer
    relationships.  In other cases, the account rep will call in a sales
    specialist to actually do the work of the sale, and both will get
    credit (one "real" and one "imaginary" or shadowed).
    
    In the second case, why should the industry rep get any credit?  He or
    she did not do the work, or at least the majority.
    
    The answer is that you have to specialize.  The customer will not want
    to get to know a dozen different reps.  The focal point must be the
    account rep, and his/her job is to be a "resource switch" or a bird
    dog.  In other words, find an opportunity, put it on track, and go find
    the next one.
    
    Now some reps use this shamelessly, trying to put ALL the work on
    others, or live off the opportunities that others track down.  I
    despise that kind of behavior, which usually manifests itself in an
    elitism that is not warranted:  kind of saying that they don't do
    windows, they don't get their hands dirty with the details, they don't
    have to know the product or the technology.
    
    In the situation described in the base note, it could be one of two
    basic scenarios:
    
    1.  The engergetic rep is indeed being picked apart by jackals.  They
    are able to do this because either:
    
      a.  The metrics say this is what the policy is.  In that case, the
    rep got caught because he was focusing on his job and not internal
    policies.  This is the worst case; the only remedy is for management to
    make some sort of exception, which they rarely do because it would
    encourage a raft of claims.  Arguing why the metrics are that way is
    another long discussion.
    
    b.  The jackals are lying about their involvement.  Then management
    should punish them, and come down hard.
    
    2.  The other possibility is that other groups are claiming credit not
    only because they are allowed to by policy, but they actually added
    some value.  Note from the discussion above that sometimes you have to
    pay the overhead of having resources -- you pay for it sometimes by
    setting it up so they get credit when they weren't helping to drive the
    sale.
    
    I know number 2 sounds non-sensical to some.  But remember there is a
    shortage of resources, always.  If a sales cycle is going strongly, as
    it sounds like this rep was able to do, then the people not vitally
    needed for that one should be out trying to scare up some others.  You
    pay for that activity somewhere.
    
    We need, we MUST have, people going after business outside our
    shrinking base.  The rep in this case sounds like he was doing that. 
    One way to look at this would be that by giving these others some
    credit on the sale, the others are subsidized to chase something else.
    
    Lastly, let me repeat I have seen the scavengers.  I have fed some of
    them.  I don't approve of them but I approve less of imposing policies
    that would kill them all off but hurt the company more.  It would be
    like drenching my house with DDT to kill the cockroaches.  
    

    The really sad part (to me) about all this wrangling for credit is
    that it consumes so much of our time and effort, and yes, profit.
    I've watched seven different managers and reps, all highly paid,
    sit in a conference room for hours, arguing over who gets credit
    for a small hardware/software/consulting win. By the time they
    were finished, I daresay that the entire profit margin from the
    sale was destroyed by the amount of non-productive time spent.
    
    My feeling is that will only stop when we run out of sales wins
    for people to fight over. The problem has existed for years, and
    management hasn't figured out a way to fix it yet.
    
    Geoff

Hot button alert!   8-)

Problem:  People getting "shadow" credit for wins that they did not participate
          in.

Knee-Jerk: Thou shalt not get credit unless you are directly involved! 
Solution  

Unintended:  In order for us to know that you were involved, you will use the
Consequence  following part number and SEG Code, and you shall employ a 
	     "Customer" Support Consultant to help you sort these codes out.
	     (Someone want to explain what the customer gets out of this?)

Example:  Network Integration Services sells a network design and 
	  implementation, including the new DEChub 900 product line, along with
	  a bunch of other stuff, like Alpha Network Management stations, etc.
	  NIS is required to quote all of this under an "FN" part number in
	  order to get credit for the sale. (Account Mgr get 100% credit also)
	  In order to do this, we first go into AQS and generate a quote with
	  Digital part numbers and standard pricing, less any discount.  Then
	  we have to break out list price from standard price, and calculate
	  margin based on DECdirect transfer cost to NIS.  Then we have to 
	  work with MCS to build back in the warranty that was removed from 
	  the original quote from AQS, and put that back under a part number
	  that MCS gets credit for.  (Hopefully there were no accounting 
	  errors, since this is all done manually with a calculator and pencil)
	  Finally, we can send the customer a quote which shows our special
	  part numbers in the right places with the right costs.  Of course, 
	  nobody does this because the customer would be more conbfused than 
	  you are right now!   So we send the original quote (still cryptic,
	  but at least consistant for a long time Digital customer... God help
	  a new customer trying to read one of our quotes) and with a letter
	  that explains the quote in English.   Then if we're lucky enough to
	  win the business, the real fun starts trying to actually book the
	  order through all of the internal beauracracy of IPR's, IAT's, and
	  etc.

Just in case I lost anyone... we go through all of that just so we can give 
the NIS people credit for the sale.  This process is, on average, about 
50% of the total selling effort, and about 95% of the total selling 
frustration.

All because Digital is afraid to give NIS credit for Digital networking 
product sales.

And this is just one example from one organization....

Its a wonder we have time for our customers at all...

Sheesh...

Bob

    re .2's willingness to forward credit-claiming disputes to Bob Palmer's
    office, and .16's observation re:carrying the load of having a sales
    force:
    
    Might the real issue not be "devious" sales reps claiming credit, but
    instead the very existence of the newly created semi-autonomous
    business units within the theoretically whole company called 'Digital'?
    
    Like the old Soviet Union during the collapse of its sphere of
    influence, once its "republics" got a whiff of independence, all h...
    broke loose.  Too many factions with special interests, too many people
    claiming to be in control of small pieces of the enterprise (but few
    being leaders).  And increasingly, the threat of total anarchy with
    further breakdowns of individual "nation-states".
    
    So we have Digital, with its many "business units" with newly
    appointed managers, each with its own purpose within the old
    "union".  For example, MCS with its charter to be as profitable as
    possible means that it will have a preference for selling 3rd
    party products (more margin, you see) such as AST PC's, Synoptics hubs,
    and various 3rd party storage products.  They are absolutely NOT
    motivated to encourage the sale of Digital products.  So, naturally,
    sales people in the old "union"'s other business units are naturally
    distrustful of the MCS folks.  I believe the general attitude may be
    that if "they" are not looking out for "our" interests, why should "we"
    care about "theirs"?  Result:  There is no benefit from the synergy
    that theoretically should be a "Digital" advantage! 
    
    This problem is not limited to anyone's perception of MCS.  Seriously,
    folks, does anyone REALLY believe that people are just dying to pick up
    the phone and order Digital PC's over the phone?  Of course they are,
    they're distributors and VARS that have worked possibly for months to
    sell themselves and Digital (usually with one of the industry business
    unit reps hounding them to make sure they don't flip over to COMPAQ or
    AST,etc. because of problems delivering Digital product).  But all the
    PC business unit sees is an easy order of 50 PC's over the phone (and the
    only overhead they'll admit to is the salary of the PC Catalog sales rep,
    along with a limited number of direct reps).  But the perception on above,
    I'm sure, is that the PC unit is handsomely profitable, while the industry
    business units appear not to work.
    
    I believe that if we streamlined the many-tiered and much-divided
    management structure, the numerous complaints and disputes over
    "splitting" or "shadowing" credit would quickly disappear.  After all,
    does anyone honestly think that he/she is ever SOLELY responsible for a
    $3M sale????  Give me a break! Even in a $5K PC order from a
    distributor, the catalog sales person deserves credit if only for ensuring
    an accurate configuration, and the industry rep deserves credit for
    probably finding the lead or ensuring that the distributor sell the
    Digital product.  For every $50K MCS project that an industry business
    unit rep was never involved in, I'll bet there's one where MCS would
    never have been involved were it not for the industry rep.
    
    Let's not act like the folks in Bosnia, where anger is misplaced and
    directed at people just like ourselves!  The problem is removed a layer
    above individual disputes.
                             

    re: .20
    
    <FLAME ON>
    
    I don't know what other customers get from their Customer Support
    Consultant, but mine get correct invoices the 1st time, don't get them
    until the proverbial "acceptance period" is over, delivery information
    and escalation, predictability, one point of contact for "ALL" product
    and service questions and issues (with BASE and LSSC support), etc.
    
    Sales gets to utilize my admin expertise so that appropriate
    expectations are set with the customer regarding specific admin
    processes and policies that may be required to fulfill the T's and C's
    of specific contracts/projects.  
    
    As a CSC I do "ADD VALUE" to any one of my sales team and business
    partners and especially my customers and I can pretty much speak for
    ALL CSC's and say that generically, if we are utilized "UP FRONT" then
    we don't have the "CLEAN-UP" usually required after delivery because
    sales/MCS Sales/BASE has proposed something Digital's systems can't
    provide.
    
    <FLAME OFF>
    
    Now, if you need more info on CSC's (Customer Support Consultants) call
    your CSC and talk with them.
    
    Toodles.....JP

re: .20

We're really using different flavors of bogus part numbers to keep track of
credit for sales??  Who thought up this wonderful scheme?

								- paul

    
    I'm surprised the talk here is only limited to the "sales" portion of
    our "program".
    
    The last CC I came from generally handed out $100, $150, $500 awards to
    people who did absolutely nothing. It generated a good laugh especially
    with the people who actually did the work. Heck it's being going on
    for years.
    
    They would take a $500 award, throw in 2 people who did the work,
    add 2 who did very little; shake it and proclaim 4 great workers.
    
    I suppose the CC could proclaim "keeping morale up" but it didn't 
    morale the actual accomplishers.
    
    
    

    Wait a minute.  I have read note .0 several times and I have a few 
    comments.
    
    This deal included "Digital H/W from logistics".  I have heard from
    several Authorized Digital Distributors(AVNET, PIONEER) complaining
    that MCS is using this process to undercut them on pricing.  These
    distributors claim that  Logistics is being stocked with equipment
    and that the MCS reps. can sell this equip. as "quasi-brokers".
    
    Questions:
    
    What are the internal costs to transfer new equip. to logistics?
    At what price does MCS have to quote this equipment?
    Can a Digital end-user sales rep. quote and sell equipment from
    Logistics?
    Is, or has, logistics inventory being, or been, artificially inflated?
    
    From what I have heard some MCS reps are making a killing selling
    from logistics alone.  Other services that are supposed to be
    marketed and sold are being largely ignored.
    
    
    

    Reg .25        
    
    The reasons of logistics being involved in the hardware sale are two
    fold, one being the quantity of systems (LPx's PC'S) to meet the
    demand of systems needing to be staged and shipped to the customer end
    users by the end of Janurary. ( Remember this did not close till the
    end of December ) and there was some concern that the normal sales
    process could not meet that demand. Regaurding undercutting the VAR'S
    believe me what the customer is paying for each system, this is not a
    issue. Secondly there is large third party content to this sale. There
    where no internal part numbers for the options the customer
    requested be involved in this intergration. ( Some of this equipment is
    strictly to interface in bowling enviroment ). So the sales Rep help
    locate a vendor to supply MCS, through MCS purchasing. After that all the
    equipment is sent to Grand Rapids MI where the software is loaded
    along with the application from the customer, the equipment is tested
    with all the interface equipment, repacked and sent through out the
    world. One other thing, some my be wondering way the local office is
    staging this. The customer was having this done with another vendor
    out of state, where there where alot of issues. So since there world
    headquarters is located in the Grand Rapids area, they are hoping for
    better results being close to the staging area, since there are many
    global issue that need to be address at any given time. 
    
    William J Sevic

    Please take a moment and explain who is is claiming this revenue other
    then the rep you are talking about.  WHat is the primary rep?  PCI
    sales?

    re:  .26
    
    Sounds like some good, creative things are being made to happen.
    This is the kind of thing we need to learn to do more of -- be
    responsive and meet a need.
    
    re:  .25
    
    We don't want to undercut VARs, but it sounds like they were doing
    something that needed to be done quickly.  Selling out of logistics is
    one creative tool we can provide for our customers.