| Title: | The Digital way of working |
| Moderator: | QUARK::LIONEL ON |
| 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 |
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Text of Bob Palmer's Q3 Employee Forum ... Date: 07-Feb-1994
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Text of Bob Palmer's Q3 Employee Forum address on DVN
(Following is the text of Bob Palmer's DVN address to
employees. A transcript of the question and answer session will be
posted in LIVE WIRE later this week.)
A couple of weeks ago, I sent a message to every employee that
put our quarterly earnings report in perspective. I'm going to review
that information briefly because it will set the context for the key
messages I want to share with you today.
For the second quarter of the 1994 fiscal year, we reported a
loss of $72 million on total sales of $3.25 billion -- or about two
cents per dollar of sales.
I am not satisfied with any loss.
However, this one was slightly less than what we reported in the
comparable quarter one year ago -- despite a revenue decline of
approximately $435 million.
In fact, this marks five consecutive quarters of improving
year-over-year results, following 17 quarters of declining
year-over-year results.
If we look at the first six months of the year, we managed to
cut our loss in half, despite a drop in revenue of $735 million. Put
another way, if we had not successfully reduced our costs as we have
done, our loss for the six months would have been greater than three
quarters of a billion dollars.
And, as I said, at a loss of about two cents on the dollar, we
are currently operating very near our financial break-even point -- a
critical point in our turnaround efforts.
We have been extremely successful in cutting and curbing
expenses. We will continue to do that, as we must.
But our major emphasis now is -- and will continue to be -- to
support our worldwide sales and services professionals so that they can
increase our revenue so that we can become profitable again as quickly
as possible.
An extensive study of companies in financial trouble similar to
ours in 1992 reveals that a successful turnaround of a company this
size is a multi-year task. It is simply unrealistic to believe that we
can turn around a company of this size overnight -- but we are
definitely making progress by following a rational and systematic
approach to transforming our company.
We all know that it took us several years to get in significant
trouble, and it is going to take some time to recover fully. That's
the reality. It's not easy for any of us, but it is a fact.
We need to remind ourselves of this so that we don't become
discouraged and lose sight of our attainable goal of sustained growth
and profitability.
We also need to remind ourselves of the reality of our situation
so that we don't lose sight of the two things that are critical to our
success:
One, we must remain focused on achieving total customer
satisfaction. It must ultimately drive everything that we do.
And two, we must all work together in the same direction.
Think about this: I cannot save your job. Your manager cannot.
Only our customers can ensure that you are successfully employed.
We were very clear when we began engineering Digital's
turnaround that one of the areas in need of attention was sales and
marketing. We knew that we had become in large part disconnected from
our customers, had not been listening to them, and had overlooked their
needs and requirements. We had ignored the demand from our customers
for open systems.
As part of our increased focus on the customer, we organized the
company around industry business units that would concentrate on
selling solutions to specific types of industries with specialized
needs.
Understanding customer needs as the customer interprets them was
-- and is -- imperative to success in the marketplace.
But we realized soon after we began implementing our industry
business unit structure that we were creating too many duplications and
too much confusion in the field.
We had built in unintentional complications that hindered doing
business and became roadblocks to growing product revenue for the
company. We also succumbed to the temptation to revert to internal
focus rather than customer focus.
And we began to get additional feedback -- from analysts and
others -- that we did not have enough sales and marketing focus on
products, on our bread and butter software and hardware that drive
revenue across industries.
We continued losing market share. Our revenue continued to drop
in our traditional core VAX/VMS-related business faster than growth in
our new businesses expanded. Quite simply, we needed to correct that.
In my November DVN with you, I showed you this slide to
demonstrate how the industry business units would report into worldwide
sales and marketing to help us reduce complications --and to help me
track more easily how the business was doing.
The new System Business Unit, which we just renamed -- and which
one or two members of the business press have blown out of proportion
as some radical change in direction -- is not any different from the
core products slice of the company.
What we did was segment this six billion dollar piece of our
business so that we can understand how we are doing in all of our
various product dimensions.
With respect to the media, it is helpful to keep in mind that
the media are in the business of tracking down and reporting news.
That's their job. But I've found, unfortunately, that sometimes the
media do not develop an accurate understanding of the facts.
The press is making a correlation between our second quarter
results and the latest organizational refinement of the Systems
Business Unit. They're simply not directly related, in terms of
quarterly results. What is related is that over the past several
quarters, we've seen that our products business was not doing well.
The issue became how to get more focus on the products business
to balance the industry business -- and that was the genesis of the
Systems Business Unit.
The Systems Business Unit includes five product segments. Those
five segments are:
o client/server software
o OpenVMS client/server systems and software
o UNIX/Windows NT client/server systems
o memory and peripheral upgrades
o and network products
Our products have never been stronger across the entire spectrum
of client/server computing. The Systems Business Unit has been put in
place to respond quickly and thoroughly to the marketplace with these
superior offerings. It will provide focus on products which are
critical to Digital's ongoing business success. Each product segment
will have a different business model, based on the objective for that
segment.
Now, as a company, as a culture, we seem to have done two things
around this Systems Business Unit announcement which do not help any of
us at all.
First, we've taken it to mean that we have given up on
industries -- which we have not. Approximately 55% of our sales
professionals and resources worldwide remain aligned by industry.
And second, we seem to have turned it into a discussion of who's in
charge.
The Board and I have discussed this in great detail.
This refinement of our organization is definitely not a change
in direction. It clarifies it, helps manage our business, and
continues to be customer focused.
The creation of the Systems Business Unit does not signify a
change in strategy. It is not about "who's in charge." The senior
management of the company and I made all of these decisions together,
after careful analysis and spirited debate. It is not about who has
more power than someone else. It is an issue of focus on our
customers.
The world in which we compete is complex, with more than one
dimension. It became very clear that we could not simply treat our
broad array of products as a homogeneous block.
The competition isn't doing that. Our most successful
competitors are looking at different pieces of the market -- horizontal
slices as opposed to a vertical integration -- and we need to
understand our revenue and our costs against the competition.
Many parts of our traditional product space now face focused
competition from companies that specialize in that relatively narrow
band.
The Systems Business Unit will help us focus our product efforts
and understand better how to compete in all of the areas its various
pieces represent.
We need to have different strategies to compete successfully in
different areas. However, our industry organization will continue to
be a key part of our total marketing picture because they understand
specific customer needs. They know how to pull together systems and
solutions that customers want and need in specific industries, with
specialized requirements. And they are the ones who will work across
the Systems Business Unit in an integrated way.
As the chief information officer of a major pharmaceutical
company in the U.K. told me when I visited him last week, one of the
biggest values Digital brings to him is an improved understanding of
his business -- and understanding how information technology can be
applied to make it successful.
So this is not a matter of "one or the other" -- of product
versus industry. It has nothing to do with industry focus going away,
or any one group or individual having more or less power. It has
everything to do with what we've committed to doing -- which is turning
this company around and making it profitable.
Retuning, refining, adjusting -- whatever you want to call it --
it all comes down to a matter of market realities; of competitive
challenges that must be met; of constantly re-examining our
understanding of what being competitive means; and of cohesion and the
successful balance of complementary capabilities within Digital.
Responsibility
We all have specific responsibilities in Digital. Marketing
needs to understand the marketplace and interpret customer needs.
Engineering needs to design the products and services that our
customers want. Sales, marketing, engineering and services need to
have continuous communication and linkages to ensure that the customer
voice is heard and responded to by our infrastructure. More than ever
before, this demands balance and teamwork.
In a traditionally engineering-driven company, engineering may
perceive this as a loss of "power." That would be a very mistaken
perception. Engineering is still the technology expert. But to be
successful, technology must be defined by customer and industry needs
through rational market research and knowledge.
It is my job as CEO to pull these different talents and
responsibilities and marketplace dimensions together in a unified
direction and strategy. That's what I am doing.
As long as we speculate on changes for the sake of speculation
-- and as long as we obsess about who's in charge, about where the
power lies -- we are missing the focus on our customers, on our
competition, and on our work.
There will undoubtedly be more changes coming -- more "tune-
ups" and adjustments -- as we learn more about operating in today's
marketplace, and as we refine our ability to meet customer needs.
We've made many changes in the past 18 months. With any change
of the magnitude experienced by Digital, mid-course corrections are
almost always inevitable.
But we cannot divide ourselves in the process. We must all work
together -- in the same direction -- to achieve our goals.
That means all of us, the members of the strategy committee, the
territory management, the business unit leaders, middle management --
and, for that matter, every single employee.
Each and every one of the strategy committee members, each and
every one of the territory managers, has very clear goals. And the
Board and I are holding each and every one responsible for meeting
their specific goals. We are also holding everyone responsible for
teamwork, at every level and in every corner of the organization.
We are within striking distance of returning to profitable
growth if all of us continue to focus on our work.
We have bright spots from the first half of fiscal 1994 that
indicate efforts are paying off:
o We see a surging demand for our personal computers.
o There has been continued steady progress in Alpha AXP
workstations, networking components and peripherals.
o Our storage products, particularly StorageWorks, are
extremely well received, and we have won seven major video on
demand trials, although only two have been announced.
o We were successful in growing our business in the Asia
Pacific region.
We are on track with our strategies and plans. We are making
good progress in simplifying our product offerings, making it easier
for the sales organization to sell, the customer to buy, and the supply
and delivery channels to ensure customer satisfaction.
We will be funding and measuring our global accounts on a global
basis.
We have made good, positive strides in turning around our
relationships with our distributors, value-added remarketers and
independent software vendors.
We've completed a transition from very undisciplined pricing to
a pricing policy that makes sense.
And we are continuing to unite our focuses on industry solutions
and leadership products and services under the banner of open
client/server computing.
The very successful Oct. 12 open client/server announcement has
led to $1.2 billion in firm proposals for business. And we have
already been able to close $266 million in business from that.
On Feb. 8, we will announce the second wave of our open
client/server initiative, with more than 200 major new software
products that make it easier and more attractive for customers to move
to and implement client/server computing. The announcement will
highlight integrated products that we and our partners can deliver now.
Employee morale
Our efforts and our results in several areas provide further
evidence that we are on track and headed in the right direction.
The turnaround is not as fast as we wish it could be, but our
direction and focus is clear -- and we are poised at this point in time
with many things working in our favor.
Unfortunately, I know from talking to you and from the Notes
files that morale is not good. We frequently are not pulling together
as a team. Many of you are not happy, and in many cases, you're not
engaged.
That doesn't surprise me. Frankly, some days it's hard for me,
too. And there is nothing our competition prefers more than for us to
be divided or weakened inside.
I firmly believe that we can succeed. We need to put all of our
energy on doing instead of speculating and worrying. If we all work
together and hold to our commitments, together we can pull ourselves
out of our remaining difficulties.
I wish I could stand here and tell you that there will never be
another downsizing. But we are still over-resourced nearly everywhere.
It comes down to a matter of what we can afford -- or what our
customers will pay to support our resources. How do we size
appropriately to give the best value to the customer? How do we size
appropriately for the margins we currently have? It's a different
situation for different territories and locations, and management has
to wrestle with these things.
Downsizings must be accompanied by some re-definition of the
work -- or simple elimination of work that isn't of importance to the
customer. On the other hand, we must focus on every single one of us
being as productive as we can, so we can grow revenue and satisfy our
customers. And we need to get past our nervousness and speculation as
a group if we are to grow the business.
Some of you may be aware of the fact that Digital has begun
conducting focus groups throughout North America -- a preliminary step
in a planned company-wide survey -- to learn in depth how you're
feeling, and help identify how we can improve our relationships with
our employees.
Your messages thus far are very clear. This is a sampling of
what we've found -- and it's not always pleasant to hear:
o Some of you definitely feel the need to know more about
what's happening within Digital.
o Some of you are losing faith in the credibility of the senior
management teams.
o Some of you are still feeling focused internally rather than
externally.
o Some of you are concerned about Digital losing credibility
with customers.
You've used a wide variety of words and phrases to describe the
culture today at Digital -- among them stressful, paralysis,
bureaucratic, intellectually stimulating, smart people, high integrity,
secretive, people covering their rear ends, very ethical, political.
The focus groups also identified these trends, across the board:
o People in Digital want to make a difference.
o You believe in the excellence of our products and services.
o You truly enjoy your work -- and express a high degree of
responsibility to do your work well.
o And you care about our company and about each other.
I know I have the privilege of working for some of the best
employees in any company, in any industry. Our challenge is to make
sure that we capitalize on the pride and good feeling left in Digital
employees -- and make that work for you and for the company.
People are very busy, and too often management thinks, "Well,
surely I'm too busy to spend any time talking about the company's
values." That's complete nonsense.
Our values, our morale, our confidence are absolutely important
to our success as an enterprise -- now and for the long term.
I have to say that not everyone on my staff has an equal passion
for Digital's values, although they're loath to say so since it's quite
clear to them that I do. But they're learning.
Some of them even think I'm a nuisance when I want to talk about
the people of Digital along with our core competencies and business
strategies. Too bad.
I want you to know that morale and confidence in the company is
my top priority -- and we as leaders and managers are going to address
that issue. That doesn't mean we're going to be feeding you all some
pap about how great it is. That is inconsistent with my value system!
We need open dialogues -- and honest sharing of information.
By July of this year, every employee will have had the
opportunity to participate in the Worldwide Employee Survey that we
have piloted. We will be looking for views about a range of subjects
-- the company, management, your jobs, your contributions to customer
success. The information will help us to identify the areas we need to
change -- and areas of strength we need to preserve as we renew our
company.
Through local discussions of the survey results, managers and
employees will create action plans to improve the business and the
environment whenever and wherever possible.
Your responses will also be mapped to our Core Values so that we
can understand better where we are as a company in actually living the
values.
Values are aspirational. Unfortunately, in some parts of the
organization, the reality does not necessarily reflect our value
system
I know that some areas of the company have already started
having important conversations about Core Values. I also know that
many of you feel that it is risky in today's environment to speak up
about things that are on your minds.
But if open dialogue and ongoing discussions do not happen, we
will not be able to address important issues -- to fix what needs to be
changed and to preserve what is important. I encourage all of you to
speak openly and constructively to help Digital succeed.
| T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2891.1 | Dissappointed | RUTILE::AUNGIER | Wed Feb 09 1994 11:15 | 7 | |
| 2891.3 | CVG::THOMPSON | Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest? | Wed Feb 09 1994 12:58 | 9 | |
> Re: Employee Morale - Does this mean Bob reads the files?? Could be. Though most likely there are people on his staff who do and report summaries and perhaps notes of particular interest. One should never write things in notes that they don't want their boss and the management chain between them up to and including Bob Palmer to see. Alfred | |||||
| 2891.4 | CSC32::C_BENNETT | Wed Feb 09 1994 13:05 | 12 | ||
Re: Employee Morale - Does this mean Bob reads the files??
Hopefully an CEO doesn't waste time with notes conferences. I would
imagine that he has more important issues. Although it sounds like he
is aware of morale issues. I was with another company that went thru
hard times in the semiconductor industry and it does hurt morale. You
have 2 choices - stew in the negative or take an active positive role in
the recovery of our company. Hopefully you are in a position which
allows you to do this.
I would reccomend that we not stew on what is bad with Digital but
concentrate on helping our customers.
| |||||
| 2891.5 | CSC32::C_BENNETT | Wed Feb 09 1994 13:47 | 17 | ||
.5 When the rewards at the end of a day for an employee for doing
.5 a good job are 0%
What Digital doesn't pay you a paycheck for your work? Do you have
health insurance provided for you? DONT take this for granted! I
get tired of people thinking that a job is where you go to get your ego
petted.
.5 and a bad review despite customer feedback to the contrary, try
.5 and be positive then.
Or what be negative and hate your job... review.
or maybe we as a company need to buckle down and get a job done
despite everything. I need to call a customer
| |||||
| 2891.6 | SAHQ::LUBER | I have a Bobby Cox dart board | Wed Feb 09 1994 14:06 | 5 | |
re .4
I wouldn't consider it a waste of time for Bob to read this conference.
It's probably the only place where he can really learn (a) what's going
on, (b) what's wrong, and (c) how to fix it.
| |||||
| 2891.7 | BP mentions Notes in the DVN | MUZICK::WARNER | It's only work if they make you do it | Wed Feb 09 1994 14:12 | 9 |
>> Unfortunately, I know from talking to you and from the Notes
>>files that morale is not good. We frequently are not pulling together
>>as a team. Many of you are not happy, and in many cases, you're not
>>engaged.
(from .0)
Either he's reading Notes, or someone is telling him about them!
| |||||
| 2891.8 | "Boss , what makes you so intelligent .-)?" | BONNET::WLODEK | Network pathologist. | Wed Feb 09 1994 14:32 | 6 |
Why not invite more field people to the DVN ?
Lots of questions in this particular DVN was from HQ folks. Which is
fine but maybe not next time again.
Wlodek
| |||||
| 2891.9 | NIT | GRANMA::MWANNEMACHER | red neck, white sox & blue ribbon | Wed Feb 09 1994 14:43 | 2 |
RE: .5 We have a portion of health insurance provided for us.
| |||||
| 2891.10 | SPECXN::WITHERS | Bob Withers | Wed Feb 09 1994 15:06 | 15 | |
>================================================================================ >Note 2891.4 Bob Palmer Employee DVN text 4 of 9 >CSC32::C_BENNETT 12 lines 9-FEB-1994 10:05 >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Re: Employee Morale - Does this mean Bob reads the files?? > > Hopefully an CEO doesn't waste time with notes conferences. Nope, hopefully Mr. Palmer gets useful information to guage employee morale and issues from Notes Conferences, as well as technical and business problems. I would hope that he would follow Digital, Marketing, DCU, and a few other strategic Notes Conferences. BobW | |||||
| 2891.11 | SPECXN::WITHERS | Bob Withers | Wed Feb 09 1994 15:08 | 13 | |
(d) what the latest rumors are 8-) >================================================================================ >Note 2891.6 Bob Palmer Employee DVN text 6 of 9 >SAHQ::LUBER "I have a Bobby Cox dart board" 5 lines 9-FEB-1994 11:06 >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > re .4 > > I wouldn't consider it a waste of time for Bob to read this conference. > It's probably the only place where he can really learn (a) what's going > on, (b) what's wrong, and (c) how to fix it. > | |||||
| 2891.12 | Some Do, Some Don't - I Would! | FHOHUB::JAMBE::JAMBE | Lemmings are Born Leaders! | Wed Feb 09 1994 15:37 | 13 |
Re: Some SLT members being sent NOTES comments - It can be confirmed that Russ Gullotti has been forwarded entries from this NOTES conference. I was tracked down by his office via the network police regarding note entry 2609.29 - His office wanted to confirm the author of the entry and schedule a time when he could call. I said I was flexible. That was in September. Russ should be given high marks for his DVN's - he communicates very well. We are pleased that he was able to reschedule DVN's outside "quite periods" and can only hope that his call was to thank us for the suggestion. | |||||
| 2891.13 | channels... | CSC32::C_BENNETT | Wed Feb 09 1994 16:00 | 8 | |
I guess I don't understand how engaging a CEO with everyones (85,000?)
employees morale complaints would solve everyones problems.
If you have a morale problem maybe a good talk to your immediate manager
is the right thing to do. If this doesn't give you peace of mind
then maybe you want to elevate to their immediate manager. I would
expect that during this discussion that a positive method of addressing
the problem would be hashed out.
| |||||
| 2891.14 | But the emperor has EARS! | NEMAIL::HANRON | Wed Feb 09 1994 16:30 | 16 | |
re .13
I don't think it's a waste of time for the CEO to listen to his/her
employees' morale issues. Whether there are 85,000 employees or 5
employees, it is generally well understood that middle layers of
management do not communicate the general condition of the playing
field. It is increasingly difficult to keep an eye on on these things
as one goes up the corporate ladder, I would think. When an
organization is reduced to resolving issues strictly by corporate
process, I would think that that is where the problems really begin.
People buy from people, the old sales saying goes. When people (i.e.,
employees) don't mean much to a company's leaders anymore, then who
might we assume that customers might turn to instead ? Perhaps companies
where people ARE valued enough to be listened to (if only rarely) at
the top.
| |||||
| 2891.15 | My .02 | GLDOA::DBOSAK | The Street Peddler | Wed Feb 09 1994 16:36 | 67 |
I've tried to respond to this string twice already and each time I
wasn't able to get to the point.
Third time's the charm (Hopefully):
Palmer and crew have a grip on what is happening. They hold the view
that it took a long time for the company to get sick and there aren't
any instant miracle cures to make it feel better. In order to heal the
patient, they are trying different approaches. That takes time.
Inherent in that approach are successes and failures.
As to employees, Palmer holds the view that employees pretty much have
ownership of continued employment (even though we are "over-resourced"
for the market.)
He is aware of the pervasive negativism and in the fact that there are
folks who won't "Engage." He knows there is a morale issue.
I think he understands and I think he and his crew are working towards
solutions.
We had an executive breakfast briefing in my patch hosted by Colotosti
-- He had some interesting views (Some things were new to me).
Did U know that five years ago we had 2 Bil in pre-tax profit.
Since then, we grew by 4 Billion in revenue with profits at essentially
break-even. Our margins went from 75% (gross) to 35% (gross). (That
17 quarter reference)
Hmmmm -- How do we maintain the status quo in that scenario? My take
is that you can't.
Colotosti had some other observations:
There was a paradigm shift from Bigger systems, Bigger margins to
smaller lower margin commodity type products. We missed the dymamics
in that shift.
We were staffed for "A" in a "B" world -- Sounds like a disconnect.
He had another interesting point -- Things happen in cycles -- In the
mid-80s, Digital was growing by 40% and had money to burn. The
competition was sucking wind. Now, 10 years later, with the
directional shift of the company AND the product suite, we are
positioned to be on the front of the Curve -- As we were in the 80s.
My take is that we have a window and we can run like hell through it or we
can miss it. It's up to us.
Palmer can do whatever he wants but if worker-bees continue to only
focus on the negative, continue to dis-engage, continue to look
inward rather than outward - The only thing Palmer
will do is to suck wind -- He can't get this thing done on his own and
I believe that's one of the messages he delivered.
It's time.
My .02
Dennis
In that time interval, we went from 35 plants to 12.
| |||||
| 2891.16 | SPECXN::WITHERS | Bob Withers | Wed Feb 09 1994 16:37 | 10 | |
The low morale of Digital employees is epidemic in proportion. I don't
think this conference is about individual morale problems; it reflects
the general climate. So, there's one morale problem with 85,00
instances.
Now, there's a touch of hyperbole in the previous statement -- I'm
pretty sure the SLT doesn't have a morale problem.
BobW
| |||||
| 2891.17 | XLIB::SCHAFER | Mark Schafer, Development Assistance | Wed Feb 09 1994 16:45 | 8 | |
I liked his candor, although not included in the livewire article. One
of his statements about running the business was "Don't run out of
cash! Anyone running a burger stand knows that." And then he went on
to show the good side of our financial situation. What did I take from
that? I now understand that his day-to-day business decisions are alot
like my personal decisions.
Mark
| |||||
| 2891.18 | Speaking of business decisions | QBUS::M_PARISE | Southern, but no comfort | Wed Feb 09 1994 17:10 | 7 |
Re: -1
Like if I had a hamburger business that was losing customers and
money, the first thing I would do is give myself a raise.
| |||||
| 2891.19 | XLIB::SCHAFER | Mark Schafer, Development Assistance | Wed Feb 09 1994 18:31 | 6 | |
> give myself a raise
The board approves the raises (and all other compensation). BP
stated during the Q&A that no VP was given a bonus in Q2.
Mark
| |||||
| 2891.20 | STAR::ABBASI | always give a check,it might be mate | Wed Feb 09 1994 18:32 | 12 | |
.12
> It can be confirmed that Russ Gullotti has been forwarded entries from
> this NOTES conference.
OMIGOD !!
do you have any idea if may be any of my notes saw their way to the SLT
offices please?
\nasser
| |||||
| 2891.21 | CVG::THOMPSON | Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest? | Wed Feb 09 1994 18:40 | 9 | |
> do you have any idea if may be any of my notes saw their way to the SLT
> offices please?
I'll tell you what, I round up a few of your notes and send them off
the the SLT members I can find Email addresses for. That way we'll
know. Hope this helps.
Alfred
| |||||
| 2891.22 | XLIB::SCHAFER | Mark Schafer, Development Assistance | Wed Feb 09 1994 18:41 | 1 | |
maybe some turkey recipes. :-) | |||||
| 2891.23 | RUSURE::MELVIN | Ten Zero, Eleven Zero Zero by Zero 2 | Wed Feb 09 1994 20:07 | 10 | |
> The board approves the raises (and all other compensation). BP > stated during the Q&A that no VP was given a bonus in Q2. BP seemed to be using 'officer of the corporation' VP definition... He mentioned something like 23 or so? ANyway, I felt the questioner meant VP as in the 100+ people that have the VP title, officer of the corp not being a criterion. To me, it seemed like just about every question was evaded. MY opinion only. -Joe | |||||
| 2891.24 | DYOSW8::BROWNE | Wed Feb 09 1994 21:30 | 25 | ||
Let me be real frank with the following thoughts from the DVN:
1. Bob Palmer's stated "top priority is the morale and confidence
in the company", and by any measure that morale and confidence is at an all
time low!
2. " We had $240 million in orders left after Q2 that we couldn't
ship." ---- Yes, and whose responsible? ( Hint: Don't say sales because
of poor forecasting. The problems with our forecasting process and
and the associated admin systems have been repeatedly brought to the
attention of the SLT over the past year.)
3. Over the past 14 months, we in Digital have spent 7 months
planning and 7 additional months implementing a "Customer Business
Unit" structure that created "too many duplications and too much
confusion...We had built in unintentional complications that hindered
doing business and became roadblocks to growing product revenue...We
also succumbed to the temptation to revert to internal focus rather
that customer focus." Given the condition of this company in July of
1992, that was 14 months that we could not afford to lose to confusion.
Our business is not very similar to baseball! This business is much
TOUGHER..... BUT...Three strikes and you are out.
| |||||
| 2891.25 | Only by making the PIE bigger will we truely succeed | DPDMAI::WISNIEWSKI | ADEPT of the Virtual Space. | Wed Feb 09 1994 22:27 | 34 |
All the audiance questions were internally focused on how Digital
works (property, legal, IM&T) and Mr Palmer attempted to answer
the questions with redirection into the answers he wanted to give
in the first place.
I took exception to the statement and repeated statment that
VAX/VMS declining sales are responsible for our poor performance
and that OSF/1 and WNT haven't ramped up to take the place of
these lost revenues.
We are shipping record levels of all our platforms (OpenVMS included)
the real culprit is the decline of real cost for computer power and
the margins we no longer make on large boxes.
Computer hardware and OSs are commodities and we are downsizing
in the wake of these reduced costs. OpenVMS customer demand
and Number of licences are up but the boxes are Workstations,
PCs and small servers that aren't nearly as expensive as the
boxes we made just a couple of years ago while packing hundreds
of times the power of our previous systems.
The margins aren't coming back and we'd better get comfortable
living on commodity hardware or have some real added value
in software or consulting to make up the difference.... Some
real volumes of our systems wouldn't hurt either...
OpenVMS isn't the cash cow it once was because smaller cows are
the order of the day. We either sell more cows or live on less
cash...
OpenVMS was 70%+ of the systems business last quarter, Let's build
on that not compete against it with OSF/1 or WNT...Only by making
the pie bigger for Digital will we truely succeed. There's no
margins in only changing the pie's contents...
| |||||
| 2891.26 | warp speed scotty! | HIBOB::KRANTZ | Next window please. | Thu Feb 10 1994 04:34 | 2 |
If morale is highest priority, why will it take 6 months just to get the results of the survey? | |||||
| 2891.27 | Q3 Employee DVN Q & A | TRACTR::SAPP | Random Kindness/Senseless Acts Beauty | Thu Feb 10 1994 12:31 | 724 |
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
Q&A from Employee Forum DVN broadcast
(Following is an edited transcript of the question-and-answer
session that followed President and CEO Bob Palmer's Q3 Employee Forum
address on DVN last Monday. The first two questions were asked of Bob
when he was in the UK last month.
(Videotapes of the Q3 Employee Forum can be ordered on-line via
OPAL. Type VTX OPAL at your system prompt. Choose #10, AVCATALOG;
then select #3, "New Titles." Under that submenu, select #2, "DVN
Q3 Employee Forum.")
There's a perception that Bob Palmer is no longer running the
company and that Ed Lucente is actually taking over. What's the reality?
That's not Ed's perception. That's not my perception. And
frankly, it does a disservice to all of the other direct reports
that run large pieces of our business. The reason I think some
people think that is again because of a completely erroneous
article in "Business Week." The reality is that each of the six
business units is more than a billion dollar business, and
everybody has a piece of what's necessary to turn the company
around. I think Ed's is the largest, but services taken
together between Gresh Brebach and John Rando's a little large.
But in any event, everybody has taken on additional
responsibility and everybody's responsible. In that regard, I
was quite pleased that Ed was willing to take on the additional
risk and the additional responsibility of running our Systems
Business Unit.
Major changes and substantial cuts are being made in Europe. What, if
anything, is being done of a similar nature in the US, particularly at
corporate?
Well, the reason that there is that perception is that we have
just announced a downsizing in the next months in Europe that's
quite substantial -- between 5,500 and 6,000 people, as I
recall. But we have actually been downsizing during the time
that I was running Manufacturing, and since becoming CEO, across
the globe and relatively uniform. We were a little slower to
get around to Europe because we didn't have permanent leadership
in Europe until very recently, and so it feels a little harder
in Europe right now. But basically they're catching up with the
rest of the company.
In the Property organization, we have been aggressively decreasing our
portfolio in relationship to the downsizing of employees. With new
senior management on board, their expectations are for higher space
standards, including far more space square footage for their individual
offices, which may be appropriate for them, but it is setting a
precedent for the rest of the company. Can you give us some guidance
on how we should deal with this issue?
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
We don't need big-shot offices for me or for my staff. Our
company is one that has striven over the years, sometimes
successfully, sometimes not, to maintain a minimum of social
distance between the different levels of management and the
company, and that's the way we need to keep it here at Digital.
You know, we are all on the same team and we are all valuable
employees of this team. We don't want to create unnecessary
accoutrements, you might say, to the different job levels. It
is important, in some of our sales and marketing areas in
particular, that we have a reasonably nice office to invite our
customers into. But on the whole, we don't need any palatial
estates in our company or any special privileges.
I'm also from the Property organization. But I have a question about
how we as headquarters staff can help in the customer outreach program.
For example, we ourselves become customers, whether we're buying
products for our home use or whether we're using it here in the office.
And there are often times when we have a hard time dealing with the
purchasing process, calling the right places, getting the right
information about what it is we need to get. And it creates frustration
for us, but then when you extrapolate that out to the customer base at
large, you wonder how we can continue being successful.
I think that's a very good observation. We can't continue being
successful with that kind of a structure. And as you know, one
of the largest activities we have going on in the company today
is what we call the customer value chain re-engineering effort.
We have customers out there that want somebody to show up from
Digital and take an order. Having taken the order, they want
somehow the stuff to be shipped. It seems like a very
reasonable expectation. I've had customers tell me that they
were unable to successfully complete that transaction because we
were so complex. So we're redesigning the whole thing, and this
is among the most urgent problems we have in the company. As a
matter of fact, in the second quarter, I was disappointed at the
results. We had about $240 million dollars of orders left that
we didn't ship. So we've had supply problems, we've had order
admin problems, we've had follow-up problems. We've got to fix
this stuff. This is not a hobby, this is a business. We need
to connect with our customers so we can make an exchange of our
products and services for their money. It's pretty simple, and
we've made it very hard, so we're trying to fix that problem.
By the way, while I'm rattling on here, that Property Management
group has done an excellent job of continuing to dispose of
excess facilities that we have over the globe. Sometimes they
don't get a lot of credit publicly, but since two people asked a
question, it kind of stirred in my mind to say thank you, it's
good work. We've been able to sell facilities in a very
difficult market on a worldwide basis, and for the most part
we've actually netted a slight gain in the facilities that we've
sold.
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
I am representing the Law Department. My question for you is, are you
concerned about the effect the press Digital has received through
print, radio, and recently from our business analysts. Are you
concerned about the effect this has on the company and our customers,
and do you feel that we may work towards softening our image through
this medium?
Well, I do get concerned about it. Usually, I'm concerned about
inaccuracies. I don't care for these articles where our
Communications Department has provided the author with the
facts, and the person just chooses to ignore the facts because
they don't support the story that they've already written. I
don't like that much. And to be honest, I haven't had much of
that. I've been in the job now 16 months and I'd say with the
exception of one or two articles just recently, I've been very
well treated by the media. It's been very fair. I mean, they
don't always print great stuff because we're obviously slogging
through some difficult times, and I don't mind that. I do mind
when there are distortions, inaccuracies, complete
misrepresentations, because it does cause concern in the
marketplace and it causes me to waste a lot of my cycles putting
that kind of nonsense down. But again, the best thing we can do
in the near term is get some profitability in the company.
Relative to where we were, we have had a remarkable progress.
You know, if you think about before I took on this job, we'd
lost $3.9 billion dollars. In the five quarters, I think we've
lost about $410 million, or about 11% of the previous. I'm not
happy about losses, you know. But from where we were and the
path we were on, this has been a remarkable turnaround as a
result of all the hard work you've done. That's what's
happened. We had one quarter where we didn't do that much
better than the previous quarter, although on an
earnings-per-share basis, it was a 7% improvement. On a profit
after tax, about a 2% improvement. It was primarily because the
revenue and our traditional VAX/VMS-based products and services
is declining faster than the revenue from our new Alpha stuff
can fill it in. Actually, Alpha's growing fast, but from a
small base. That is a transition that we have to go through.
We're going from VAX/VMS, that 32-bit architecture, to a new
Alpha AXP 64-bit architecture. That transition is about a
four-year transition anytime anybody makes a transition of that
type; that's historical data. So this isn't any surprise, and
in point of fact, we did a little better. Five quarters in a
row better after 17 every quarter worse.
So fundamentally, I do not have a problem with my board of
directors, I do not have a problem with my conscience. I do have
a problem in terms of feeling positive every day because I know
there's a lot of pain out there as we restructure this company,
but there is no alternative. There is no alternative. We've
got to get competitive and we've got to grow our business, and
that's what we're doing.
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
[Elin Lee]
I'm with the M&L IM&T organization. My question is two-fold regarding
Q2 spending. And how it is going -- if it is going to be continued in
Q3. We're seeing more layoffs. I've survived a layoff. It's
disintegrating employee morale, like you mentioned, and there were
even requests to take time off without pay during Q2. And a lot of us
heard a lot of rumors which I'm hoping you will refute. One is that
there were 17% bonuses given to vice presidents in Q2.
In the second quarter?
In the second quarter. That's what I heard.
They must have given them to each other. (Laughter) This person
didn't approve any bonuses for anybody during the second quarter.
You have to earn your bonus by the end of the year, which is the
way it should be. Just right now our management team isn't earning
any bonus. If we don't improve our performance between now and the
end of the year, there won't be any bonus for the executives,
including the speaker here. Nor should there be. On the other
hand, we do have sales professionals whose part of their salary is
a commission. Obviously we're paying that, and there might be some
confusion about that.
OK. We're hearing other things of other perks for our high-level
executives, and I was just wondering if you can help us understand how
compensation guidelines are derived for senior-level management versus
other employees.
Sure. Actually, I can absolutely answer that question.
Compensation for all employees is derived by external survey.
We go to external companies that are in the salary compensation
business and we look at what is reasonable for different levels
in our company versus our competitors. That's the same as for
the officers. The difference in the case of the officers is
that the board of directors specifically has to approve any kind
of perks, salary increase, benefit or whatever for the officers
and for those that are in the top five, you have to publish it
as well, all of which I think is healthy. I mean, it should be
that way.
This is not our money. It's determined by the shareholders.
And fundamentally, the board of directors has that
responsibility. I have the direct responsibility below that
level to make sure that these compensation is fair, and we're
trying to move from a system that kind of paid everybody whether
you contributed or not to a system that pays for contribution, a
meritocracy. And we're going to take multiple years to do that
because we haven't had that in our company. My view is people
should be paid on the basis of their contribution, on their
accomplishment, on the skills that they bring to satisfying our
customers' needs. Not on how long they've been here, not on
their gender, not on their race, not on their sexual preference
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
or religion. Those things are interesting but they're not
important in terms of performance. What counts is what is your
ability, what is my ability to contribute to the success of the
enterprise. And every one of these salaries and benefits should
stand up to public scrutiny vis-a-vis our competitors, and I can
assure you that they do. The numbers are large for senior
levels in a company of this size, no question about that. The
numbers are large. And throughout the company they're
reasonable. At the top, they're large and reasonable when
compared to the competition. I can't defend the whole system,
you know, I can't do that. But I can assure you that the way
it's done is professional and relies on external data.
I work in the US Benefits organization. Our group has responsibility
for managing the benefit programs offered to the US employees, and I
would say that, at least from this employee's opinion, that we're
giving 150% towards the company, and I think, at least from my opinion,
what would make me feel really good as an employee with regard to some
of the things that you've spoken about is if somehow we could see the
stock price reversing the trend that we've seen. To me, that would
seem to be an indication that the things that you spoke about are
really taking effect and that we are satisfying the customers.
I think that's a very good observation.
So I was wondering if you could comment on that
You're exactly right. At one level that is kind of your report
card as a company -- what is the market value of your company?
And right now our stock is at a 52-week low, or very near it.
That reflects the fact that the analysts are concerned that this
decline in the VAX/VMS systems business is going to continue
faster than we can bring up the Alpha AXP revenues. And analysts
that trade this stuff, write about it, are very short-term.
They look out three months, six months. This is not an
investing kind of thing for the most part. We have some people
that own our stock that hang on for the long term. There's an
inertia in either direction. Things tend to overshoot on the
upside or overshoot on the downside. Right now they're
overshooting on the down side because analysts are concerned
that we are not going to be able to stop this revenue decline.
They have a reason to be concerned. I'm concerned, and the
senior management of the company needs to be concerned. That
was largely why we created that Systems Products Business Unit
so that we could focus on slowing that decline, and we
recognized that our VAX/VMS business is somewhat different from
our Windows NT or UNIX businesses. And so we wanted to make
those strategies different. We need to slow that decline. But
you're right. You could look at the stock price and say, gee,
relative to where we've been, how is that doing? Right now
we're bumping along the bottom there. It also reflects a
concern on the part of the analysts that if the revenue doesn't
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
recover, it means that we will have to take a large
restructuring reserve, which reduces the book value of the
company. That's what many of them are speculating about. I
think it's too early to say on something like that, and I'm not
making any forecasts. But I'm pretty cognizant of why they're
concerned. So we all have the same concern here.
Your number-one job, though, is not, surprisingly, shareholder
value. Your number-one job is customer satisfaction. If you
satisfy your customers the earnings and the sales growth will
follow and the shareholder value will follow that. And so my
focus really is on how do we satisfy our customers with superior
products and service, how do we get the revenue and the earnings
returned? Then the share price will follow. That's the
objective.
There's been a lot of speculation about divisionalizing the company or
spinning off pieces into wholly-owned subsidiaries. Could you comment
on that, please?
The idea was if you remember that stack I had on the chart that
talked about a vertically integrated computer company, which
Digital has been for all of its career, really, and the
de-layering, if you will, of pieces of that. That is, the
electronics is largely now replaced by microchips, and there are
a few companies in the microchip business at the very bottom of
that stack. Up a notch is the operating systems, companies like
Microsoft and Novell. Those companies are in that horizontal
piece. You go up another piece, there might be data bases like
Oracle and SyBase, and so on through the entire stack. The
important thing is if you look in those horizontal slices, what
you find is that even though our total investment's very large,
our investment within any particular slice is not as large as
the leading competitors in that slice. That means for the most
part that you have a failing organizational strategy.
We're a smart bunch of people here, smart engineering, smart
everywhere, but so are our competitors. And if they're more
focused and spending more money, the probability is they will be
successful and we will not. So we have to organize our business
and de-layer it a little bit, not totally. A good example would
be, say, our personal computer business. Pull the personal
computer business out, set it up as essentially a stand-alone
division. That business is growing at double-digit rates,
nearly 100% per year. It's astounding, really, the market after
our three or four previous miserable attempts to penetrate the
PC market. New leadership and Enrico Pesatori being very
successful. You may have seen that our new Digital XL series
was the first PC that was upgradable by just changing a little
daughter card inside the PC from a 486-based machine to a faster
486 to a Pentium chip or to an Alpha chip. So the customer buys
the box and all they have to do to upgrade it and keep it
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
powerful and current is change this one little card in there.
That was best of show at several of the PC shows. And we
basically could have shipped more product in Q2. We were
essentially sold out, you know, in terms of our product.
Storage is another good example I mentioned in my speech. You
know, three or four years ago, we were headed right out of
business building only big disks and ignoring the realities of
the marketplace. Charlie Christ came in, turned that completely
around. Our business is growing like crazy. We're a run rate
now of something like a million disks a year. Can you imagine a
million disks? That's the run rate and [it's] increasing.
Again, we cannot meet the demand for those products. And the
video on demand wins that we've had, four in the United States,
three outside the United States. Major big telecommunications
companies choosing Digital to partner with for their video on
demand platform that was designed and developed within Charlie
Christ's organization. So storage is a separate division -- got
a separate business model, like PCs.
You look at Digital Consulting. The consulting business, to go
in and help customers with solutions is a different business
than the systems business, so you need a different business
model. So that's why we're setting these things up.
Now the other part of your question, though, how about spinning
them out and having them sold or something. There's no current
plan to do that, but you have that opportunity if you set them
up so that they're essentially independent. Also, if you're
the chief executive, you have a much better chance of measuring
each vice president's performance if they have a well-contained
unit. The way it was when I took on the job, there was one
thing that all came together as a big mush ball, and if you
tried to figure out who's making money or losing money, there's
nobody inside the company that could agree on that because it
really depended on how much did you allocate to this person or
that person of some kind of corporate load on the business.
Today we can absolutely understand which of our business units
is making money and growing, how much cash is it using, how many
assets are employed, how many people are employed in the thing?
All of the things you need to know in a business. Then you can
decide, is that a business I want to be in or is that a business
that Digital should let somebody else be in, or whatever. So
we're making tremendous progress on getting this in a way that
you can analyze it and manage it and run it. At the same time,
that's largely driving a lot of the downsizing, because when you
get into a business that has gross profit margins at 20%, say,
like the PC business, you know right away you can't carry a lot
of overhead. It just will not carry it. And so as we keep
looking at those different business models, we have the
opportunity to improve our overall performance.
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
By the way, in that quarter just ended of the six business
units, four business units were doing better than their
operating plan on profit. Four business units. Now when I
talked to the board of directors at Q2, I wasn't feeling all
that good because I really had expected we had a chance to break
even in Q2, and we did if we'd shipped what we had orders for.
That's not all Manufacturing's fault, by the way. A lot of
times the orders came in too late to ship, and in most cases
the forecast of the demand was not that close in terms of mix to
what actually was ordered. So it's a generally shared problem.
But anyway, I wasn't feeling that great about it and I was
talking to the board about, well, but we did have four business
units that made their profit goal. The board was ecstatic.
They said four is more than they've ever seen in the company
before actually make their achievements since our halcyon days
in 1988. And so it's progress. Now the other two, they're not
quite making their profit at this point. One expects to by the
end of the year. The other one doesn't have a chance, and so
the issue there is how can you minimize the losses in that one?
But four are making it, and by the way, only one of those four
is making the revenue plan. So the others are saying, gee, my
revenue's not coming in as planned, I can manage this business
to get the profit. And that is what management's about. So I
want to be positive about it.
I'm with the US Acquisition IM&T. Over the past year or so we've seen
quite a few people transitioned out of the company, and at the same
time a number of VPs have been hired. Do you see that streamlining
upper-level management would help not only to eliminate some overhead
but also help cut the bureaucracy in the company today?
Actually, that may be a perception. It's not an accurate
perception. The company had at one time since I've been in the
company, some 45 officers. Today we have less than 26. Out of
the 26 we have, more than 50% are new people. Either people
promoted from within or hired from the outside. So the reason
people might have that perception is we have these announcements
and they say, gee, they hired somebody, they hired somebody, they
hired somebody. It looks like a lot of vice presidents. This
is a huge company, today at about 93,000 people, and you need some
management structure. But as I say, it's 25 or 26 as opposed to
44.
The other thing I look at, although you didn't ask it, is as we
do the downsizings, I asked Dick Farrahar, who's head of
Personnel, to get the data by job level. And I want to avoid
this thing where what happens is all of the workers in the field
get laid off and all of the management stays, you know, which
is the traditional thing that happens in downsizings. And we
have the data by job level, and Dick assures me that it's
relatively uniform. The largest number in percentage terms are
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
exactly the vice presidents. It turns out that we have had a
departure from our company of more vice presidents on a
percentage level than any other category, and it was necessary
in my view.
[I'm in] Computer Network Services. There's a lot of necessary focus on
our income statement, but shifting for a moment, with the downgrading
of our debt and the debt registration, can you talk about your feelings
on the trend in our balance sheet?
Yes. I'm glad you asked that question. Digital continues to
have one of the stronger balance sheets in the industry. That
is to say, the amount of debt we have is approximately a billion
dollars long-term debt. We have $1.1 billion dollars of cash on
hand at the end of the quarter just ended, so it's very strong.
In terms of the quarter, by the way, we had positive cash flow
in operations. Just barely, but it was positive. It's very
important that you maintain enough cash, and so what we did was
had this registration of preferred stock which would enable us
to raise several hundred million dollars, up to a billion if we
need it, as working capital to run the business. But it's our
intent to continue to maintain the balance sheet quite strong,
and that is the chief focus of the chief financial officer and
myself, and of course the comptroller of the company. So Bill
Steul and [Vin] Mullarkey and I primarily focused on that.
Now the group that's been spending all of their attention to it
is our Treasury group under Ilene Jacobs, and she's done, and
her team has done, just an outstanding job. You know, it was
remarkable that we were able to get shareholder approval for
that preferred stock offering. They managed that. They've
managed all of our debt requirements very effectively, so we've
got a quite competent Treasury function in this company, and
that's very important. So the company is strong on the balance
sheet, has plenty of cash to run the business, but on the other
hand, our margins are continuing to decline.
Let's talk about the business in kind of an overview. During
the last year margins continued to decline rather dramatically.
In fact, in the quarter just ended, the gross profit margin was
down 23%. So that means you had 23% less dollars as a function
of sales to pay for all of the stuff we needed. In addition to
that, the mix of the products are such that it's moving away
from the high profit margin, big machines and big systems to the
desktop and deskside products. So this isn't going to reverse
itself, in my view. We have to learn to live on less profit
margin in order to maintain the strength of our balance sheet.
And all of these things play together.
Now it happens that, as I said in my speech, if we had not
reduced research and engineering by some 18%, if we had not
reduced our selling general and administrative overhead expenses
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
by 23%, then instead of having this $150 million dollars or so
loss in the first two quarters, we would have had a loss of $750
million or more. That will destroy your balance sheet and so we
can't allow that to happen.
We've got to maintain two things here. Don't run out of cash.
If you're running a hamburger stand, don't run out of cash.
So if you're running a company this size, that's your number-one
requirement -- do not run out of cash. And, you want to preserve
a strong balance sheet. These are not that complicated, really.
It's surprising, though, how many companies lose sight of that.
I'm from IM&T. I wanted to ask you about an opportunity. We've heard
a lot about the Internet and how it's turning into the international
information infrastructure. I wonder if you could give us some of your
thinking about how we might increase our already large current
participation in that movement, not only internally but externally
through consulting services, marketing, engineering, and sales?
This is a very big area of opportunity for Digital. As I
mentioned, right now Digital is far and away the leading vendor
in terms of video on demand server wins. I wish I could
announce some of these things, but the customers are quite clear
that they want not to announce it until they're ready. So I'm
told that one of them, a major one, is going to be announced
this month in New York. We're going to have several others.
This is where we have provided the storage platform, the
networking, some software, some computing in the case of Alpha
AXP, various architecture to enable a provider of video on
demand to have an efficient way to do it. Some of them are
trials, some of them are full-blown roll-outs that go on for
multiple years and represent tens of millions of dollars in the
first phase for Digital. This is an example of good selling,
good marketing, understanding the market, good engineering, and
Digital participating in that phase. But there are many other
phases we could participate in. You know, on the user end in
the home, you're going to need some kind of relatively serious
computing in order to provide the full attributes that people
envision for the national information infrastructure. The Alpha
architecture would be ideal for that if we could drive the costs
down.
So there's many opportunities there. There are opportunities in
wireless and mobile communications related - or computing
related to this national information infrastructure. Now what
we have is we have several people within the Senior Leadership
Team working on a strategy, has been going on for a long time,
both in my direct reports as well as with our strategy group,
that ad hoc group that works for Lucia Quinn, looking at where
are the opportunities for our technology in this unfolding
national information infrastructure. And there are many of
them. And as a matter of absolute fact, we're reviewing that
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
next week. It's kind of a check-in on the next phase of the
work, and we're going to be looking at some proposals from the
Communication, Education, and Media group, Paul Kozlowski's
group. I think this is going to be a good opportunity for
Digital. It's not the only opportunity, but it's one that we
have so much talent and technology on we definitely should get
some growth out of that part of the market. Thank you.
I'm from the Designer Facilities organization. I have a product
strategy question. Recently IBM, Motorola, and I believe Apple
announced an alliance whereby they're producing this PowerPC [chip].
What does that mean for us in terms of our overall Alpha strategy?
It means that the PowerPC is a viable competitor against the
Alpha architecture. Now it happens that in most of these things
there's a good deal more hype than reality. In this particular
case, the PowerPC doesn't have any applications today. It will
be running, though, the Macintosh 7 operating system for Apple,
which is a big deal. The reason that they're getting so much
play is because of that relationship. The IBM volumes are very
low. They've only got one product that's even announced on it
yet, and they don't have an operating system for it. But
because the volumes for Apple are so high, people say, gee, that
should be a successful operating environment. That should work.
PowerPCs should have some volume. Now they're worried about
Alpha. Will we have some volume in order for our costs to be
competitive? Next week if not in fact this week I hope to
announce a solution to some of that question. The question
really is how can you afford the semiconductor investment
necessary to stay on the absolute leading edge. If you compare
the two products, Alpha today runs multiple operating systems,
has been shipping for two years, and it has twice the
performance at the same cost. So that's kind of the short form
of the comparison. All we need now are some larger customer
wins or some other way to reduce our costs in semis.
[I'm] in Finance. Part of my work is employee communications in
Finance, and we had a bunch of questions prepared for Bill Steul and
Vin Mullarkey in an employee communications session last week. I'll
share a couple of those with you having to do with marketing and
customer satisfaction. Where is our advertising strategy? Customer
satisfaction appears to be declining. Where is our marketing -- we
need some public image-building for both customers and employees. Why
not put Bob Palmer on TV?
Well, right now I am on TV, I think. But fundamentally around
some of those questions, the Bob Palmer on TV thing is very
unlikely to happen because I'm not that much of an egoist. You
know, I don't want to be up in front. The reality is the CEO
can't do anything by himself. Just zero. All you can actually
do is try to create an environment where everybody else can do
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
something. And so I'm always a little cautious about pictures
on the front of magazines or TV or stuff like that for me
personally. It doesn't fit my personality. On the other issue,
though, as far as outselling is concerned, I just got back from
an eight or nine-day trip in Europe. Three or four customer visits
a day, working on into the evening with customers. I do enjoy that.
I mean, it's very tiring but you do get an idea of what customers
want, where you're doing well, where you're not doing so well, and
you occasionally help spur a sale along while you're at it. So we
need to do some of that. Around the advertising question, we ran
into a problem there, actually, because we didn't very cleverly set
that up. We said, here is an advertising budget, some total number,
and we left it to the advertising department to figure out how to
allocate it. That's obviously not a good strategy. We recognized
that last, oh, October, November, and we changed that. It was unfair
to Charlie Holleran running all the media, it was unfair to our
advertising people, and it was not effective anyway. The issue
was I think our brand campaign, which is a very different issue.
The brand campaign is working quite well. We're getting the
Digital brand out there and we're identifying some of the things
we can do. But we want the advertising to be in the product
business units.
I've only time, they tell me, for one more question.
[Ed Mansfield]
I got it. (Laughter) Hi Bob, I'm with the Corporate EEO group.
Historically, we've been known for our strength in our diversity, and
during the last three years of transitions there's a widespread
perception that we have depleted greatly our representation of people
of color. I understand all the other things that you've said, but to
those of us who view that as a critical asset to the company and the
company's future, what is senior management doing about that or intend
to do about it?
That's a very good question. I'm glad you asked it, because I'm
quite dedicated, as was my predecessor and the whole history of
Digital, to maintaining an environment that values all
employees, people of color, and all other labels that you can
talk about. Quite concerned about it, and it's, as you notice,
one of our value statements. We've got seven value statements
-- talking about respect for the individual, and in a sub-bullet
in that explanation of that, we talk about valuing the diversity
of our employees on a worldwide basis. We have discussion at
the Senior Leadership Team that I personally lead that they are
supposed to lead with their direct reports. We're moving that
throughout all of Digital to make sure that all employees feel
that they have opportunity that has nothing to do with these
various labels that society puts on us but has to do with your
ability to contribute, which is as it should be. That's one of
the things where some people wonder, why do I take important
time from talking about operations and technology and strategy
to talk about that issue? And I do that because I think it's
FOR DIGITAL INTERNAL USE ONLY
Worldwide News LIVE WIRE
critically important, and I think it's my responsibility to
maintain Digital's value system intact as we go forward making
these various trade-offs that we have to make in running the
business. [I'm] quite dedicated to it.
As you probably know, I hold quarterly forums with people of
color and with senior women. There's only me and the people
that are selected to be participants in that panel, so I get
direct feedback from representation of the various communities
of diversity as to how do they perceive what we're doing or not
doing. And you're right, we're not doing as well as we'd like
to be doing. In the environment that we're in, downsizing as we
have been and as we'll continue to have to be, it would be easy
to find an excuse not to work on this problem. We are not going
to take the available opportunity. We're going to continue to
focus on it, we're going to continue to ensure that we have an
environment where everybody feels valued in whatever his or her
ability to contribute is. I'm holding each of my direct
reports, to give you some concrete example, for a sheet of goals
as to how I measure them, how I determine their performance,
their salaries, their bonuses. And one of the various criteria
has to do with what plan do they have, each one of them, for
their organizations around the subject of diversity? And you
know that we have a focus on that carried on in Dick Farrahar's
group under the direction of Ron Glover. So that's how we're
doing it. We don't want to lose sight of that and we're very
careful about that.
They tell me that's all the time I've got for questions. I
enjoyed talking with you. I want to thank you for coming. I
want to encourage you to think positively, work together in
teamwork. Remember, it's our customers that count. Think about
it. One more time, I cannot save your job. Your manager cannot
save your job. Only our customers can save our jobs if we
delight them with our products and services so this business
continues to grow. We've got to stay customer-focused. We've
got to work together as a team to be successful. Thank you very
much. (Applause)
| |||||
| 2891.28 | In Due Course | TRACTR::SAPP | Random Kindness/Senseless Acts Beauty | Thu Feb 10 1994 12:36 | 15 |
RE:.8
> Why not invite more field people to the DVN ?
> Lots of questions in this particular DVN was from HQ folks. Which is
> fine but maybe not next time again.
I participated in one of the first Employee DVNs and about half of that
audience were from the Field. The Q2 one was from Europe and had Field
and HQ people in it. Bob Palmer is always looking for other locations
to hold these. I'd recommend one from Canada as this is a large
territory.
Hope this helps!
Edwin
| |||||
| 2891.29 | NACAD::SHERMAN | Steve NETCAD::Sherman DTN 226-6992, LKG2-A/R05 pole AA2 | Thu Feb 10 1994 13:55 | 15 | |
I expect that "top priority" is similar to "most favored nation." At
first glance, you would think it means just what it says. But, upon
closer inspection things change. China has "most favored nation"
status (currently). It doesn't mean that we'd rather trade with China
than with anyone else because there are (as I recall) literally
hundreds of nations that have been granted "most favored nation"
status. Similarly, I expect that there are a fair number of "top
priorities."
Drawing another parallel, just as some people can be "more equal" than
others, I expect some "top priorities" are more "more top" than others.
Thus, declaring that something is "top priority" may or may not mean
anything.
Steve
| |||||
| 2891.30 | please do more than read: write! | BOOKS::HAMILTON | All models are false; some are useful - Dr. G. Box | Fri Feb 11 1994 12:50 | 34 |
One of the things that's always fascinated me about this company are the notes files. Yes, I know that the internet is rapidly superseding some of them, but in terms of the "general" Digital interest files (like this one and Marketing, for example), I think we tend to underestimate their effect on our work lives. There are times when I am devastated by the discussions here; other times I'm uplifted, still other times disgusted. The fact that Palmer and Gullotti have publicly acknowledged the conferences' importance to morale is a welcome validation, for me at least, of what I had been thinking for quite some time -- that electronic fora are enablers for the rapid development of both positive and negative synergies. I think that fora like the conferences will serve as a model of what to expect as Internet connnectivity grows. That is, the rapidly increasing ability of each of us to surface ideas, outside the chain of command, can have both intensely positive and negative effects. It's a minefield out here -- not a place for the faint of heart. My challenge to the SLT, or staff, is to *use* the conferences actively, not just be passive readers. We've got millions and millions invested in this infrastructure. Please get involved in the give and take; test the logic of your ideas and directions against the crucible of employee opinion. I applaud Messrs. Palmer and Gullotti for their curiosity and open mindedness -- at least they aren't taking the stance that some of my immediate managers over the years have taken -- that the notes files are simply employee complaint sessions. David Stone was a good example of an executive that was willing to *participate* in the technical and strategic debates; he did not shirk the responsibility of absorbing the slings and arrows found in conferences. I am heartened that other senior executives might also be willing to take the plunge. Glenn | |||||
| 2891.31 | SAHQ::LUBER | I have a Bobby Cox dart board | Fri Feb 11 1994 13:52 | 9 | |
I couldn't agree more. Just once, I'd like to see a reply from Bob
Palmer in this conference. In fact, it wouldn't take more than ten
minutes of his time each day to review NEXT UNSEEN and enter a few
replies. That in itself would be one hell of morale booster -- knowing
that the CEO uses the same vehicle that employees use to communicate.
Maybe he's afraid that people would be inhibited in their responses if
he started to actively participate. Or maybe he is participating under
a pseudonym.
| |||||
| 2891.32 | participation | HIBOB::KRANTZ | Next window please. | Fri Feb 11 1994 13:59 | 10 |
In order for the SLT to affect morale via this (and other) conferences, they would have to change their communication style. They would have to stop the spin control and start communicating, they would need to be willing to debate issues rather than presenting prepared statements with lots of words and little content. If they could do that, I'd feel a lot better about the company I work for, because we would have leadership, not just management. Joe | |||||
| 2891.33 | .8% of company writes | DBSALF::QUINN | Crying? There's no crying in baseball! | Fri Feb 11 1994 14:00 | 19 |
<<< Note 2891.30 by BOOKS::HAMILTON "All models are false; some are useful - Dr. G. Box" >>>
-< please do more than read: write! >-
Out of curiosity a couple of days ago, I created a directory file of
all the notes and replys for the past year. Sorting this on node::name
I came up with a total of about 744 respsondents. This included of course
people who were TFSO's or left the company last year.
Bob Palmer said in the last DVN there were about 93,000 employees. So,
the number of people who respond in here is :
745/93000 = .0080107 so .8% of DEC population write in here, I
can't believe the number of read only would even move the number up to 1%.
My point is how important really is this notes file. If just one senior
level manager reads this file, top management is as well represented here
as any group.
- John
| |||||
| 2891.34 | .32 and .33 | BOOKS::HAMILTON | All models are false; some are useful - Dr. G. Box | Fri Feb 11 1994 14:11 | 20 |
re: .32.
Precisely. That change in communication style is precisely
what we need on the internet as well. Read for awhile,
acclimate to the community, learn the netiquette. Then
add ideas to the fray. Anyone who has been following the
"internet advertising" discussions will realize that managers
and executives of companies will need to jump in respond
to comments about their products/strategies. And to do
it intelligently, you need to internalize the dominant
communication style and use it. What better place to get
used to it than notes conferences?
re: .33
Wow. Is that true? I'm surprised, and I don't quite know
how to respond to that datum.
Glenn
| |||||
| 2891.35 | De-Lurk, PLEASE! | THEBAY::CHABANED | Spasticus Dyslexicus | Fri Feb 11 1994 14:18 | 14 |
I wonder how many of us feel the SLT is "lurking" in the notesfiles and
whether the more vocal participants fear retribution for our frank
expressions of opinion?
Bob Palmer's style on DVNs has become more relaxed lately. I commented
on how stiff he looked in the beginning. Whether this is due to
experience of my comments here, I don't have a clue. I know a *LOT* of
fear would go away if someone from the SLT noted here and let their guard
down a bit. Seeing a note full of "smileys" from BP would make him seem
less like the "talking head" we saw in his early DVNs.
-Ed
| |||||
| 2891.36 | Ah ha!!! | STAR::DIPIRRO | Fri Feb 11 1994 14:24 | 8 | |
Re: .31 > Maybe he's afraid that people would be inhibited in their responses if > he started to actively participate. Or maybe he is participating under > a pseudonym. That's it! It's Nasser! I knew it! All that stuff about turkeys was just a smoke screen! | |||||
| 2891.37 | more datum | CVG::THOMPSON | Who will rid me of this meddlesome priest? | Fri Feb 11 1994 14:25 | 6 |
Read/write ratios for conferences I've checked run from 5 to 10 times as many readers as writers. I suspect that this conference runs to a lot of readers to writers. Perhaps more then 10 to 1 but I don't have hard data. Alfred | |||||
| 2891.38 | don't you think they already know this? | SMURF::WALTERS | Fri Feb 11 1994 15:14 | 8 | |
>> Wow. Is that true? I'm surprised, and I don't quite know
>> how to respond to that datum.
Maybe that's why the SLT chose to use the more objective
employee survey discussed in 2831?
Colin
| |||||
| 2891.39 | my views and feeling and related issues | STAR::ABBASI | always give a check,it might be mate | Fri Feb 11 1994 15:34 | 27 |
<<< Note 2891.33 by DBSALF::QUINN "Crying? There's no crying in baseball!" >>>
>I came up with a total of about 744 respsondents. This included of course
i'd like to share with you my views on this subject .
i think is that many more DECeeees are read only and not write only like
the 744 DECeees mentioned in the earlier note.
i know many DECeees who just read but dont write, writing is not
as easy for many and it dont come as natural as the flow of wind in
spring summer day as it does come to the 744 of us DECeees who write
so fluently in here and in dedication about all sort of topics
of importance to the DEC way of life.
so, my bottom point is, even though only 744 DECeees write in here,
many more do read, so please, KEEP ON WRITING !!, we need it !!
please dont stop !!
i'd also like to take this opportunity in behave of myself and
everyone else to thank those who write and to ask those read
only noters not to be afraid and to jump in and hop'a'board.
thank you,
\nasser
| |||||
| 2891.40 | 4 * writers = 3% | DBSALF::QUINN | Crying? There's no crying in baseball! | Fri Feb 11 1994 15:50 | 9 |
<<< Note 2891.39 by STAR::ABBASI "always give a check,it might be mate" >>>
-< my views and feeling and related issues >-
Yes, I agree don't stop writing. But read only, even if 4 times users are read
only, that gives 2976, or 3% of employees use the conference. Not really a
good medium to effect change.
- John
| |||||
| 2891.41 | no guerilla noting from the top, please! | HDLITE::SCHNEIDER | Perception is deception | Fri Feb 11 1994 15:59 | 22 |
I'm a "lurker" (hrrmph!) myself, but I'm compelled to respond to the
notion that BP could enter "a few" notes in 10 minutes. (After also doing
some reading, yet!)
If he did, the quality of his entries (how well the ideas are thought out
and articulated) would surely be no better than that of the average BB
entry. I think it's a profound understatement to say that the average
light-to-heat ratio is poor.
But worse, because of BP's position, people would latch onto his toss-off
notes like they were stone tablets, absorb them with reading comprehension
that's also astonishingly poor on average, and then ACT on what they
perceive the edicts to be. I'll admit that the direction of the corporate
mind is pretty random already, but it's a pretty long shot that this would
be an improvement.
I haven't seen that much of David Stone's notes output, but I'm pretty
sure the examples I have seen weren't 10-minute jobs.
Chuck
(who doesn't write much because it takes me more than 10 minutes even for
a simple flame like this)
| |||||
| 2891.42 | need to look at the indirect effect of this note file | STAR::ABBASI | always give a check,it might be mate | Fri Feb 11 1994 16:10 | 29 |
.40
\John,
>But read only, even if 4 times users are read
>only, that gives 2976, or 3% of employees use the conference. Not really a
>good medium to effect change.
but \John, you are missing a subtle underlining point here, is that
many of read only will communicate via verbal methods and in otherwise what
they read in locations as such the cafeteria and walking in the halls
and over the coffee stations to other DECeees who are not read only or
write only what they read in this note file .
so, even though only 2976 DECeees are read only, if you consider
the resulting widespread effect of this, it is much much more.
i also heard that some DECeees tell their spouses when they get home
something about what they read in here, and the spouses will tell
the neighbors and the neighbors might tell their relatives
and their relative might tell their neighbors and so on, this way the
word will spread out and beyond.
so, again, to the writers, please dont let these numbers discourage
any one you from stopping to write and to tell us what is going on in
DEC !
thank you
\nasser
| |||||
| 2891.43 | NACAD::SHERMAN | Steve NETCAD::Sherman DTN 226-6992, LKG2-A/R05 pole AA2 | Fri Feb 11 1994 16:54 | 10 | |
I would be concerned about Lurker-Becket Syndrome. Herewith, an
Empowered Individual could make an off-hand comment in notes, perhaps
indicating that (s)he wished this or that about A Certain Noter's
response. Perhaps something like, "Who will rid me of this meddlesome
noter?" This, read by an Empowered and Well-Meaning Lurker could lead
to a Most Unfortunate Circumstance for A Certain Noter.
Just my opinion, of course. ;^)
Steve
| |||||
| 2891.44 | New Levels of Information Technology | DYOSW8::BROWNE | Fri Feb 11 1994 17:11 | 20 | |
RE: .30 Absolutely Right!!! What you say has considerable merit.
Taking full advantage of the information infrastructure will soon
be a hallmark of the successful business organization, and hence the
successful business executive!
We at Digital have the opportunity to take the initiative and lead
the movement, or we can hunker down and attempt to recoup our position
by staying with the business practices and modes of operation of the
"nearly-expired" 20th century. For those who choose the later, a word of
warning:
"The problems that we face today cannot be solved at the level of
thinking that we used when we created them!"
- A quotation from Albert Einstein
This quote is often referred to by Stephen Covey, the author of
the books, The Seven Habits of Highly Successful People and
Principled-Centered Leadership. ( I hope that in remembering the quotation
I have not butchered it badly!)
| |||||
| 2891.45 | He can't do it alone | HANNAH::SICHEL | All things are connected. | Fri Feb 11 1994 18:55 | 12 |
I can't help feeling some of the responses in here are very hard on Bob Palmer and the SLT. I thought it was a good insightful talk about the state of Digital. As far as I can tell, Bob Palmer is doing and saying a lot of the right things. Those who have ears will hear. He's only one person. He can't do it alone. - Peter | |||||
| 2891.46 | The numbers | ICS::DONNELLAN | Fri Feb 11 1994 20:09 | 13 | |
re: the magical numbers - 744 or 2976
Where else can you have a "conversation" about matters of importance
and involve this many people?
That the notesfiles are the topic of conversation in so many different
arenas in this company illustrates how seriously they are taken. These
represent an opportunity for people to speak their minds and that mere
fact is more reflective of the "state of the company" than perhaps any
other source of information.
And I think Bob Palmer, Russ Gullotti, and others now recognize the
significance of what is written here.
| |||||
| 2891.47 | Information is sent to Bob Palmer | 24108::ROBERT | Fri Feb 11 1994 23:45 | 28 | |
For everyone's information, I have been taking what I think are the
best out of the marketing and digital notes files and have been sending
them to Bob Palmer. I only put the text of the note, and send this to
Bob. Everyone that I have sent to him, for the past year or so, he has
responded very positively. Bob is listening and is acting on the
information that I send to him. I recently sent him a note about a
company, ( KODAK ) and how it turned around one particular division in
18 months. I was shocked at the number of people that had read the note
and the names of those who had read it. A friend of mine from the past
got the note and forwarded it back to me with all the headers included.
To show me where it had been and who had read the note, and the people
they had forwarded it to.
Like other people in this notes file and others have said, Bob Palmer
"CANNOT DO IT ALONE", he needs our help. If some people up the
structure do not want to help, then shame on them. We need some means
of letting Bob Palmer know who these people are. I do not consider this
ratting, I consider this a means of survival. I do not intend on
letting anyone get in my way from helping this company survive. I am
going to be in Maynard next week, and I am going to try and get a few
minutes with Bob if possible.
I have some more information to pass on to him in person, and an idea
to really jump start this corporation. I hope that he will have time to
listen to what I have to say.
Dave
| |||||
| 2891.48 | TAMRC::LAURENT | Hal Laurent @ COP | Fri Feb 11 1994 23:59 | 12 | |
re: .33 > 745/93000 = .0080107 so .8% of DEC population write in here, I >can't believe the number of read only would even move the number up to 1%. I suspect the number of read-onlys is rather high in this notes conference. Of all the conferences on our network, this is probably the one that one's boss is most likely to read (or at least hear about). I personally have a very good boss, and I'm not worried about such recriminations, but I'd be willing to bet that that's not a universal feeling. -Hal | |||||
| 2891.49 | Any Electronic Message system is about 99% readers/1% writers | DPDMAI::WISNIEWSKI | ADEPT of the Virtual Space. | Sat Feb 12 1994 09:32 | 40 |
>Bob Palmer said in the last DVN there were about 93,000 employees. So,
>the number of people who respond in here is :
> 745/93000 = .0080107 so .8% of DEC population write in here, I
>can't believe the number of read only would even move the number up to 1%.
>My point is how important really is this notes file. If just one senior
>level manager reads this file, top management is as well represented here
>as any group.
I run a DECUS LUG sponsored BBS in Dallas for our membership
and the read/write ratio is about 99% readers/lurkers to 1%posters
and that's in an open environment. The standard BBS stats for
most notes/news systems is about the same.
Why do people post here? That's a better question.
I participate because I believe that some one may be listening and
trying to decide what to do on the issues I comment about.
If I'm wrong about someone listening, this notefile is only thearpy
for an overworked, balding sales support consultant who's tired of
seeing Digital throw away opportunities that make other companies
and individuals rich.
If I'm right, some one is reading this and understanding what's
going on in my corner of our customer driven world...
If it's only theapy it's still valuable to have this notesfile for
folks.
And if Management is'nt interested in my and the other 744's
opinion on how we're doing.... That's their loss...
Other companies without this type of electronic access would poll
and repoll to get a sense of what's going on.
John Wisniewski
| |||||
| 2891.50 | PASTIS::MONAHAN | humanity is a trojan horse | Sun Feb 13 1994 07:56 | 25 | |
Other Easynet notes files have shown a ration of 10/1 between
readers and writers. I could easily believe that up to 20% of DEC
employees *read* this notes file. I follow several conferences in which
I have never entered a single note.
Why would the other 80% not be reading it?
Poor telecommunications from place of work (Moscow, Morocco, ...)
Job never requires use of a terminal (van drivers, factory workers,...)
Never heard of the file.
Too busy.
Not interested in the company - it's just a job.
?
Why would a reader not write?
Shy of poor quality of English.
Nervous of expressing an opinion against status quo.
Not worth repeating an opinion expressed by someone else.
Just "interested" without information or opinions to add (is this Bob?).
Only manages to read occasionaly, by which time arguments are stale.
?
While not all factors work this way, many of the above factors
would tend to concentrate the most valuable suggestions for
improvements, and the most relevant criticisms of what is currently
wrong in this file.
| |||||
| 2891.52 | lots more out there | AKOCOA::TLAV01::SAM | DECblah | Mon Feb 14 1994 05:15 | 15 |
add to .50 - why would a reader not write :
Many issues in this conference are centered around US - issues
in other places are very different, such users may not contribute.
The network's pretty slow outside I guess - I spend 30-40 mins
of spare time to catch up with latest notes every time. Not every
person can afford that.
The cynics (and their numbers are growing very fast) who feel
that writing anything will have no effect anyway - so why bother.
But believe it - lots more people read this than write.
| |||||
| 2891.51 | I think .8% is very HIGH | NCBOOT::PEREZ | Trust, but ALWAYS verify! | Mon Feb 14 1994 12:49 | 33 |
re .32:
>They would have to stop the spin control and start communicating, they
>would need to be willing to debate issues rather than presenting
>prepared statements with lots of words and little content.
>If they could do that, I'd feel a lot better about the company I work
>for, because we would have leadership, not just management.
It appears that there is some confusion between "can" and "will", or in
this case, "could" and "would"... I know of nothing PREVENTING the
above from occurring. I am not sure of the "willingness" to MAKE it
occur.
re .33:
>745/93000 = .0080107 so .8% of DEC population write in here, I can't
>believe the number of read only would even move the number up to 1%.
At least here in MPO the read/only ratio is MUCH higher than 10:1, at
least in the software unit. Close to everyone reads this conference,
but other than Mr. Haag (and of course the new departed Greg Scott),
generally noone is willing to stick their head out of the foxhole long
enough to risk writing...
But more importantly - so what? There are supposedly valid polls that
come out weekly which presume to predict the attitude of the entire
country from a sample of 1000 people. This is a WHOLE lot smaller
percentage than .8. I also believe the cross-section of population in
here is at least as representative as that reflected in the polls. I
believe the VAST majority of people in this company can identify with
many of the topics here, and would echo the sentiments and statements
made in this notesfile.
| |||||
| 2891.53 | 11 read / 0 write | SWAM1::BASURA_BR | Politicians Prefer Unarmed Peasants | Mon Feb 14 1994 16:11 | 5 |
re: .33 .37 .etc
I asked 11 people and NONE of them ever post in this conference even
though they are regular readers (including me).
| |||||
| 2891.54 | Inconsistency... :-) | BSS::CODE3::BANKS | Not in SYNC -> SUNK | Mon Feb 14 1994 16:28 | 8 |
Re:<<< Note 2891.53 by SWAM1::BASURA_BR "Politicians Prefer Unarmed Peasants" >>> > I asked 11 people and NONE of them ever post in this conference even > though they are regular readers (including me). Then how did your note get in if you never post in this conference? :-) - David | |||||
| 2891.55 | i agree with these staticstics | STAR::ABBASI | one of the 744 | Mon Feb 14 1994 16:28 | 18 |
ref: statistics of read/only vs. write DECeees.
this only goes to show my point that there are many more who read than
write in here.
i hope this will convince every one not to give up on expressing there
thought and hopes for DEC in here, and to let us know the true and
nothing but the true so help you so.
speaking of talk and reading and such , i think this note file needs more
RUMORS!! this note file has been kind'a lacking in rumors lately, why
are there no more rumors in here? last year there was much more rumors
talk in here compared to this year i think and it was much more
interesting to listen to it.
thank you,
\nasser
| |||||
| 2891.56 | ROWLET::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow! | Mon Feb 14 1994 16:43 | 7 | |
Remember, there is a copy of this conference on MORTAL that is
exclusively read-only. There are also many people who use various
forms of batch-notes-extractors. Let's also not forget all the folks
who mail stuff from this and other conferences to various internal
distribution lists.
Bob
| |||||
| 2891.57 | :-) | THETOY::LANE | C code. C code run. Run code, run. | Mon Feb 14 1994 17:05 | 2 |
>....from this and other conferences to various internal distribution lists. and newspapers. | |||||
| 2891.58 | The downside... | ROWLET::AINSLEY | Less than 150 kts. is TOO slow! | Mon Feb 14 1994 17:24 | 9 |
re: .57
>and newspapers.
Yeah. This conference probably has the largest readership of the rest
of the company's conferences combined:-(
Bob
| |||||
| 2891.59 | look much but don't touch | KERNEL::WEBSTERC | Tue Feb 15 1994 22:04 | 13 | |
re .53
yep, I read-only this one, I'd be *much* too nervous
to enter a note.
rats, blew it.
Colin
| |||||
| 2891.60 | Will the real non-BP please stand up... | 54291::VUURBOOM_R | Roelof Vuurboom @ APD, DTN 829 4066 | Thu Feb 17 1994 16:41 | 9 |
I'm intrigued by a suggestion somebody made a while back that BP
may be participating under a pseudonym (and somebody opted for
Nasser!
Suppose - just suppose - that BP had a massive multiple personality
syndrome then all 744 of you out there may be BP in disguise...and
then there's me :-)
What a mind blower...
| |||||
| 2891.61 | whoops | GVA05::SELBY | Thu Feb 17 1994 16:49 | 6 | |
re .60
In normal circumstances one might say "keep taking the pills" but in
this case perhaps you'd better stop the medication now.
Mark ;-)
| |||||
| 2891.62 | please stop rumors | BONNET::WLODEK | Network pathologist. | Thu Feb 17 1994 20:19 | 4 |
Wrong, I don't write in this conference.
| |||||
| 2891.63 | DCU ? | EVOAI2::FARIS | Life is a lethal VD | Fri Feb 18 1994 11:59 | 7 |
>
> to .10
What is DCU and the DCU conference ?
never heard about it in Paris (France...)
| |||||
| 2891.64 | CVG::THOMPSON | An other snowy day in paradise | Fri Feb 18 1994 12:04 | 9 | |
> What is DCU and the DCU conference ?
DCU is the Digital Employees Federal Credit Union. It's sort of like
a cooperative bank in the US. Unless Bob Palmer is a member of the
DCU I don't know why he'd want to track the DCU conference. But as
acting moderator I'd welcome him anyway.
Alfred
| |||||