Conference 7.286::digital

<<< Note 3732.0 by JGODCL::HEIJSEN "Wil Heijsen, Euro_MCS_Service_Logistics_HW_ECO_coord." >>>
                             -< #vp's/100emp's?? >-

>    I counted 10 different VP's in this article on the quoted 3500 people.
>    So 1 VP per 350 workers, is the new 'lean & mean' organisation standard
>    today? :<()=amazed
    
Tell us something we don't already know!  So what is the current
number of VP's in the company - 160+?  I wish our share price was
linked to the number of VP's we are "carrying".  Wait a minute...it
is...except the relationship is inversely proportional :-(.
    
                            James. 

    ........by watching the VTX one can calculate the number of new VP's
    at two per week average soooo.......within a year we'll have 104 new
    fearless leaders.....
    
    
    hhornET
    

    
    
    I count 15.
    
    

    You will notice that a "SOMEONE" from the Ivory Towers will respond in
    this notes file to certain topics. Have you ever seen one of these
    monitors respond to the "how many VP's are there in DEC" question? It
    is truly our own dirty little secret. 

    
    
      Well we've seen it sarcastically written here many times "Management is
     our core competancy".
    
     Only trouble is management does'nt pick up the sarcasm part.

    What is the big deal ??? My local branch bank that has 10 people
    working in it, 4 of which have a VP title. I wouldn't get so bent out
    of shape because someone has a VP title. In the long run its their
    performance that counts not what there title is !!!!!!! 
    
     
     

RE: .6

So, I assume that you'll gracefully accept the job title of bank teller.  After all, that the only person
in a bank that isn't a VP.  Well, the guard and the janitor, may not be either.  Get the analogy?

|    What is the big deal ??? My local branch bank that has 10 people
|    working in it, 4 of which have a VP title. I wouldn't get so bent out
|    of shape because someone has a VP title. In the long run its their
|    performance that counts not what there title is !!!!!!! 
    
	Interestingly enough the banking business (in US) is one of the few
	that have maintained a fairly stable employment level despite
	the slashing of jobs in other industries.

	Sounds familiar?

        Some predict an unprecedented cutback of employment in the
	traditional banking industry over the next 5 to 7 years mostly
	due to increased competition from other financial institutions.
	Those supposedly have a more cost effective infra structure ..
	but I'm sure the banks are like good ol digital writing off
	UNIX-vendors as snake-oil salesmen.

	Banks are not a good benchmark for justifying a high density of
	VPs. Pick another industry :-)

	>Per

    
    ....re6. so when did they make you a VP?????.....you sure sound like
    one......
    
    
    hoRNEt

    
      Customers like to deal with VP's (for some bizarre reason), so you
    will find that many industries have a lot of them (at least in title).
    
      A former employer had:  Executive VP's, Senior VP's, First VP's,
    VP's, and Assistant VP's.  The last couple of names were basically
    just titles.  I think the ratio was 1 per 100 and that was in banking.
    
           Mark

    
    In asian and south american countries it is almost impossible to
    get an appointment with decison makers without a fancy title like 
    VP/director/managing director etc. Many of our VPs do travel to 
    meet and work with international customers and titles do matter 
    in other countries. 
    

    
    
    
    
      The title would'nt bother me if I believed these turkeys got paid
    by company performance and not because they had "VP" in their name.
    

    traditional banking is predicted to disappear.  A local bank has
    announced that they are setting up branches in a supermarket chain. 
    Not just cash machines, mind you, real branches.
    
    Mark

    BankSouth has had branches (people and everything) in Kroger
    Supermarkets for years (at least 5+) here in Atlanta.
    
    Dan

Banks are different in that many transactions require
signoff by an officer of the corporation.  This is why
banks have so many people with the title of VP.

    RE .6
    
    So who do think get's the ax when the pinch comes?
    
    The VP or the FE?
    
    In my neck of the woods it's BYE-BYE FE.
    
    

With due respect to the departed Nasser, we havn't had turkeys in years!

BobW

>================================================================================
>Note 3732.12                    #vp's/100emp's??                        12 of 13
>KAOFS::W_VIERHOUT "Flash: Inmates take Asylum"        7 lines   8-MAR-1995 15:26
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                                -< still scary >-
>
>      The title would'nt bother me if I believed these turkeys got paid
>    by company performance and not because they had "VP" in their name.

    	
>    So who do think get's the ax when the pinch comes?
    
    I'm gonna try to address the Piggly-Wiggly banking issue and the above
    in one shot, so bear with me...
    
    Here in Texas our banks have traditionally been built on mobile
    platforms with velcro signs.  Thus "Heritage Banc" can be wheeled
    across town and the sign changed to "Uni-Bank Savings" after work but
    before dinner, which is far less time than it takes the depositor to
    find where their funds went.
    
    This created quite a furor, as VPs running from one moving bank to
    another created traffic hazards (although they did, in general, slim
    down some, if they survived).  Traffic reports often went like "There's
    a spectator slowdown on 635W at Montfort.  It appears the takeover team
    from RepublicBank, headed south, is attempting to jump ship midstream
    to NationsBank, currently en-route North on Midway just past McEwen."
    
    Employees, on the other hand, were often seen sitting in herds in empty
    parking lots, having found their banks reloed without notice and the
    next bus home wasn't until five.  Some were lucky to be picked up by
    other reloing banks, but most had to wander for quite some time before
    being adopted again, albeit probably temporarily.  Meanwhile, you would
    see them on street corners with "Will Bank for Food" signs.
    
    This temporary adoption, referred to on Oprah as "Serial Monogamy" and
    something else by most big city Vice squads, sparked a fire in one bank
    VPs tiny brain.  "Hey!  If it flies, floats,  or (fill in blank here),
    it's cheaper to rent!".  
    
    But that's another story. :^]
    
    							Tex
    
    
    

    
    	So "lack of sales" pressures have hit the Sunny South also, eh,
    Tex?
    
    	BTW, latest rumours are US Channels Marketing folks in cold
    Merrimack have been getting the opportunity to "enhance" their
    value outside those four walls this week...
    
    	And a new list of old-time folks reassigned to "Special
    Asignment" jobs is growing. Going to be a fun quarter;*)))
    
    			the Greyhawk

    Why do people get so upset with titles? The excessive use of the word
    "president" is merely a characteristic of your culture. In other places
    the words "sir" and "lord" are preferred in management structures. Who
    cares if they do the job they are paid to do? A rose by any other
    name...

    But calling dog dodo a rose doesn't make it smell any better and
    causes people to wonder about you analytical abilities.

From:	... 08-Mar-1995 1504 ...
Subj:	VPs at Digital (all 141 if them) 

Zul Abbany, VP
Dennis Albano, VP
Cary Armistead, VP
Bill Armitage, VP
Gary Aslin, VP
Bernhard Auer, VP
Rob Ayres, VP
Ray Bedard, VP
Charlie Bennett, VP
Len Bizzarro, VP
Winnie Briney, VP
Ron Bunker, VP
Bob Burke, VP
Rich Butler, VP
Guy Buyst, VP
Larry Cabrinety, VP
Ed Caldwell, VP
Joe Cannizzaro, VP
Jon Caputo, VP
Dan Casaletto, VP
Bobby Choonavala, VP
Charlie Christ, VP
Bob R. Clark, VP
Bob Cohen, VP
Tom Colatosti, VP
Chris Conway, VP
Harry Copperman, VP
Giorgio Corsi, VP
Tony Craig, VP
David Creed, VP
Vincenzo Damiani, VP
Bill Demmer, VP
Duane Dickhut, VP
Wim Elfrink, VP
Howard Elias, VP
Bud Enright, VP
Bob Farquhar, VP
Dick Farrahar, VP
Paul Feresten, VP
Dick Fishburn, VP
Brian Fitzgerald, VP
Jim Flanagan, VP
Rita Foley, VP
Frank Fortunato, VP
Alberto Fresco, VP
Sam Fuller, VP
Mike Gallup, VP
Nick Ganio, VP
Dawn Gilbert, VP
Tom Gillette, VP
Rose Ann Giordano, VP
Skip Gladfelter, VP
Chuck Goslee, VP
Stephan Gray, VP
Hope Greenfield, VP
Bob Griffin, VP
Tom Grilk, VP
Al Hall, VP
Don Harbert, VP
Don Herbener, VP
Jim Hogan, VP
Charlie Holleran, VP
Rich Hollingsworth, VP
Willie Hooks, VP
Mike Howard, VP
Bob Hult, VP
Mike Jackson, VP
Ilene Jacobs, VP
Bill Johnson, VP
Steve Johnson, VP
Sharon Keillor, VP
John A. Kelly, VP
Steve Kirchoff, VP
Ron Larkin, VP
Jesse Lipcon, VP
Ralph Lipizzi, VP
Jeff Low, VP
Gail Mann, VP
Bill Maro, VP
John McClelland, VP
Tom McEachin, VP
Bob McNulty, VP
Wes Melling, VP
Jim Melvin, VP
Peter Mercury, VP
Gianni Messora, VP
Debbie Miller, VP
John Millerick, VP
Tony Morris, VP
Gordon Moultrie, VP
Bob Mulkey, VP
Vin Mullarkey, VP
Barry Nay, VP
Gene Nelson, VP
Pauline Nist, VP
Bruce Nonnemaker, VP
Art O'Donnell, VP
John O'Keefe, VP
John E. O'Leary, VP
Marian O'Leary, VP
Mahendra Patel, VP
Enrico Pesatori, VP
Mike Pocock, VP
Kathy Power, VP
Rich Powers, VP
Mick Prokopis, VP
Gwyn Pugh, VP
Lucia Quinn, VP
John Rando, VP
Bob Rennick, VP
Philippe Ribeyre, VP
Richard Riker, VP
Scott Roeth, VP
Roger Rose, VP
Jean-Claude Sainctavit, VP
Bob Schmitt, VP
Dick Sellers, VP
Graeme Shorter, VP
Herb Shumway, VP
Tom Siekman, VP
Anil Sitole, VP
Al Snyder, VP
Pat Spratt, VP
Kannankote Srikanth, VP
Bill Strecker, VP
Nancy Strecker, VP
Patrick Sullivan, VP
Bob Supnik, VP
Dave Sweeney, VP
Tom Vacchiano, VP
Paul Van der Spiegel, VP
Larry Walker, VP
Janet Wallace, VP
Tony Wallace, VP
Mark Wang, VP
Ray Weadock, VP
Theo Wegbrans, VP
Abbott Weiss, VP
Jim Willis, VP
Graeme Woodley, VP
Luis Zuniga, VP

    And I thought the Federal Goverment bloated :-).
    
    Mark                                            

Re: .22

I'm afraid you missed the latest announcement from Vincenzo Damiani, 
where he has "strengthened the European team" by naming more VPs.

Jean-Paul Nerriere: head of Digital France

Hans Dirkmann:	head of Digital Germany.

He also announced Alberto Fresco, but he was in your list.

    
Al Fresco?  Was he hired to sell off all the Digital buildings?

	RE: .25

	>Al Fresco?  Was he hired to sell off all the Digital buildings?

	Oh, No. Al was hired to tailor Bob's new suits...

    ....hey you forgot my name on the list
    
    curt horne VP manager of dumpsters and termination papers
    
    
    horneT
    

    I think Tom Colotosti resigned this week, so there may be room
    for one more.

    Well, it's about time. We haven't had any good stuff in here in a long
    time. Been missing my sarcasm fix as of late ;^)
    
    Pat
    It is sarcasm, isn't it Toto?

    Nice to see Al Fresco being made VP for outdoor catering.

    less than 10% are women...

    Yes,but 90% are not.

    
     I suspect those at the VP level have been in the business world for
     20 to 25+ years.  
    
     The current group I work in:  
    
     Females    	50%
     Minorities 	63%
     White males	37%
    
     Management positions 100% minority
    
     No VP's though....
    
     M
     

    
    Re: .28
    
    >> I think Tom Colotosti resigned this week, so there may be room
    >> for one more.
    
    You got it. And the name is........
    
    Sultan Zia... VP

    
    
    
    Re: .*
    
    Are white females considered minorities...??

     
     re:35
    
     Yes, white females are considered minorities..
    
     M

    Doesn't that make white males an even smaller minority? White females
    make up greater than 50% of the white population. Is there a
    politically correct math?

    
    I don't have specifics, but I've read many articles which state white
    males are less than 50% of white population...
    
    Policically correct math (help me here) applies in business... where 
    white males are the majority, therefore...  
    
    less = more ?????
    
    M

    Hopefully these people are in these positions due to their 'skill'
    and for no other reason.  Discrimination of any form is wrong.

    
    Re. 38,39
    
      I agree, people should be placed in positions because they are
     qualified, not because of their skin color or gender.  But
     it still happens..
    
      VP's and more importantly little folks should be rewarded for their 
     fine efforts.  Has anyone seen the little folks get a promo since the
     "freeze" went into place?????
    
      As far as discrimination, I agree 1000%, NOONE should be
     discriminated against, but it happens
    
      

    No promotions here.
    
    Sneezy,Grumpy & Bashful etc.

    My boss (finally) got his promotion to Consulting Engineer, in January,
    I think - we took him out to lunch.  So promotions are happening, at
    least.  And the guy definitely, without question, deserves this one.
    
    /Charlotte

    RE: %women, %minorities, #VP's, discrimination, etc.
    
    To quote someone famous:
    
            "Can't we all just get along?"

    
    ......skill set requirements for DIGITAL VP's is a low golf score....
    
    and the repeated phrase..."If what I am telling you is not true than
    
    you can hold me accountable......???????
    
    ya ok!!!!
    
    
    hhoRNet
    

    I lived in San Antonio for 20 years.  Hispanic population approx. 67%. 
    Yet, they were a "minority".
    
    Go figure!

    Non-Native English Language Speaker Alert!
    
    	Why is it "Vice President" of 'XYX'" reporting to Chief Executive
        Officer (or whatever)? Who is then the "President of 'XYZ'"?
    
    	Namely, if there is no "President", why the "Vice" in the first
    	place?
    
    ...petri (just curious)

> I lived in San Antonio for 20 years.  Hispanic population approx. 67%. 
>    Yet, they were a "minority".
>    
>    Go figure!

I believe that in regards to jobs you will find that percentage wise
there are many more white males in the high paying jobs. Sure, there
are pockets here and there where that isn't true but in this country,
over all jobs, it is. Women and people of color and some other groups
regardless of their numbers in the population at large are a minority
of the upper pay brackets. Add all minorities together and I'd bet
there are still more white males in these jobs. 

Why or how someone becomes a VP is not something I have much knowledge
of, I do know that most are white males. Women and minorities tend to 
reach a certain level of management and then stop advancing. Since I 
have never aspired to management the details of what happens at the 
"glass ceiling" aren't something I've paid much attention to. I just 
know the results. liesl

    RE. 22
    Jeez, I hate scrolling through 120 lines just to get to the next note.
    

    
    Re: .39
    
    >> Hopefully these people are in these positions due to their 'skill'
    >> and for no other reason.  Discrimination of any form is wrong.
    
    I certainly hope to hear from you, once Nuttie's "New Society" becomes
    fully implemented.
    
    Warning...
    
    Rethorical question:
    
    If all the Blacks that were, as is said, "hired solely based on their 
    color", replaced by unemployed/disgruntled white males, how many 
    unemployed/disgruntled white males would remain...??!

    At that point, then whom would the remaining unemployed/disgruntled white 
    males have to blame for their malaise...?!?

    Perhaps their wife's...!??!?!?    :-) 

Percent of economically active population who are managers or administra-
tive workers, 1989; and percentage average annual growth of labor produc-
tivity, in output per employee, 1979 to 1990

	Country	     Managers(%)    Productivity Growth(%)

	USA		12.1		0.7
	Australia	11.9		0.9
	Canada		11.9		1.2
	Austria		 4.7		1.9
	Japan		 3.7		3.0
	Netherlands	 3.3		1.5
	Denmark		 3.0		2.1
	Finland		 3.0		3.6
	Ireland		 2.2		---
	Spain		 1.3		3.0

Source: International Labor Organization,  Yearbook of Labor Statistics
1989-90	 (Geneva, ILO, 1990), pp. 120-186; Organization for Economic Coop-
eration and Development, OECD Economic Outlook 50 (Paris: OECD, 1991), p.136.

___Pete

    re -1
    Got the statistics of Digitals growth rate or profitability versus the
    number of administrative workers for the last 5 years?
    Or better still,the 3 dimensional plot including number of
    reorganisations per year as the z axis.
    
    Whilst we are at it,I would like to be considered for a VP job on the
    grounds that I am a minority.Apart from being English in France,I am the
    ONLY person wearing a striped shirt today-this surely sets me apart as
    much as the average VP.No?

         <<< Note 3732.47 by TINCUP::KOLBE "Wicked Wench of the Web" >>>

> I believe that in regards to jobs you will find that percentage wise
> there are many more white males in the high paying jobs. Sure, there
> are pockets here and there where that isn't true but in this country,
> over all jobs, it is.

  I also believe that in regards to models posed in bathing suits,
  underwear, and other sexually-provocative attire, you will find
  that percentage wise there are many more females in the high
  visibility ads. Sure, there are pockets here and there where
  that isn't true but in this country, over all ads, it is.

  Liesl, there couldn't be a connection here.

  Or could there?

  Sorry, I was just struck by the two potentially-parallel notes strings.

                                   Atlant

    What's white, anyway?  I took a Valuing Differences Course a few years
    back and they said white meant Anglo-Saxon, or maybe, just maybe
    northern European (Dutch, German, Scandinavian).  All else, said the
    instructor was "off white". As for the US population only 16% is white,
    meaning Anglo-Saxon, protestant.  Projected figures say by year 2000
    one third of US population will be Hispanic.  Remind me again what a
    minority is?
                         
    Paul (who is "off-white")

    Face it, white males (especially Anglo-Saxon scum) are responsible for
    all that is wrong with the world today.  If we (they) had never
    introduced such obscene inventions as the wheel to North America, or
    brought Christianity and the work ethic to these shores, we would all
    be blissfully happy digging potatoes in Ireland, mining coal in
    England, or dodging bullets in some god-forsaken central European
    "nation state". 
    
    fwiw  <;)

> -< Let's get real >-

  We are real. We just notice that approximately 52% of the
  adult population-at-large is female, but less than 10% of
  the Digital VP population is female.  This causes some of
  us to wonder:

     "Why?"

                                   Atlant

    Maybe it has something to do with the fact that Digital has
    historically hired from engineering schools, and engineering schools
    tend to be populated with males (more non-white today, btw, reflected
    in Digital's population).   Nothing deep here.  If engineering schools
    were populated with chimpanzees, and Digital wanted to hire engineers,
    to whom do you think the bulk of the employment offers would go?

    
    um, the wheel was here before us Europeans (you can see it/them in the
    anthropology museum in Mexico City).  Plus, most of those firing the
    bullets in god-forsaken European nation states are white males.  
    
    We're not saying that you guys don't have some good points.  Just don't
    let it go to your heads.

> Maybe it has something to do with the fact that Digital has
> historically hired from engineering schools, and engineering schools
> tend to be populated with males (more non-white today, btw, reflected
> in Digital's population).   Nothing deep here.  If engineering schools
> were populated with chimpanzees, and Digital wanted to hire engineers,
> to whom do you think the bulk of the employment offers would go?

  White males, at least for VP-level positions.

                                   Atlant

Re: last few

I think we've gone a little off the mark here so I'll try to steer us
back on course a little, OK? 

The problem with giving someone the title of VP is that they will 
eventually start acting like one!

I've no problem, per se, with the number/quality of VPs Digital have
at the moment, what I do have a problem with is what they are doing
with their very expensive time (average VP pulls in $200K a year?). 

Since I work in Ireland and have little contact with VPs of any kind,
could someone tell me what an average day consists of if you are a VP
in Digital?  What do these people produce, who do they meet, what do
they do?  I've never seen them come out publicly in a notesfile to
discuss any of the issues raised within. 

Do any of them practice MBWA (Management By Walking About)?  Or are
they all closeted away with little or no interaction with the outside
world (employees of customers)? 

Just wondering really,
 
                          James.

(Getting a little more cynical with each passing day of what I see
going on in Digital). 

re; Atlant, point taken. Though I do notice that there is a lot
more beefcake showing up in ads lately. Maybe Fabio is VP material?
liesl

James:

> Do any of them practice MBWA (Management By Walking About)?  Or are
> they all closeted away with little or no interaction with the outside
> world (employees of customers)? 

  At least one of the Veeps on the list associates with the
  "little folks" via the relevent technical notesfiles.  I'd
  bet that if I were reading other conferences in other areas
  of technical disciplines, that there are several others that
  make contributions in their areas of expertise as well.

  Notesfiles aside, more than a few of the Veeps on the lists
  are real presences in their areas.  They *DO* know what's
  going on and are worth their weight in gold.

  Some of the veeps on the list, of course, are worth their
  weight in something completely different.

  If you ever have an opportunity to see a "golden" Veep and
  a "something else" Veep together in front of real customers,
  you will have no difficulty telling them apart. The "Digital
  Management Listens" Veep panel at U.S. DECUS is famous for
  enabling this "sorting out".

                                   Atlant

    re: Why aren't there more women, etc., VP's
    
    Aren't most VP's old guys that need to be walked to and from
    their offices every day?  It takes time for women and minorities
    who started working "only" 15-20 years ago to get that old.
    
    I think it's just a time-lag thing between the time more women
    and minorities started getting more into "professional" career
    paths, and how long it takes for anyone at all, starting from
    being a college hire, to become a VP.  As they work their way
    through the ranks, you'll see more and more over the next decade.
    
    Chris

    The average age of most VPs, like most senators, means they probably
    served in WWII or just missed it by a tad.  Ralto's probably right, in
    that there is a major timelag due to the length of time it takes to
    become a VP.  What we're seeing is a result of the hiring practices,
    culture, and social mores of the fifties.
    
    On the other hand, especially looking around Texas, I see those in line
    to become VP as a pretty diverse crowd and believe that twenty years
    from now the demographics will have changed drastically in the VP gene
    pool.
    
    Today's cars are more efficient and less polluting than yesteryears. 
    However, there's still tons of people like yours truly that are drivin'
    iron left over from the Ford administration, thus the new breed of
    cars, by attrition, will eventually represent the total automotive
    population (until it changes again :^]) given several years.  But not
    today.
    
    							Tex

    I've done a couple of speaking engagements where I was
    announced (complete with title PowerPoint slide) as
    "Director of Corporate Morale" and most people thought
    it was a legitimate position.
    
    This has proven so effective, that the next time I'll
    promote myself to "Vice President, Corporate Morale".
    At least I'll be able to justify a better hotel room
    on my expense report.
    
    Dan

    re .55
    
    >We are real. We just notice that approximately 52% of the
    >  adult population-at-large is female, but less than 10% of
    >  the Digital VP population is female.  This causes some of
    >  us to wonder:
    
    Atlant,
    
    Are you thinking it is so desireable to be VP that we are discriminating
    againt women by not allowing them to be VP?
    
    Or are you thinking it is unfair to men that so many men have to serve
    as VP while women get off so easy?
    
    I think we do it to protect our position in the industry.
    
    /joel
                                     
    

.50 is probably the most informative single note i've seen in this conference!

We tend to assume that in a capitalist society the management class makes some
vital contribution to the success of business, but the statistics sure don't
seem to bear that out.  Especially in the upper ranks, to be almost overly
Darwinian about it, maybe what leads to success is merely the ability to get
promoted.  That ability may be based on business acumen, but i think we have
noted in the past that it could also be due to a host of other factors, such
as personal relationships, fitting in with the social culture of management,
knowing when to switch jobs so as to duck responsibility for mistakes, etc.

At some point stockholders are going to have to question whether they are
allowing a culture of incompetence to grow up within businesses and overpower
the more rational goals of business activity with unstated goals that revolve
more around furthering the self-interest and proliferation of managers as a
social group.  Something definitely seems to be going awry here!

- paul

    
    	Excellent commentary .67...
    
    	Tom Peters calls it "executive flight". To avoid association with
    failure, lack of leadership, incompetence, etc. promotion must come
    within three years each time you get promoted, or else...
    
    	It's a singular American disease. After all, we are the only
    society that worships youth; everywhere else on this planet, age (and
    attendent wisdom) are venerated.
    
    	And, as many of my collegues note, that clearly explains why we
    are the world's largest DEBTOR nation. Before everyone goes bonkers,
    just think of your own children. When's the last time one of your kids
    paid the mortgage? And we are still a child among the nations of the
    world.
    
    		the Greyhawk

re Greyhawk's comments on .67:
 
>   	Tom Peters calls it "executive flight". To avoid association with
>   failure, lack of leadership, incompetence, etc. promotion must come
>   within three years each time you get promoted, or else...

There has been a lot of talk about management incompetence lately, and not
only in Digital.  Here in Germany, a book was published a couple of years
back, called _Nieten_in_Nadelstreifen_ (Zeroes in Pinstripes), about the
quality of German corporate management.  The title says it all.

Is management really less competent than it was 20 or 30 or 40 years ago?
If so, is this a failure of the business schools?  And how would that
explain Digital, whose management has traditionally come through the ranks?
    
>   	It's a singular American disease. After all, we are the only
>   society that worships youth; everywhere else on this planet, age (and
>   attendent wisdom) are venerated.

Unfortunately, America's diseases have a way of spreading around the world
with a 5- to 10-year time lag.  I fear this one is no different.  It is
perhaps not so advanced as in America, nor so virulent, but if age was ever
venerated here in Europe, I daresay it is no longer.
    
>   	And, as many of my collegues note, that clearly explains why we
>   are the world's largest DEBTOR nation. Before everyone goes bonkers,
>   just think of your own children. When's the last time one of your kids

This disease, at least, seems to encounter resistance here.  Despite the
economic difficulties of the past few years, savings rates have pretty
much held firm.  The persistance of the cultural memory of the '20s,
especially here in Germany, is remarkably strong.  Let us hope it
remains so, as we move in the direction of a single European currency.

>   paid the mortgage? And we are still a child among the nations of the
>   world.

An adolescent, I think, judging by the nation's preoccupation with
matters of prurient interest.

Steve

    
    Perhaps we should entertain the notion that management is less
    willing to take risks as they were 20/30/40 years ago. Particularly
    in Digital which has found itself ( as a result of various moves ) 
    retreating to what it once was. Even less. With fewer, freer dollars
    to develop, promote and lead. 
    
    jc
    
      
     
    

    re .50, .67, .68- I think I'd find that a lot more valuable, Pete, if
    you included the column on absolute productivity next to the percentage
    change in output per employee.  You'd find that in addition to having
    the highest percentage of managers the USA also has the highest
    absolute productivity per employee; only Germany and Japan come close,
    and even then not very, something like 70% of the US average.  And we
    do that with the highest percentage of managers.  What does it tell
    you?  It tells me that the chart in .50 was woefully incomplete, which
    I'd pass on to the writer in .67 who was so impressed by it, and the
    Greyhawk, who endorsed that evaluation in .68.  You want to talk about
    productivity we should discuss the whole picture.
    
    DougO

A relevant question vs. 20/30 years ago etc. is how much is the average VP
salary (and bonuses) compared to the average employee (all) salary today
vs. back then.  If it has gone from 4X to 12X or something, that could be a
clue as to what's going on.  If you can get in and out in a shorter amount
of time with enough money to retire comfortably on, then maybe the longer
term viability of the company is less important to you, and even destructive
("eating your seed corn") short-term fixes will look more promising.

- paul

    An excellent discussion of this "management" challenge appears in a
    Peter Drucker essay in the Harvard Business Review, Nov.-Dec., 1991,
    entitled "The New Productivity Challenge".
    
    It give a macro view of what is happening as we move to a services
    economy.  One can strongly infer from reading it that our management
    isn't incompetent, but conversely, is doing remarkably well in holding
    together enterprises which have little reason for exixtence.  
    
    Disagree with my thoughts, if you like, but get the article and read
    it.  You will feel smarter, dumber, more depressed, or a combination of
    the three.
    
    gc

    
    	Productivity has been *in spite of* management numbers relavent to
    the number of ICs.
    
    	Even more noticeable is the "bracket creep" of titles which
    substitutes for jobs that are actually individual contributors,
    ie: regional manager = salesperson for companies in territory
    expansion mode. So measuring number of managers is probably very
    suspect from a whole number viewpoint.
    
    	And remember, as corporate downsizing remains a fact of life
    in the US, productivity will naturally increase as fewer people
    do the same amount of work as previously defined.
    
    		the Greyhawk

    
    	It is out here in the field. Our numbers (budget) are steadily
    increasing, and we still crank it out, even though there are a
    whole lot less of us.
    
    		the Greyhawk

Another factor is the pay US managers get compared to say
Japanese managers. It's hard to imagine some of those people
being worth the money ( and perks ) that they hold down. liesl

    (especiall when you consider how much Bill Clinton gets, and he's not
    even worth THAT!)
    
    tony
    (read my personal name for a clue)

>>>        <<< Note 3732.79 by ICS::BEAN "Attila the Hun was a LIBERAL!" >>>
>>>    ... 
>>>    (read my personal name for a clue)

Gee, and all this time I thought you were saying that even Attila the Hun had a
good side.

						Brian

    Re. .75
      ".....Assuming that same amount of work indeed gets done."
    
       Fact is historically more will get done, better and cheaper..
      

    I by no means meant that a company can cut it's way to profits. 
    Utilizing technology to imporve productivity will displace people,
    That is what accounts for my statement.  Sorry for the confusion.
    
    Les
    
    

Well if someone in Digital walks up to me and says:

	"Hi I'm xxxx, the VP of xxx"  

I think my reply is going to have to be 

	"Ya so what, you are just one of hundreds.  What do you do for the 
	 company?"

The title of VP is mis-used and over-used.  To me, it no longer holds the "high
stature" meaning.  To me, a VP is someone who reports DIRECTLY to the P, not to
another VP (or worse..). 

I guess it's more of a personal concept I have where the model of one VP 
having other VP's under them does not fit.  This "sub-VP's" (for lack of a 
better term,,, but I like that!) in many (most ?) cases has a sphere 
influnce that is next to nothing.  

Hell, we're good at inventing new things, lets think of another name for these
"sub-VP's".  What ever the documentation group is calling themselves these days 
when through their organization and re-named every job a few years back
(supervisors became coaches, writters became some sort of "resource" etc..), 
maybe they have some un-used names left.

Brian J. - Not a VP

It looks like there is a lot of nesting of VPs (i.e. VPs reporting to VPs).
If I read that org chart correctly, there is at least one example of the
nesting going five deep:

 COMPUTER SYSTEMS DIVISION (CSD) - Enrico Pesatori, VP
     Systems Business Unit - Enrico Pesatori, VP (acting)
       Software Developer Partnering Group - Tony Craig, VP
         Consumer and Process Partner Group - Eli Lipcon, VP
           Retail/Wholesale Partners - Abbott Weiss, VP

Jim

You'd think that they'd at least have a hierarchical
namespace...  Vice Vice Vice Vice Vice President of <whatever>.

    That'd be v-squared p or somethin', right?
    
    Well, I'm gratifed to see that another large company, American
    Airlines, impressed by our turnaround, has decided to emulate us.
    
    They fired 900 employees and created a new VP position this week.
    
    								Tex

    re: .85
    
    The list is already almost two months old.  To get the current list,
    check:
    
    VTX ATOZ
    
    								-mr. bill

	Does anyone have an accurate list of the VP's 
	in 1988,1989, or 1990?

    
    	Who cares? 
    
    	It doesn't mean ditz how many VPs there were then, or how many we
    have now. Our problems have very little to do with numbers of... and
    a lot more to do with type of thinking from...
    
    	Remember GIGO? Replacing old traditionalists with new
    traditionalists solves nothing. Replacing marketing stovepipes with
    sales stovepipes still means you have stovepipes.
    
    	Until Digital understands *true* thinking outside the dots,
    counting the number of dots is meaningless. I like the thread
    about sex and ads better...
    
    		the Greyhawk

    Anyone else amused by the fact that Quality & Outsourcing
    are tagged to the same VP?
    
    bk

Greyhawk

	Back in the late 80's we were told by wall street that
	our ranks were bloated with management. This at a time
	when we still made a profit, was the second largest
	computer company in the world, 25 largest company in the
	Fortune 500, had one of the largest cash accounts (over
	3 billion dollars), "NO" debt, and had the respect of
	our customers and competitors.

	Today, after we made all the changes suggested (layed off
	over half the employees, closed or sold most of our 
	manufacturing, sold off entire lines, stopped direct selling
	to many of our customers ...) we are now faced with losses,
	debt, dwindling cash, low moral, and a lot of very unhappy
	customers.

	The only thing we have successful at was adding VPs.

	The following is my estimation of the VP/emp ratio.

	1988 About 55 VPs
	     and about 130,000 employees

	1995 About 145 VPs
	     and about 63,000 (my end of Q3 guess)

	This means that we have about 5 1/2 times VP/emp
	now than we had 6 years ago.

	We may have had problems back then but not like we have now.
	Increasing the number of expensive management was not
	the answer. 

    
  >> I like the thread about sex and ads better...
    
    No problem.  We'll get a vice Vice President to maintain it.

In 1988 or thereabouts, we were making the mistakes that landed us where
we are:  pooh-poohing the PC, turning up our noses at UNIX, ignoring the
increasing demand for open systems, and on and on.

Maybe if we'd had one more VP, he's have whispered the right words in
KO's ear.

I'm with you, Greyhawk.  It ain't how many, it's how good.

Steve

    gosh, I believe it was earlier than '88.  That was when X Windows came
    along and Digital was developing PMAX and PVAX.  Alpha wasn't
    announced, but there was an "advanced development" project going on...
    
    Mark

re: .96

>I'm with you, Greyhawk.  It ain't how many, it's how good.

That assumes that the non-good ones are a net zero in terms of effect.  In
reality someone in a high position who's not really good can cause a net
negative effect by sending people off to do the wrong thing either from
strategic miscalculation or as part of the dreaded "look busy" syndrome.

I'd be surprised if the number of VPs was noticeably greater now than in
1988 (BTW, i think things started going seriously amiss more like 1986),
and some of the increase was probably a response to the perceived impact of
the EU (need a VP in every country to impress the natives etc.).

Rather than HBR i think we need an anthropologist to come along and study
the mores and cultural assumptions of the upper management tribe just as
they would study any other tribe.  The question is much like that which
faces us in the political arena these days (look in the THOMAS WWW data
if you really want to get frightened): when the leaders can enrich
themselves (if they're not already rich) through clever short-term
maneuvering, do they cease to have a stake in the longer-term viability
of the enterprise that they're leading?  Some surely do not, due to
idealism/pride/ego/whatever, but what is the more general case?

- paul

    I can't believe that people are so concerned about the
    ratio of VPs to other employees. Sure it's a lot higher than
    it was years ago, but what does it matter?

    First off, I'll bet in almost every group in Digital the
    ratio of senior people to junior people is a lot higher
    than it was years ago. For example in engineering, I'll
    bet the ratio of Consulting Engineers to Senior Engineers
    is a lot higher than it was years ago. Pick almost any 
    title, and I expect this will be true. The same is true
    of management positions. The ratio of VPs to other management
    positions has gone up.

    The reasons for this phenomenon is obvious. Many of us
    have been here for a long time. People generally tend
    to get promoted over time. Also, as raises have not been
    easy to come by, sometimes people will be happy with a
    fancy title. Perhaps rather than giving some senior managers
    a raise, they get a promotion to VP. 

    The real issue should be the ratio of management to workers.
    If that has gone up, then I can see people having a valid
    complaint. However if the management positions are now
    being filled by VPs instead of some other management title,
    so what? 
        
    					Ed
    

re Note 3732.96 by MUNDIS::SSHERMAN:

> Maybe if we'd had one more VP, he's have whispered the right words in
> KO's ear.
  
        One problem with that is that most VPs don't report directly
        to the president.

        The company has always had plenty of people who could and
        would have whispered the right thing in KO's (and now
        Palmer's) ear, however for most of them the only access to
        that ear is through the filter of a small circle of "real"
        VPs and staff.

        Bob

    re .98
    > That assumes that the non-good ones are a net zero in terms of
    > effect.  In reality someone in a high position who's not really good
    > can cause a net negative effect by sending people off to do the wrong
    > thing either from strategic miscalculation or as part of the dreaded
    > "look busy" syndrome.
    
    The folksinger Tom Rush tells of a pack trip he was on out west: the
    guide had an employee--[an "undertall" gentleman from a different
    state]--who "not matter how fast you looked, how hard you tried--you
    never could see him working: he'd always be standing there, leaning up
    against something, chewing gum [or something]. One day, the guide
    pointed at this feller and said to me, 'Having that man on mah payroll
    is like having two *good* men *gone*!'"

re.99:

>    ......     Perhaps rather than giving some senior managers
>    a raise, they get a promotion to VP. 

I think you've made a mistake there, shouldn't that be "Perhaps rather than
giving employees in general a raise, they gave a raise to all of the VPs"?

Dave.

    This all brings me back to the almost 'heroic' scene in the motion
    picture 'Wallstreet', by Oliver Stone back in about '87, starring 
    Michael Douglas as Gordon Gecco(?).
    Gordon, being a ruthless raider who strips down companies whith a weak
    (financial) structure, is allowed to speak to the annual
    shareholders meeting where he points them out, that the company
    almost goes bankrupt by carrying the load of management they have,
    who's main activities are writing/passing memo's to each other and 
    going on business trips.
    

>>  With a Northeastern Business School graduate program answer of a max
>>  of 5 persons per supervisor, you can calculate a quick basic program
>>  to get a rough idea of the number of layers needed, 5**L.
>>  For 6 levels you can cover 15,625 people effectively
>>  For 7 levels you can cover 78,125 people effectively.
>>  With 1 layer of president and 5 layers of VPs, each productive worker
>>  could be directly reporting to a VP, and we could rehire thousands
>>  without exceeding that.
    
    Hey, that's how AMWAY works!  
    
    Now if we could only get each digit to buy a bottle of soap a month
    with n% going to each of the five levels above, 
    we could put all VP's on commission - no salaries!
    
    Just imagine the possibilities...

>>  With a Northeastern Business School graduate program answer of a max
>>  of 5 persons per supervisor,

They must not know how to do it. In SES our Capacity/Capability Center
managers have 50, 80, and more direct reports. One had over a hundred for
a while.
         
This concern about the number of VPs neglects one factor: some major
customers have purchasing agents who only want to deal with a VP; so, we
make a VP and assign him/her to that customer. Keep the customer happy.
Whatever it takes. Thinking idealistically, the revenue stream from a
given customer should far exceed the cost of the VP we had to create to
keep that customer.

HTH,

Art