Conference 7.286::digital

I LIKE IT!!

/mike

p.s.  But then, I liked the new management system as well...  *sigh*

I like the business units that have products or services. Like Storage, for
instance. It'll be easy to tell when they're successful. If they make money,
they're successful. 

I don't like the business units that are aimed at specific customer industries.
There are too many things that can go wrong:

 o Industry groups can fight over who owns the customer.

 o The reporting structure at the local office level sounds chaotic.
   How will support resources be shared? Perhaps I don't understand the
   details well enough?

 o The industry business units may give conflicting advice on how to design
   our machines.

 o Many channels aren't aligned this way. Who will develop the ones that don't
   fit?
 
 o Only a few industries are targetted. Will other customers be ignored?

 o Industry groups will fight to shift costs to other groups and revenues to
   themselves. Because many functions will be shared, there will be a LOT
   to fight over.

I would have preferred a structure aligned along product boundaries:

    the good four, plus:

 o  Alpha Computers

 o  OpenVMS

 o  OSF

 o  NAC

 o  Software Layered Products

It'd be a lot easier to keep score, and a lot easier to keep the turf
issues under control.

Just one opinion from an engineer... I'm not a manager, and I don't even
play one on TV ;-)

--RS

    It's exactly what we need to be a "marketing-driven company".
    
    Each of the Product Line managers has P&L.  Engineering now comes
    a-beggin'.  That's the way it was until 1982 and it worked then.  WIth
    fewer PL SVPs now, we're less likely to have conflicting and
    overlapping projects; in any case, that's probably what Strecker and
    company will be there for.
    
    I am less worried than the author of .2 about the types of PLs.  Some
    businesses are commodities, and thus stand alone.  More complex systems
    selling (the high end) is more solution-oriented, and there is value
    added in industry-specific marketing.  This organization reflects it.
    
    Reorganization is no panacaea.  But at least we have an organization in
    place where the VPs are accountable, with NO EXCUSES!

    
    
    
    	Where does operating systems , database systems, system management
    	and other software fit in ?
    
    	What about CPUs other than PCs ?
    
    						Mike
    						----
    
    						

    As I understand it the model is still revenue centres (businesses) and
    cost centres (territories), the latter to manage sales and services,
    and some concept of cross- charging to produce P&L by the businesses
    and, presumably, a zero balance by the territories.  If so .... Oh,
    dear!
    
    For the past two years cross- charging has not worked.  We don't seem
    to be able to get our accounting systems and management attitudes in
    line with the idea.  It's not unusual; I don't think I've seen a
    successful example of internal cross- charging anywhere (and I've been
    a few places).
    
    I saw the same thing attempted in ICL in the U.K. in 1982, when the
    funding was put into the hands of the marketeers and they said they
    were going to be marketing- led.  About three years later, when they
    recognized that sales, engineering etc. were still loose canons, they
    introduced business stove pipes, where necessary top to bottom, with
    their own sales, services and engineering.  I happened to work with the
    man who drove them in this direction and what he said was, "If your
    organization isn't up to matrix management, you have to re- organize by
    the most important dimension."  They too chose industry.  Recently, in
    our U.K. LiveWire, ICL was reported as the only mainframe manufacturer in 
    the U.K. still in profit.
     
    So, in conclusion, my view is, "Right direction, not nearly far
    enough."
    
    dave_P

    
    
    	I think it is a great idea in that it will bring focus on
    	responsibility for P&L.
    
    	One question though..what are the differences between 'Components
    	and Peripherals' and 'Storage' insofar as products?
    
    	John

    
    I also think this is the right direction.  I was beginning to
    worry about the strategy and messages we were getting.  All I've
    heard was cut, cut, cut (and Alpha/NT as our savior) for the past
    couple of months.
    
    I think this is a bold, dramatic approach.  I might quibble about
    some of the details, and I must admit to some confusion on the
    way the industry business units were put together, but that
    comes mostly from my rather limited view of fairly vast markets.
    
    I would add a further challenge to Mr. Palmer and the company, though.  
    I'd like to see even more autonomy: how about a goal of actually selling
    equity in the business units by mid-decade?  That's what IBM has hinted
    at doing for the Baby Blues.  In other words, I think Palmer should
    say, "not only must you be profitable, but you should be prepared, if
    necessary, to be wholly autonomous subidiaries."
    
    Glenn (who has no background in any of this stuff, but what the hell,
           this *is* the Digital notes conference after all)
    
    

Speaking of cross-charging, will these independent business
units be contracting jobs internally anymore, such as 
documentation? Or will they be encouraged to go outside
if the price/quality is better? 

-PHiL    

Re: difference between "components and perhipherals" and 
"storage" - Larry Cabrinetty is now VP of components and
perhipherals. He had been VP of VIPS, which makes terminals
(dumb and X), printers, and monitors, keyboards, and mice.
(Or at least specs them and handles buying them from
other companies, as is done with monitors, keyboards,
and mice.) I would expect components and perhipherals to
continue to include these.

	Hi,

	This really just sounds like another re-org ( and more
	VPs ) to me.

	I can't believe we have a "New Plan" and more Vice Presidents
	on the way, after 4 months of "Woods Meetings."

	Care to bet whether it'll make ANY difference at all....other
	than the style of forms we fill out and to whom they
	are mailed ?

	Steve H

	I'm reserving judgement. I thought the NMS was good when it was
	first announced but I haven't seen much of a change. The idea that
	two of these groups are being headed by "outsiders" sounds very
	interesting. I guess we'll have to wait and see who these people
	are and what they do.

	Of course as long as my manager and CC manager don't change what
	difference does it really make to the way I do my part of Digital's
	business?

			Alfred

    re: .10  I don't believe that it means more VPs.  In fact, the rumors
    are rampant about the number of VPs that were axed.

I question the logic of 'outside' management is better. 

IMHO, our problems started in the 80's when we went on a binge and hired a lot
of middle managers from outside, rather than longer-term Deccies and mill rats
who understood the culture and how to do business. 

What we got from the outside was managers who hired their toads and cronies
from the old companies they helped run into the ground. Suddenly we had training
classes to _tell_ us what the culture was, (their intrpretation), and a thick
layer of overhead whose only goal was the furtherance of their own careers and 
growth in the size of their CC budget.

Don't get me wrong. There are some excellent people out there working for other 
companies. But why would they want to come here ? 

Especially if we haven't removed the root cause of our cancer.

			R

>>I question the logic of 'outside' management is better. 


I suggest that DEC doesn't have the right people on board today to run sales,
and perhaps a few of the Industry Business Units (which will esentially be
marketing spots).  We've NEVER developed people for these jobs, so it's natural
that we go outside.  New blood in the right positions is good, as long as it's 
the RIGHT new blood.

Bob

    Sounds like MIke Thurk will be insuring Digital can get HBO and SHOTIME
    to the masses via LANs, WANs, etc.
    
    Communications, Education and Entertainment. 
    
    I wonder if he can get HBO onto the DVN
    
    Tom

Re: .13

Spot on!

Back then, the cry was 'get new blood' (AIDS tainted?). I saw some pretty
big zeros get hired on... the most worthless one (IMHO) was a former
<insert name of fast-food chain with clown as icon> manager!  Today, that
guy is at Area level making policy for Customer Services.

They turned our company from one of customer focus and excellence into
a company of mediocrity and political quagmire.

Shame on them!

Lee

    So, has the new V.P. for the Personal Computing business unit been
    announced yet?  And if anyone knows, would they please post it here? 
    
    Thanks,K.B.
    

    re .5 (ICL)
    
    The Fujitsu ownership of ICL has not a little to do with its
    profitability, I suspect.
    
    John