Conference 7.286::digital

    This doesn't address your problem regarding capital budgeting in the
    field, but I do believe the roadblocks in IEG have been removed re:
    ordering workstations. (For several months, there was an allocation
    scheme which required your obtaining senior v.p. signature) Also, I 
    believe that DECdirect is taking internal orders for VAXstation 2000s.
    
    Marge

re: .1; roadblock in IEG

Hmm. It would seem then that this entire group was able to get VP approval
for a quantity of WS's.

Lee

    Re .2;
    
    The problem is basicly what you mentioned briefly in your base note. 
    Marketing groups don't have to worry about margins, profit and loss and
    the other dreary things that field groups have to worry about.  My last
    boss felt that W/Ss were very important to his group and so he begged,
    borrowed and stole whatever he could find.  We ended up with hand me
    downs that had been entirely written off (a good source was the ACT,
    now that they are getting 3100s, some VS2000s and GPXes might become
    available), not the most modern stuff, but useable to learn product on. 
    As for demo gear, that is up to the local Sales District Manager.  In
    my area, with the ACT so close, they don't see the need to get the new
    stuff.  How does the ACT get its equipment?  They get funding from
    Marketing groups.
    
    Larry

    RE: .0
    Waiting customer list??? Historically DEC has been its own best
    customer...but with engineering and field at bottom of the list...!!
    

    Getting VP approval for 12 WSs is probably not all that much
    harder then getting it for two.

    The field has always been short on hardware. This has been because
    SWS has generally refused to pay for it. They've wanted Sales to
    buy it and Sales has (usually) refused. Sales and SWS then usually
    go to Marketing who sometimes helps. That's how the first 11/780
    made it to the NYC office when I was there. I don't believe that
    asking Marketing to pay for everything is totally fair.

    Field offices could have much more equipment if field managers
    were willing to pay for it. As long as field managers are paid
    for short term profit that is not likely to happen though. I
    wonder if a manager took a few quarters of a heavy hit to their
    numbers (to get some serious hardware) if they'd have a long term
    gain in sales and productivity. I think so but doubt we have
    enough brave field managers and managers of field managers to
    give it a fair shot.

    As to why so many facilities in the NE area have the hardware I
    think it's more then just not having to show profit and loss.
    It's a combination of being willing to spend money to get results
    and having people who demand the proper resources to do the job.
    There is a bit move leverage, having so many groups competing for
    people in such a small area, to do that. I know lots of people who
    would be hard pressed to take a job that didn't come with a WS.
    I doubt I would take a job supporting WS products that didn't
    come with a WS on my desk. I mean how could I take a manager
    seriously if he asked me to do a job with out a minimum resource?
    It'd be like asking someone to answer phone calls from the pay
    phone in the lobby.

    		Alfred

Note 677.24 touches on this subject quite a bit.

Re: .5

Alas, unless a SWS mgr can measure (as in numbers in a spreadsheet cell) the
benefit of spending money on equipment, it's doubtful (as you have pointed out)
that many equipment purchases will happen. No doubt there are a few that will
buck the bottom line and order sufficient equipment, but very few.

As long as the mea$urement critera remain$ a$ it i$ now, I see little chance
for change.

Lee

    The Western Area is currently working on a Area Computing Strategy,
    which will get many more workstations on the desks of field employees.
    It hasn't happened yet, but I think it will.  An independent task force
    demonstrated the efficiency improvement (I think 20% was the number,
    and that was conservative) when one used a workstation versus not.
    Consequently, I think the WA will spend money on hardware for the field
    as a long term efficiency gain (morale too!).
    
    Ed
    

    re:-1
    
    By "field employees" you are of course excluding those of us in
    FS.We just got our WS order cancelled as a money saving measure
    and there are no prospects in sight for us even getting newer
    terminals.(we have VT100's)
    BTW: I'm in product support in WRO3

        Clearly, since some groups in Digital are able to get equipment
        such as workstations (it's irrelevant whether they *need* them or
        don't, they are able to get them), and other groups don't get them
        (again, need is irrelevant), the question is not one of whether or
        not workstations are available, but whether or not resources are
        allocated to obtain them. 
        
        Bitching in this conference about whether or not you have them in
        your group isn't going to fix what you perceive as a problem. 
        
        Meeting with your manager and discussing the tools you need to do
        your job, and the impact on your performance of not having the
        right tools, *might* fix the problem.  Probably it won't, because
        if you don't have the tools, it's probably because the decision
        is not in your manager's hands.  You'll never know if you don't
        try.
        
        Folks, it isn't a question of short-term versus long-term goals,
        or local P&L trade-offs, that keeps modern equipment out of the
        field.  It's management philosophies at a fairly high level that
        allocate resources in other ways.  If you want to change it (and
        it *can* be changed, but not easily), you will need to mobilize
        *lots* of people throughout the field carrying the *same* message
        up the management chain, until it reaches someone who is able and
        willing to change the policies. 
        
        You *may* find that it's easier to get a different job where you
        have access to the tools you believe you need than to get this
        sort of policy changed.  But stranger things have happened..
        
        As for VAXstation 2000s, they are old technology and not likely to
        be in demand among our customers once we start delivering the
        VAXstation 3100 in volume. 
        
        Tom

    Of course, for those of us in PSS, it doesn't matter whether there
    are workstations in the office or not.  I don't think I have spent
    more than 3 weeks in the office in the past year, and that is probably
    high for a PSS person.
    
    This all sort of leads back to the training problem too.  Most PSS
    people are too busy making money to get training, etc.  I'm finally
    going to get some DECnet training at the end of the month.  It's
    been on my training plan for 1� years now.  It's pure luck that
    the course is being offered in my district near the end of my current
    assignment.
    
    Oh well, we do the best we can with what we have,
    
    Bob

    As to VS 2000's being "old technology", around here (Western Area PSS),
    VaxStation II's are new technology! 
    As to P&L, and whether or not "need" is relevant, I have recently had 
    my first opportunity to use a WS as a TOOL in a real development
    effort.  My estimate (shared with others in the group) is
    approximately 100 - 200% productivity gain. Documented. 
    Now, if our group of 12 specialists had more than 2 WS's, we would
    have brought the project in ahead of schedule.  Thats profits. 
    Thats bottom line.  Thats what upper management listens to.
    So, how do we get the message out that workstations are not a toy,
    not a frivolous luxury, not just a learning demonstration, but a 
    necessary, productive TOOL? I am willing to spread the word as far
    as possible, but does anyone have any insights as to which directions
    would do the most good?
    Lets get some strategy together so that we can change the situation.
    Bitching will not fix things.  A concerted strategy and effort will.
    
    Kevin Farlee

    As far as I know, there is no structure or policy that attempts to
    guarentee computer resources for software specialists (with the
    possible exception of DIST's mail systems).
    
    Its hard to imagine a manager that would refuse to get a typewriter
    for his/her secretary - its understood that a secretary NEEDS a
    typewriter to do his/her job.
    
    Not so with unit managers and software specialists.  The critical
    knowledge that programmers need computers is lost in the quarterly
    numbers shuffle.
    
    But, the unit manager is the one that has to be convinced.  Because,
    unless a magic policy is introduced to ship hardware to the field
    DESPITE the unit managers, it will never happen otherwise.
    
    As I recall, the southern area hasn't had company cars for ages - not
    because of a company policy or lack thereof - but because southern area
    managment didn't want it, even though other areas did.  I don't know
    why, but it has become clear in this notesfile that company cars cost a
    *LOT* more than $200 a month and $.08 a mile.
    
    If high levels of management within Digital make hardware available to
    the field at no or almost no cost transfer (even the 80% discount
    doesn't seem sufficient), then hardware will appear.
    
    Till then, the person to convince is the U.M., because that is who
    foots the bill, and that is who will succeed or fail based the revenue
    that will be impacted by hardware purchases.  If the U.M. wants it, I
    promise you he will find a way to get the D.M. to approve it.  And
    thats the way it works.  (How many U.M.s have car phones?   How many
    software specialists have terminals at home?  And car phones cost a LOT
    more than the transfer cost of a 220 and a modem).
    
    Jim
    

    For the time being I have to agree with Bob in .10.
    
    As a Software Specialist who is typically on residencies or projects,
    I find I get what I need, as I need it.  When I needed VAXstations,
    I got them.
    
    Just before I first started, about 5 years ago, I was told that
    originally in PSS in the NWD, the only way a specialist got to use
    a terminal was at a customer site...
    
    ...we've come a long way, baby!
    
    Doug

        I don't see a problem, we budget support equipment like any other
        budget item, we get our money, we buy our kit, we use it...
        
        I think there is a large section of middle management, that a)
        don't understand the benefits that technology can provide
        internally, and b) is too scared of their superiors to push a
        Capital Appropriation Request through.
        
        That is where the problem lies...
        
        q
        

    As a UK person working in a development group, its interesting to see
    that others have problems getting hold of workstations - We have had 4
    Vaxstation 2000's on order for nearly a year now, so far one has
    arrived to supplement our second hand monochrome 2000.
    
    These tools are essential for all of us in our group to be productive. 
    There is a constant waiting list to get onto one of them for 1/2 day.
    Lack of workstations is the single greatest constraint to productivity
    in our group.  I get very cross when I see some groups - not
    development - who have a colour workstation for everyone and who could
    manage just as well with VT220's.  
    
    Well, I've not been very constructive but I feel better for having said
    (or written) it anyway.
    
    
    John

        RE: .15 -- Have you discussed this with your manager?  Has he or
        she discussed it with his or her manager?  Clearly, if some groups
        have obtained workstations (or whatever other things that you
        believe you need to do your job), then it's possible to get them. 
        
        There is no corporate policy that says that, e.g., marketing
        groups can have workstations but engineering groups can't, or that
        headquarters people can have them and field people can't. 
        
        What is your manager doing (daily) about this problem?
        
        Tom

    >            What is your manager doing (daily) about this problem?
     
    Not a ***** thing. About 1 and 1/2 years ago, he filled out the
    paper work to order some 5 VS2000 and sent them off to be signed
    off by the appropriate people. As far as he is concerned, they should
    arrive anyday now. Our superiors are aware we want (notice he didn't
    say "need") them. 
    
    I too am in the field. I asked my manager how we can expedite this
    order or if there were alternate ways. My manager told me that the
    normal procedure is that a project which is going to generate millions
    of $ in revenue usually can get what they need as far as hardware
    goes. We then wait for the project to be completed or die (which
    in his opinion is more often the case) and then try to get that
    equipment reappropriated. I've only been in the field for two years.
    But you others out there is this procedure true? I mean waiting
    for projects to fail or complete. We do have one or two such projects
    in out area, but I may die from holding my breath. 

    A "real" order has a DEC number assigned by the Internal Equipment
    Group.  Anyone is able to call IEG and get the status of the order. 
    When, in the past, IEG has rescheduled equipment, they have sent out
    paper that lists the new expected ship date.
    
    If you cannot identify the IEG-assigned number for your order, you
    don't have an order, what you have is paperwork that's been lost in the
    process of becoming an order.
    
    Most of the workstations in the field are in the form of "allocations",
    which is to say that clout was used by or on Worksystems Marketing
    itself.  Of course, this is how ISV's and ACT's get their workstations. 

RE: Why some marketing orgs (or whomever) have VS's on every desk and the
   field (or other orgs) don't

    A lot of this depends on timelieness too. For almost a year now the
   source of VS's for internal users has been dried up, as has been mentioned
   earlier in replies about the IEG restrictions. Many groups (probably
   including the one referred to in .0) had already obtained their VAXstations
   BEFORE the restrictions (per Jack Smith, BTW) went into effect. The
   engineering group I was with in my last position was an example - we had
   already placed a VS on every one's desk before the word went out that
   they were no longer available.
    Now, some orgs have since been asked to relinquish theirs if they
   couldn't demonstrate a critical need for them - I know, for instance,
   of several writers who had VS's and had to give 'em up. Usually this
   occurs within an organization - keep the resources in the family, so to
   speak. In any event, once you get the thing on your desk it's a lot
   easier to make a case for why you should keep it than it would be to
   make the case for obtaining it in the first place - the same logic
   works in both cases - 1) It's obviously necessary to get the job done
   since it's being used and the job's getting done and 2) It's obviously
   not necessary to get the job done since it's not being used and the
   job's getting done!

   -Jack

    Ref: .10 (below)
    
>>> This all sort of leads back to the training problem too.  Most PSS
>>> people are too busy making money to get training, etc.

    Boy, did this one hit home!?  Just got CALLED back pronto after TWO
    days of a FOUR day training session to put out fires here.  This
    is the first note I read, and I was pretty hot under the collar
    because I have to go back and do the thing all over again somewhere.
    Yes, PSS people seem to be yanked around by every other division.

    Re: Previous few, UM's, and IEG...
    
    My UM is apparently one of the "enlightened few", who seems to 
    understand the benefits of using a WS.  So much so that she pushed
    through an order for 3 VS 2000's, getting all required signatures
    (VP signature was required at that time, per Jack Smith...), and
    placed the order with IEG.  That was last March.  It is a real order.
    Anyone can call up and get the current status and ship date...
    Which has now slipped to August of '89.  16 months!!
    
    Obviously there is SOMEONE between my UM and those VAXStations that
    doesn't think that using WS's to bring in revenue is very important.
    
    I can assure you that having tied up that much of her budget with
    the order, my UM is doing what she can to expedite the order.
    
    So, whose door can I bang on next?
    
    Kevin

    According to the folks at DECdirect, they are accepting orders for two
    configurations for the VAXstation 2000, one with a color monitor, one
    monochrome.  The color system is available on a "next business day" basis 
    and the monochrome on a 30-day availability.
    
    Should you call, reference the following part numbers:
    
    SV-LVXXA-EK
    SV-LVXXB-EK
    
    Marge

>    According to the folks at DECdirect, they are accepting orders for two
>    configurations for the VAXstation 2000, one with a color monitor, one
>    monochrome.  The color system is available on a "next business day" basis 
>    and the monochrome on a 30-day availability.

But are they accepting INTERNAL orders? For many DECdirect items they have
a note on their screen that indicates that the item must be ordered through IEG.

End-run terminated.

Lee

    Re: Calling IEG for order status

    The following  page  is  from  the IEG VTX base.  To view it on
    your terminal, do a 'SAVE TT:' right now at the notes prompt.

    It asks people  *NOT* to call IEG about order status but rather
    use the VTX base.   (Probably quicker.  The person on the phone
    will do the same thing  you  can do yourself.) It allows you to
    enter keywords of either a particular  dec  number  or  a  cost
    center so that you can see all  the  equipment  orders for your
    cost center!

    Lee
    
    
)0 Internal Equipment Group rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr lqqqqqqqqqqqqqqk rrr
 ppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppppp x Order Status x ppp
mqqqqqqqqqqqqqqj
Welcome to IEG ORDER STATUS

  This Order Status System is updated on a DAILY basis and reflects the
  most up-to-date status available to IEG.  Please do NOT call IEG with
  regard to your order unless you wish to change or cancel items.

  KEYWORD SEARCH INSTRUCTIONS FOLLOW:

PF1 7   FOR KEYWORD SEARCH (for fast view of multiple orders
(READ the KEYWORD ACCESS HELP page
(PF1PF2 = KEYWORD ACCESS HELP

    Enter a K before either your cost center, your DEC #, or your CAR #
    (EXAMPLE: Enter page or keyword : K123) The K123 will select all orders
    for Cost Center 123.  If a menu page with 22 items is generate, there
    is a high probability that more items are available to you by hitting
    the RETURN key on your terminal.  Read the help page on PF1 PF2.

qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq
PF1PF2 = KEYWORD ACCESS HelpPF1. = Exit   PF3 = Prev Menu

    re .23:
    
    Lee, I identified myself as an internal person interested in placing
    an internal order... if you have any further interest, I suggest you
    give them a call.
    
    grins,
    Marge

I'm flabbergasted. Ordering WS's from DECdirect?!?!? What will they think
of next?

Lee  ;^)

In case you think you have problems justifying hardware (or reasonable
working conditions), ponder this report extracted from Risks digest
apropos a discussion on failed projects:

Martin.

RISKS-LIST: RISKS-FORUM Digest  Friday 20 January 1989   Volume 8 : Issue 12
 
        FORUM ON RISKS TO THE PUBLIC IN COMPUTERS AND RELATED SYSTEMS 
   ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy, Peter G. Neumann, moderator
...
 
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 89 09:09:07 CST
From: "Keane Arase" <kean%[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Losing Systems
 
I can add some first hand information about losing systems.  Let me tell
you a story about a data collection manufacturing pacakge I stayed as far
away as possible from.
 
Background:  This was a marketing intensive company.  This company considers
technical support people expendable.  They would rather lose their experienced
people because programmers/analysts coming out of school are cheaper.  BTW,
they hired on grade point average only.  Not what you know, but what you did in
school.  In my experience, the two are *not* the same.
 
It was decided we were to develop an off-the-shelf/base package which could be
custom modifiable for data collection/time and attendance functions for the
manufacturing environment.  Because of a recent reorganization, all of the
experienced project leaders and programmers *fled* the company.
 
Our most experienced project leader (hat was left) had stated he was leaving in
6 weeks because of personal reasons.  Yet the project planning and design was
given to him to do.  Six weeks later, he left, the project design about 30%
completed.  Another person (from another area in the country) was brought in to
complete the design.  Soon after the design was completed, *he* left the
company because of a better offer elsewhere.  Thus, we had no one who
completely knew the entire system design.  Worse, none of the programmers knew
the manufacturing environment, so they couldn't spot any design errors, even if
they stared them in the face.
 
Since the reorganization made us a profit center, we now *had* to make money.
This, of course, while 90% of our efforts went toward development of a product
which was projected to make money in *two* years.  Because we were in the red,
raises were denied to certain programmers (through no fault of their own), who
in turn did extremely shoddy work in the programs they put together.  (And of
course, left at first opportunity.)  Our regional manager also declared that we
would receive no new hardware, since we couldn't justify the cost because we
were losing money.  Thus, we didn't have the necessary hardware that this
package was supposed to be running on.  (Only later did marketing force our
regional manager to get the equipment.  Much of the equipment belonged to our
certification, verification and testing site.)
 
Because the project was losing money and behind schedule, programmers were
*required* to work 45 hours per week.  No compensation, no exception.  Several
more programmers *fled* the company.  They hired part time people to fill in
the losses.  (Sorry, can't hire more people.  Can't justify the cost!)
 
In the scheduling, there was no provision for extensive system testing, or for
the development of test scripts.  More delays, more time and money lost.
 
Because we were losing money, the company decided our district was expendable
and desolved our group.  We were given the option to move to a medium sized
city in Southern Ohio, where their home headquarters is.  *No one went*.  Thus,
this company had a $300K+ package, somewhat complete (about 250K to 350K
lines), but far from working correctly, with NO ONE ON THE ORGINAL OR
SUBSEQUENT PROJECT TEAMS LEFT IN THE COMPANY! (From the spies I have in the
company, they hired a bunch of college kids straight out of school to complete
the work under 2 experienced project leaders.)
 
This post details about 40% of the problems encountered during the development.
It doesn't include poor hardware design, or the fact this package is really to
extensive to run on the recommended hardware.  Even with all that went wrong,
this company is still marketing this package today, training people how to sell
it and install it.  (The base package is more or less useless without
modification.)  I'll bet it still doesn't work today.
 
I think I can summarized why projects fail by the following:
 
Poor planning and quality control.  By far the worst offender.  How can you
keep within budget and time frame if certain critical events are left out of
the schedule?
 
Poor management and company policy.  This is probably the second worst
offender, although I'd probably tie it for number one.  Management is only
interested in one thing.  The bottom line.  Does it make money NOW?  (Apologies
to those managers who aren't this way.  But I'll bet if you work for a large
computer corporation, and your year end bonus depends on how much your site
makes, you *are* one of these.)  They must also provide the necessary resources
to get the project done.  This includes keeping your people and treating them
right.  (At least until everything works! :-) Also, managers who know nothing
about the computer biz or the programming environment, should be managing the
sanitation engineers or the cafeteria staff.  They have no business managing
things they know nothing about.
 
Poor expertise by programmers.  This is not necessarily the programmers fault,
but the companies fault for not providing the education.  (Please note this
assumes competent people! If the human resources department does their work
properly, getting competent people shouldn't be a *big* problem.)  Programmers
should know what they're programming *for* as well as what the programs should
do.  Programmers should also know the project.  I had enough pull and technical
expertise to be involved in *other* failing projects.  (Want to hear others?
E-mail me, and if I have the time I'll detail others.)
                                                                               
Keane Arase, Systems Programmer, University of Chicago                  
Disclaimer:  This company was *not* the University of Chicago!              
 

    	A little imagination can also be very useful...
    
    	Our group (manufacturing software engineering) put in a CAR
    for a reasonable amount of WS equipment (I think it turned out to be
    about 3 or 4 VS II/GPX) and was told that WS delivery was on hold.  GPX
    upgrades, for �VAX II's were, however, available immediately...  We had
    a couple of II's (DECWorld returns - we scrounge a lot...) sitting
    around, so we placed an order for 10 upgrade kits.  We then went
    hunting for CPUs and found all we needed off DIAL. 
    
    	Moral of the story?  We bought/built/scrounged 10 GPXs (most
    13 meg, 1 RD54, 2 RD53 configurations) for about the same cost as
    3-4 of them purchased through IEG, and "delivered" in about 3 months
    (the upgrades did slip a couple of months) instead of a year or
    more.
    
    	We've also been known to build machines out of parts we manage
    to get our hands on, and that can be purchased for under $1000.
    
    	We also purchased most of our terminals from DIAL.  Everyone
    in the group has one of: 
    	a) workstation 
    	b) VAXMate
   	c) VT240/VT241/VT340
    *and* all the "software" people have a second LAT drop and a VT220
    or VT320 in their cube.
    
    
    					--Doug

        RE: "DIAL" (for those who are curious).  D.I.A.L. is the Digital
        Idle Asset Listing, an on-line database maintained by Field
        Service Logistics to help re-deploy idle hardware assets. 
        A recent topic in ANYWAY::ASKENET asked how to get access to
        DIAL, and the information is there for the asking.
        
        Tom

    
    After reading all the previous 31 replys, it's time for my two cents.
    Many of the previous replys have obviously been made by people who
    have never (or not for many years) worked in a field office.
    It's really easy to say you should just convince your U.M. of the
    need for a WS.  My unit manager MORE than knows of the need and
    benefits of having workstations and she is very supportive.
    I hate to break the news, but that's not where the problems is.
    
    A unit manager cannot approve a purchase for any item (hardware,software,
    manuals, etc) over a certain dollar amount ($500?).  After that
    they need to go to the District Manager for approval and I would 
    imagine to the Area Manager after yet another dollar limit.
    In the Southwest area we have been under a tremendous expense crunch
    for months, which was handed down by the SWS area manager.  I don't
    necessarily think he's to blame either.  SWS is measured on 
    customer satisfaction and more importantly the all-mighty dollar.
    The managers are, for the most part, doing their job in what they
    think is the best way.  

    Internal DECies (those who don't go face to face with customers
    daily) don't have a clue on what life is like in the field and
    they never will until they spend some time out here.  I have
    seen first hand the eye-opening experience an engineer who has 
    transferred to a field position goes thru.  I think it's much worse for
    these people because they start every sentence with "When I was
    in engineering we had  ....." and the rest of us are used to
    the inequalities between the two groups. 

    In turn, I can't really know what life is like internally until
    and if I spend some time there.  Regardless, my advice to the
    field folks is to get sales to order the equipment on rotational
    inventory.  It took me well over a year to convince the S.U.M.
    but he finally bought into it.  This is a good way to do it
    for many reasons:
    
    1. You get to use the equipment for a year and then next year you
       can order the latest and greatest equipment.
    
    2. It benefits sales (once you convince them) because you are now
       much better able to help them sell the equipment.  I was almost
       WS illiterate until I got my VS2000 and I was of little help
       to sales on what is getting to be our biggest selling area.
       I think they have already seen the return on the investment.
    
    3. The customer benefits because they can buy equipment at an 
       extrememly low price.

    
    Just my two cents worth ....
    
    
    Donna

    As I have said before:  the problem is not local.
    Our unit has had an order approved all the way up through the
    Western Area VP.  But we still can't get the order shipped.
    Yes, I know about DECdirect... I also know that it is over 30% more
    expensive to purchase through DECdirect as opposed to IEG.
    
    So, it would seem that there is a more fundamental problem here.
    One of the misperceptions that I see is that "Digital sells Hardware"
    We do, but we also make a LOT of money from software. I can't see
    why a $6000 WS is not a good investment when it is used to help
    turn out a million dollar software project (plus hardware).
    
    If one of the manufacturing lines in Hudson needed a similar
    investment, would they get it? Why is it so hard to see that producing
    software requires equipment just like producing CPU's?
                                                                  
    Kevin

    Seems there are two problems here:
    
    	Districts that see the need for and the value of hardware and order
    	necessary hardware, but	CAN'T get delivery.  This is a logistics
    	problem.  It is very curious, because some people seem to be
    	saying they have had no	trouble getting workstations.  I would tend
    	to be suspicious about the sources that say the equipment is
    	unavailable, or on hold, or whatever.  If some areas of the company
    	can get hardware and others can't, that strikes me as unfair.
    
    	Districts that WON'T order much needed equipment.  My impression
    	from being in and dealing with SWS is that 90% of the cases of		
    	hardware being "not available" fall in this category.  As mentioned,
    	UMs have to go on the line with a justification for hardware.  They	
    	have to explain how they can meet their numbers, even if they blow	
    	large quantities of funny money	on hardware, OR how they CAN'T meet	
    	the numbers WITHOUT the	hardware.  Most of the time, I think its	
    	easier to just say "NO" and leave it at that.  After all, how many
    	people will quit their jobs over something as trivial as not having the
    	tools they need to do their jobs!
    
    	Many times I have had a manager tell me that s/he is "working on it",
    	or "trying to push it through", or some other misleading phrase. 
    	What this means is that his/her numbers are real shakey, and s/he is
    	waiting to see if they pick up before s/he dares to ask the DM
    	to spend money which will make his/her numbers worse.  Or maybe s/he's
    	working a deal with sales which, if it comes through, s/he will
    	give away some free PSS for a loaner that a customer didn't want.  But
    	the bottom line is that s/he is looking for a way to avoid spending
    	the bucks.  If s/he's a real wheeler-dealer, maybe s/he can come
    	through.  But I've never accepted that a SWS specialist should
    	have to depend on the "old boy" network to get the tools needed
    	to do the job.  I believe Digital (through local management) has a
    	committment to do the "right thing", if they expect that in return.
    
    If you are being told that hardware is unavailable, be helpful.  Offer
    to start tracking it and put pressure on the internal people.  Ask for
    the verification of the order (order number) so you can start driving
    the issue for your manager and help him/her out.  If the order
    (number) can't be found for some reason, well...
    
    On the other hand, if there really IS an outstanding order that isn't
    being filled, you should then have the opportunity to get a better idea
    of where the blockage is coming from so your manager can pass the
    information up the line to his managers in an impact report.
    
    Perhaps an OMBUDSMAN would be involved in pushing a corporate
    initiative to make the necessary tools available, but we don't have
    one, so the only answer is to drive it yourself.  There is no higher
    authority.
    
    Good luck!
    
    Jim (who was definitely in the field, who doesn't much care for the
    answer he just recommended, who was never the type of person that could
    follow that type of advice, and who was lucky enough to be able to move
    into an area with a very different way of thinking)