Conference 7.286::digital

    
      After a long and tiring evening of outdoor work, I too sat down
    in front of the TV and began playing arm-chair commander.  Almost 
    ready to pack it in for the evening (boring night viewing the tube)
    I happened upon the same program and became totally engrossed in
    it's content.  Made in America surfaced many underlying issues
    currently pressing not only the auto industry but closer to home!
    
      It's narrator, Robert Reisch (sp?) was and probably still teaches
    at Harvard University...not that it's all that important but just the
    same noteworthy.
    
      I share some of the same views with both the narrator of the program
    and the base note.  In order to succeed and survive in the well into
    the next century, all details and aspects of a successful project must
    be "shared" information and joint decision making.  Teams provide a
    project with a wishing well of innovation and experiences, some of 20
    to 30 years worth.  But one of the things I can't understand is this;
    Back 5 years ago, our facility embarked upon a journey towards being
    or becoming a world class manufacturing site.  That is, within DEC.
    We openly shared thoughts, tapped valuable and experienced resources,
    formed cross functional teams, met daily and kept it as brief as
    possible.  We were to become one of DEC's main manufacturing sites,
    so they said.  All the ingredents were there to spawn successful
    product introductions and keep on producing at a reasonable cost.
    Then our products were being shipped off-shore to be manufactured
    at other DEC facilities and we are being transformed into a customer
    services site.  What went wrong with the Made in America model?
    What or who's to say if Chrysler has formulated the correct answer?
    I just hope they are not being led down a path to success and glory
    as we were only to find out it's nightfall and there's a cliff at
    paths end!...sigh
    
    P.S. I believe the "Made in America" is a series of programs and will
         air tonight and tomorrow with additional segments...

>      It's narrator, Robert Reisch (sp?) was and probably still teaches
>    at Harvard University...not that it's all that important but just the
>    same noteworthy.
 
	According the write-up on the show in yesterday's Boston Globe,
    I think his name is spelled "Reich".

>    P.S. I believe the "Made in America" is a series of programs and will
>         air tonight and tomorrow with additional segments...

	The show is four hours long in total, but I'm pretty sure it was
    only split in half.  The second half airs tonight on PBS (I think at
    8 PM EST - Channel 2 for those in GBA).  This is required viewing
    for all arm-chair CEO's, so don't miss it!

				   -davo

MOA= Military Operations Area

    I saw most of the Harvard Professor Bob Reich PBS program "Made in
    America" last night, and was impressed by a couple of things, for 
    example:
    
    	A facilitator working with a bunch of grunts from the Crysler
    	shop floor who operate machines which grind crankshafts. He
    	had the team actually doing Taguchi "Design of Experiments"
    	calculations on settings for improving yields. The workers
    	were contributing new ideas for experimental variables! Note
    	that this was not just for new products, but for continuous
    	improvement of existing production processes.
    
    	A cross-functional group of marketeers, stylists, engineers,
    	manufacturers and........SUPPLIERS........jointly designing
    	components and systems. And everybody watching workers assemble
    	their prototypes and taking notes. And this was at least a year 
    	before the product would reach the production lines. In other
    	words, Rapid Prototyping, in the best traditions advocated by
    	the QFD approach.
    
    When I see this kind of thing on a mass-media television program, I
    despair. Why?
    
    Because I'm in the Concurrent Engineering/CALS Program Office, and last
    week I sat in an entire group meeting in which our management 
    deliberately avoided a question asking if we are going to institute
    real Concurrent Engineering practices. 
    
    We were told that our management team would not accept the challenge of
    facilitating the development of an effective measurement & reward
    system targeted at making Concurrent Engineering breakthroughs or to
    empower the people to do so. Our management told us that they felt that
    "six-sigma", and "TQM", for example, were not necessarily appropriate
    to our business, and that they were just the latest "buzz-words". 
    
    Our  management team told us that if they do not commit to a Concurrent
    Engineering approach, then they cannot be held accountable for failing.
    We were told that everyone in the group should use their own methods
    and tools, and every individual should do what is fit for themselves. 
    
    When one person asked the question "Well, how are you going to empower
    me to make breakthroughs?", he was told, by a V.P., "Easy. I hereby
    empower you".
    
    This kind of ill-conceived attitude is all too pervasive in our
    management in Digital, and makes by irreconcilably sad.
    	
    Ray

	The showed seemed to me worthwhile watching, but not because of
	anything Robert Reich contributed.  It's old news, but a little
	history lesson can be worth the while occasionally.

	And is the "Chrysler MOA" worthy of note?

	I doubt it.  Lee Iacocca still would have us believe that there
	is no difference between an x-designed car made in Japan by the
	folks at Mitsubishi and the "same" car made in Detroit by union
	grunts.  Wrong, Lee (as shown in much of the Reich show).

	Lee Iacocca still thinks he knows what's best for us, and if we
	have the arrogance to make up our minds we just don't know what
	is good for America.  Wrong, Lee; America was here before you.

	Lee Iacocca would have us believe that the Viper is "proof" the
	"Americans are just as good as the Japs."  Well, let's wait for
	a test-drive by Real People willing to cough up 50 grand for an
	honest-to-Pete made-in-the-USofA new-design gas-guzzler.    For
	today's proof, take a peek at the point-of-origin on affordable
	Ford, GM or Chrysler cars (mostly Pacific-rim countries) now in
	the show-rooms.

	There seems to be no idea so good Lee Iacocca can't screw it up
	and get a zappo commercial from it.

			Charlton

    Excellent show! One part of the broadcast that stands out in my mind
    is  the difficulty with which Riech had in explaining the total
    committment that the Japanese workers have for their jobs and their
    fellow workers. One reason for this is the genuine respect that
    managment has for workers. The number 1 priority in the Japanese
    workforce is to have "honor" for each other.I'm not surprised Reich
    was baffled for an explaination. Most of the work force in America
    don't understand it either. Unless of course you've worked for a
    Japanese Company (I have).American Managment must cultivate into the
    workforce from the top down this basic principal before ALL else,
    in hopes that we might be as successfull as the Japanese have been.
    No more BS about the new x,z car etc. etc. or MOA.

    Did anyone notice the comment made about Douglas Aircraft, he said
    they made a mistake that is common to most large successful
    corporations, they failed to embrace new technology (jet engines) and 
    instead invested big money in a piston engine aircraft while the
    competition passed them by...
    
    Sound familiar??
    Brad.

    Another show on PBS (sorry...can't remember the name of it)
    went behind the scenes of the showplace auto mfg plants
    and into the supplires that make many of the parts.  I think 
    the show dealt with computers more than cars.
    Anyway, the suppliers are treated like garbage and are
    controlled by the larger companies.  The employees are not asked their
    input and work in sweatshops (mostly women) putting together
    piece parts into larger assemblies.  Japanese-style management is
    great if you work for Toyota or NGK.  If you are a supplier
    to the gig guys, you hire women, at low wages, make 'em work
    real hard in lousy conditions, and watch your economy take off.
    
    I don't think we see the whole picture.
    
    Gary 

   Re: Note 1914.6 by EMDS::MANGAN
   

�    Excellent show! One part of the broadcast that stands out in my mind
�    is  the difficulty with which Riech had in explaining the total
�    committment that the Japanese workers have for their jobs and their
�    fellow workers. One reason for this is the genuine respect that
�    managment has for workers. The number 1 priority in the Japanese
   
   
   Digital used to be like this.  During the early 80's I was totally
   committed to Digital.  This was because they treated me as a valued
   resource.  I gave my all to Digital because they showed they cared
   (verbally, officially, monetarily, etc.).  Now'a'days, I believe
   Digital thinks of me more as a necessary evil.

    re: .0
    Thanks for entering this, Davo:
    
    I, too, played "Armchair CEO", like several of you (for a portion of
    the show).
    
    For those of us is the Field (Sales and Sales Support, at least), we
    have had some coursework which would lead to the kind of management
    structure and operations that would help make sure we could compete in
    teh 21st Century (and that we get there!)  Notably, I just completed a
    course called (Sales Management II), in Maynard, last April 13-17.
    About twenty field (and a few Headquarters Managers) did an "Outward
    Bound-style" training in the Woods just West of the Parker Street
    facility.  We spent most of two days in the Woods solving problems
    which required Teamwork, total Teamwork.  There simply was no way to
    solve our problems without empowered people, excellent communication,
    respect for our differences (gender, size, intellectual or management
    style, job function, etc.)  I found it one of the most valuable
    trainings I've ever had in my 25+ years in business!!  (I understand
    they're trying to save the course.)
    
    Also, 4 years ago, the company expended tremdous sums of money sending
    Sales Support Managers to Florida for a Management Assessment, and then
    to a two-week school (Management for Effectiveness), which had several
    "High Performing Teams" modules.  Another excellent class.  The
    principal management problem is that Regional and Country management
    did not take the course, and did not incorporate its tenents into Goals
    and Objectives.
    
    Last week, in the LA Times there was an exploration of the Big Three
    (anachronism?) Auto Manufacturers and their attempt to adopt Concurrent
    Engineering and other modern industrial attitudes and techniques.  The
    article concluded that Ford was furthest along, and have plant
    operations that are  superior to Japanese operated U.S. plants.
    (Incidentally I bought Ford stock several years ago--after renting a
    General Motors Cadillac at Avis.
    
    Incidentally, why does Digital make an agreement to purchase Chevrolet
    Luminas when they have one of the worst Frequency of Repair Records for
    their class of car?  (Through our Leasing Company)
    
    Richard B