A) Write a summary

B) Your recommendations for either the focal character(s) in the story or for the class?

CHAPTER 35 BY YOUR WORKS SHALL YE BE KNOWN Mr. Marsh's office will need this by Tuesday, Stanley. So you've got to get right on it. We've got to be sure The Company is doing its best to compensate our top technical contributors properly." Ted's manner was fittingly important/urgent as he explained to Stanley what was needed on his special assignment. These people are the backbone of The Company's technical thrust," Ted explained. All have been nominated as outstanding technical contributors by their own top management. So, naturally, Mr. Marsh wants to make sure that they are being compensated (paid," Stanley translated to himself) appropriately." Ted departed, leaving Stanley with a list of twenty-one outstanding contributors and the assignment to unearth the human resources data necessary to determine whether or not the people on the list were being appropriately compensated whatever that might mean. It did not take Stanley very long to find out what those words did mean, and mostly by contrary example. For here was an outstanding contributor who was given only a C rating by his manager in his last performance review. (The Company's merit rating system ran A, B, C, D, and out, not unlike those used in the school systems.) Another was rated B by his managernot bad but not outstandingwith summary comments indicating that the man needed to improve his technical skills to qualify for his next promotion. And then there were other cases, those who were, in fact, rated A but who were underpaid by anyone's standards. Stanley pondered the situa- tion for a while and came to a conclusion: Something's wrong here." Perhaps some research was indicated. With that in mind, Stanley looked up Drew Bolt, Group Manager of Plant Engineering at Pawtucket, for one of Pawtucket's fin- est was on the list. Briefly, the process of forming the list was sequential and hier- archical, with four levels of management involved-Department, Group, Function, 173 174 The Ropes to Skip and the Ropes to Know and the Plant Manager. Each higher level picks two or three names from the lists submitted from below. Finally, the Plant Manager selects one or possibly two names to be sent on to New York. "So that's my assignment, Drew," Stanley was saying, to try to get a better han- dle on what seems to be, uh, a difference between what these people should be paid and what they actually are paid. Then, handing Bolt the memo from Ted, Here, this guy is one of yours, I'm pretty sure, A. S. Barker, right?" Bolt eyed the list, frowning, "Why yes, that's right. But something's wrong here, Stan. My guy isn't on this list." Um, I guess that's because he wasn't picked higher up, Drew," Stanley observed brightly "No, no, that's not what I mean," Bolt growled. I mean, yes, Al Barker is one of our people, but not one of the ones I sent up." "Why not?" Stanley has a genius for missing the point. "Why not?! How the hell would I know? I sent up Greg Mendel and Eve Curie. Barker's a good man don't get me wrong. But this program's aimed at the indi- vidual technical contributor, the one who otherwise doesn't get into the corporate spotlight." Stanley left with Bolt muttering to himself about just once doing something right and went to look up Bonnie, who knew just about everyone. Maybe she'd have a clue. "What do you know about this guy, Bonnie, this A. Sayles Barker? Mr. Bolt says he works here. "Oh, Al. Everyone knows Al Barker. Honestly, he's the nicest guy. And he's a whiz with words. He always helps us with our letters and things. He's going to be something in The Company some day, too. You just know it by looking at him. And you know..." From what followed, Stanley was able to construct part of the story. And through subsequent consultations with second- and third-level staff people (the assistants to"), he was able to piece together the rest. The process by which you become an outstanding contributorat least for someis this. The first-level managers, the ones on the firing line, have a pretty good sense of who their technical hotshots are. Oh, they don't always have an outstanding con- tributor, but they almost always nominate someone. After all, they want to give one of their own people at least a shot at it. These names are then sent up to the Group Managers (next level). They are a little further from the action, but still pretty knowl- edgeable. They knock off the obvious weak ones and send one, two, or three names to the function managers (next level), who aren't quite so knowledgeable; same process there, and then on up to the Plant Manager who isn't knowledgeable at all. The Plant Manager then okays one, possibly two, names; these are sent to New York to appear on the final list. What Stanley found was that it is these last two stops, Function and Plant, where the process goes awry. The names that reach Function level are usually, though not always, those of quiet, competent, technical employees known only to their own managers and, through an occasional flash of brilliance, to other quiet, competent Chapater 35: By Your Works Shall Ye Be Known 175 technicians. But at the upper levels, different criteria are brought to bear by manag- ers, whose different responsibilities necessitate a different perspective. And that's the scenario. Barker's no dummy, make no mistake about that, but he isn't, and doesn't even want to be, a top technical man. Like anyone with sense, he wants to get into top management some day, and probably will. He's good with words, makes a good appearance, and has poise. He knows how to make his point and isn't easily flustered. These are ideal qualities for the person who will make the Technical Presentation, the vital communication link between the troops in the technical trenches and middle management. And who would you guess is the worst at the Technical Presentation? Right. The technical people. They're not too good with words in the first place, but they're death with the top management. After all, they don't give a damn about sales or dollars or market share or anything but the beautiful technical detailsin infinite detail. So Al Barker makes the presentations. He's got the style, enough of the facts; he's got the right answers, and he delivers well. Above all, he likes to do it, and he knows how to present himself. Now you're starting to see, are you? Sure. The Division Manager gets the list, looks it over, and thinks, "Say, where's Al Barker?" Turns out Barker made a really top-notch ("crisp and hard-hitting," in Ted's words) presentation yesterday. Well, that won't do. This fellow's got to be one of our real comers. Let's see, he's in Bolt's outfit, isn't he? Uh, I'll just cross off this Gregory Mendel, whoever he is, and put in Barker. Yes, sir, he's a real comer. Wonder how Bolt missed him?" And with this process taking place again at the next level, and throughout the Company, the result is inevitable. Why is it inevitable, you say? It is inevitable because of who is involved. These top and middle managers have been away from the technical trenches for a long time. They don't have the same perspective any more, if they ever did in the first place. In any event, their role now is to make decisions about alternative programs based on a broad set of criteria, only one of which is technical excellence. They are busy people (at least to their way of thinking) and don't have the time or inclination to be buried under an avalanche of detail. They want the necessary facts, answers to a few key questions, and a balanced (again from the management perspective) presentation. So Al Barker strikes a resonant chord. He's got his head screwed on right." The problem, you see, is that it's one thing for Marsh's office to say, Let's make up a list of our outstanding contributors," and quite another to do it. As with any complicated decision, the facts do not speak for themselves. It is not even clear what facts, or whose facts, to use. And after the facts are selected according to one set of criteria, they are judged on the basis of different, though equally valid, criteria. What makes it seem deceptively simple at the outset is the existence of one or two individuals, those one-in-a-million, who have it all or who have produced some- thing of unquestionable genius at the right time. But the problem is that they are one-in-a-million. So the ultimate judgment comes to rest with top management, who, consciously or unconsciously, like to see a little balance in their technical people. 176 The Ropes to Skip and the Ropes to Know The net result? As usual, the quiet, competent technician gets passed over, and the one with the management flair, the one with the look of a winner, comes out on top again. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS 1. Can you think of anything in your own experience that illustrates the idea that information can morph as it moves up the line in accordance with what each subordinate thinks his superior will embrace? 2. Why don't the managers at successive levels of The Company just make a simple, honest effort to identify outstanding technical contributors? 3. Do presentation skills trump technical skills? How does the concept of attribution help explain Barker's placement on the outstanding technical contributors list? 4