Message-ID: <12138249.1075854145045.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2000 23:18:00 -0800 (PST)
From: buylow@wt.net
To: daren.farmer@enron.com
Subject: Marketing Services/Scheduling
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: "buylow" <buylow@wt.net>
X-To: Daren J Farmer
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Darren_Farmer_Dec2000\Notes Folders\Personal
X-Origin: Farmer-D
X-FileName: dfarmer.nsf

Daren,

Thinking about Robert's little memo yesterday and along the lines of pulling 
the marketing (Sitara) function back to your side of the fence I think a 
strong case could be made in favor of that idea.

It is obvious that several people are involved in changing tickets, pathing, 
nominating, and confirming the Industrials. This dissipates the knowledge 
base and the responsibility factor. It is a "Who's on First" issue.

If the responsibility to ensure pricing, volume, and accomplishment of market 
intent is accurately depicted, and in Sitara, is in your shop then the 
schedulers could concentrate on the accuracy and correctness of Unify and 
POPS. I'm sure this would help volume management and client services 
immensely.

As the skill level rises in this area you could then gradually feed more and 
more of the marketing function (Sitara) to the scheduling group in the hopes 
they would then have a better understanding of the overhaul picture.

I believe the current situation is too much, too fast, for scheduling to 
handle all at once. It has also created a situation where Robert seems to 
think not only that he has all the segments mastered, but that he is the only 
person that should be involved in the Industrials.

I will support whatever direction you want to go on this issue, but if you 
and Pat leave things the way they are please explain to both Robert and Pat 
that others may be involved in the Industrial activity and that is quite 
alright.

Once again, thanks for listening.

Ken
 - att1.htm