A few of us have been having chats in the hallways, offices and
conference rooms lately about the state of Atari Games.  These have ranged from
informal coffee station conversations to formal meetings about issues that
affect us all.  The topics seem to be as diverse as the locations, but all seem
to revolve around the general issue of Atari's 'SYSTEM'.  That is: how we do
business inside (how we have organized ourselves, management style, employees,
environmental constraints, etc.) and how we do business on the outside (how we
interface with our customers and the rest of the world, taxes, etc.).

        Many feel that we are in need of some changes.  But what changes? 

	A few of us feel that we should begin the process of describing what we
see as inefficient and unproductive and offering solutions for better
productivity and higher quality.  And so, we offer this new type of forum to
view ideas on specific important areas.  This message is the first of many to
follow.  And here is how it will work:

        Each week I will offer a problem relevant to Atari Games and a solution
by top management consultants.  What I am asking you to do is to respond to me
(via EMAIL) on how Atari Games compares to this solution.  I will collect all
responses, edit them and then EMAIL them back to you the next week.  After you
have had a chance to read the edited replys, I would like you to reply once
again on how Atari Games can close the gap between the Atari Games way and the
consultant's method.

        It's important that you only reply directly to me, since a general
free-for-all will most likely defocus the issue at hand.  And, by the way, take
some time with your replys.  These will be important issues.  Considering
Atari's long term survivial, this is more important then your current project!

And now this weeks problem:

What do you think is the purpose of Atari Games?  What is the goal of this
company?

Some things to ponder from a top management consultant:

	A company should create constancy of purpose toward improvement of
product with the aim to become competitive and to stay in business and to
provide jobs.  (constancy is defined as:  the state or quality of being
unchanging; stability).

        There are two problems:  1) problems of today and 2) problems of
tomorrow.  Problems of today encompass maintenance of quality of product put out
today, regulation of output so as not to exceed immediate sales by too far,
budget, employment, profits, sales, service, public relations, forecasting, and
so forth.  It is easy to stay bound up in the tangled knot of the problems of
today, becoming ever more and more efficient in them.

        Problems of the future command first and foremost constancy of purpose
and dedication to improvement of competitive position to keep the company alive
and to provide jobs for their employees.  Are the board of directors and the
president dedicated to quick profits, or to the institution of constancy of
purpose?  The next quarterly dividend is not as important as existence of the
company 10, 20, or 30 years from now.  Establishment of constancy of purpose
means acceptance of obligations like the following:

I. Innovate.  Allocate the resources for long-term planning.  Plans for the
future call for consideration of:

        New product that may help people to live better materially,
	 and that will have a market
        New materials that will be required and the probable cost
        Method of production; possible changes in equipment for production
        New skills required, and in what number?
        Training and retraining of personnel
        Training of supervisors
        Cost of production
        Cost of marketing; plans for service; cost of service
        Performance in the hands of the user
        Satisfaction of the user

	One requirement for innovation is faith that there will be a future. 
Innovation, the foundation of the future, can not thrive unless the top
management have declared unshakable commitment to quality and productivity. 
Until this policy can be enthroned as an institution, middle management and
everyone else in the company will be skeptical about the effectiveness of their
best efforts.

II. Put resources into Research and Education

III. Constantly improve design of product and service.  This obligation never
ceases.  The consumer (NOT our distributors but our players and users) is the
most important part of the production line.  

	It is a mistake to suppose that efficient production of product
	and service can with certainty keep an organization solvent and ahead
	of competition.  It is possible and in fact fairly easy for an
	organization to go downhill and out of business making the wrong
	product or offering the wrong service, even though everyone in the
	organization performs with devotion, employing statistical methods
	and every other aid that can boost efficiency.

Our customers, our suppliers, and employees need the company's constancy of
purpose - our intention to stay in business by providing product and service
that will help man to live better and which will have a market.

Top management should publish a resolution that no one will lose his job for
contribution to quality and productivity.


Questions:
1. Has ATARI Games established a constancy of purpose?
2. If yes, what is the purpose?  If no, what are the obstacles?
3. Will this stated purpose stay fixed, or will it change with time?
4. Do all employees know about this stated constancy of purpose?
5. How many believe it to the extent that it affects their work?
6. Who does our president answer to?  Who do our board of directors answer to?


Remember to reply directly to me.  Next week you will receive the replys and be
presented with the next problem and solution.

	Thanks to all for your replys to last week's Problem 1!  Response
was good!

The following contains the edited replys to Problem 1.
To recap, last week's problem was:
	
	"What is the purpose of Atari Games?  What goal has Atari set for
itself?"

	
The replys were varied but the major theme from the respondents was:
	
		"We don't know Atari's purpose."

	One employee cited that "constancy of purpose means directions,
leadership and sticking to it."  But most found that management has not made 
company directions and goals known.  And that management was not aware that it
is crucial to communicate these goals.  Some cited that they felt top 
management probably had no goals. One employee said that "it is apparent that
top management has no concept of the word 'leadership' and how it applies
to running our corporation."

	Several respondents emphatically stated that even though the company
publicly states (in meetings and company gatherings) that innovation and
creativity is very important for the future success of Atari, little (or
nothing) is done to incorporate this into our system.  One respondent: "There is
a lot of lip service paid to the notions of orginality and innovation...  But in
reality, these do not seem to be part of Atari's purpose."

	One reply mentioned that the existence of a Mission Statement is
not as critical as the content.  It was also stated that it was important
that management review company goals critically to define 'real-life,
precise statements for all to follow.

	Others seemed to be outright frustrated with the current system saying:
"my lifelong career is now just a job" and "We are not trying to drive our
chosen industry, it drives us.  The fact that we started the industry is
irrelevant."

	Even though the respondents were frustated, they felt that the
opportunity to turn things around was at hand.  They all seemed willing
to do what it takes, and all said that they look to upper management for
directions.

	And now to follow up Problem 1:

		How can we close the gap?  That is:  What can Atari do
to create a purpose and stick to it?

A top management consultant states:

	"American style of management rode along unchallenged between 1950
and 1968, when American-manufactured products held the market.  Anyone 
anywhere in the world was lucky for the privilege to buy an American
product.  By 1968, forces of competition could no longer be ignored.  What
had happened in Japan could have happened in America, but did not.  The
thought still lingers:  'We must have been doing something right.'  This
is not an inevitable conclusion."

Here's problem 2:

	"If Atari changes (or creates) a purpose, how can we adopt the
new philosophy?"

The same consultant writes:

	"We are in a new ecomonic age, created by Japan.  Management must
awaken to the challenge, must learn their responsibilities, and take
on leadership for change."

Consider these points:

	Once a company purpose is created, it is vitally important that all
employees accept the responsibility to adopt the new philosophy.  Citing that
"our problems are different" is a common disease that afflicts management and
administration the world over.  We definitely are different, but the principles
that will help to improve the quality of our products are universal in nature
(quality means the usefulness which improves the customer's quality of
life). The management must put resources into this new philosophy, with
commitment to quality, education/training, and leadership.


"How do you think Atari could best adopt new philosophies?"