DOCSLIB.ORG

AME the New Edge of G Knowledge Management and Transfer of Best

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AME the New Edge of G Knowledge Management and Transfer of Best AME The New Edge of Knowledge Management and Transfer of Best Practices Carla O’Dell, Ph.D. President www.APQC.org 2009 North American MAKE Award Winners h Apple h Hewlett‐Packard h APQC h IBM h ConocoPhillips h IDEO h Fluor h Microsoft h Google h MITRE © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 2 Why transfer? “Research has found it not A B uncommon to find 3 to 1 4 2 differences between best 1 2 and worst sites in the 1 2 same firm.” 3 © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 3 People are hard‐wired to share knowledge. Why is it so hard in organizations? © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 4 Easier to document Explicit and share 20% Contributes to efficiency Easier to replicate Skills and experience Tacit 80% Hard to articulate Harder to transfer LdLeads to competency © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 5 Knowledge is Sticky h Information and knowledge exist ‐‐ but won’ t automatically flow. h Without a systematic process and supportive environment, it won’t move. © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 6 Barriers to Sharing Knowledge Why should I rely on Will it make more information from you? work for me? ANOTHER program? Silo mentality We don’t have time Not invented HERE . I don’t know what you know. I don’t know what to ask. © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 7 Enabling the Flow of Knowledge Use Adapt Create Share Identify Prepare RiReview The chain won’t hold if any link is broken. © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 8 Systematic Approaches to the Transfer of Knowledge and Best Practices Tacit -Internal benchmarking -Knowledge Champions -Best Practice Teams Transfer of Best Practices Communities Of -Q&A - Trade tools, templates, best Practice practices - Solve common problems - Identify best practice - PtltkPortals to key ifinfo: metho ds, temp la tes e tc Self-Service + - Search capability -Expert directories Explicit -Lessons Learned Lower Human Interaction Higher © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 9 WHAT IS A “BEST PRACTICE”? h Some prefer the term “successfully demonstrated” ¾ The “Best Practice” must demonstrate through evidence that it is 'better, faster, cheaper‘ and leads to measurably better outcomes. h Best for us: “Solutions and approaches that achieve our objectives.” © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 10 LEVELS OF “BEST” PRACTICE Promising Successfully Tips Demonstrated Validated Best Practices Practices Practices Not every process requires validation of the practice © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 11 Use an effective Lessons Learned approach to reduce the costs of not knowing. Indiana fire-fighting crew’s After Action Review© 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 12 Predicting successful transfer 1. Motivation of source and recipient ¾ Ongoing involvement of the source ¾ Absorptive capacity of the recipient 2. Quality of the relationship ¾ Credibility of source ¾ Strength of the relationship 3. Understanding the process & practice ¾ Poorly understood by the recipient ¾ Hard to articulate and document by the source 4. Facilitation and support 13 © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 13 Best Buy’s Knowledge Management Journey MSN Results ‐ Pilot Results District 5 and 17 ISP UNITS/STORE/DAY 18.0 17.0 16.0 15.0 14. 0 13.0 Dist. 5 Unit/Store/Day 12.0 Dist. 17 Unit/Store/Day 11.0 Company Unit/Store/Day 10. 0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0 5.0 MAMJJASONDJF Dist. 5 Unit/Store/Day 5.9 7.6 7.3 9.1 9.6 11.3 11.2 8.3 13.1 17.8 Dist. 17 Unit/Store/Day 676.7 747.4 707.0 767.6 10. 4 12. 5 11. 3 828.2 12. 2 14. 6 Company Unit/Store/Day 7.1 7.2 6.5 7.6 9.4 11.4 10.2 8.3 12.1 13.6 © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 15 What can go wrong? © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 16 What can go wrong? h Thinking a database or repository will solve the transfer problem by ilfitself © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 17 What can go wrong? h Thinking a database or repository will solve the transfer problem by ilfitself h Picking the wrong problem(s) or place to start © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 18 What can go wrong? h Thinking a database or repository will solve the transfer problem by ilfitself h Picking the wrong problem(s) or place to start h Naïve beliefs about human and organization behavior – people won’t change without a reason to do so © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 19 What can go wrong? h Thinking a database or repository will solve the transfer problem by ilfitself h Picking the wrong problem(s) or place to start h Naïve beliefs about human and organization behavior – people won’t change without a reason to do so h Confusing data, information and knowledge, and how to “manage” them © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 20 AdiAppendix: APQC’s KM PjProjects www.apqc.org APQC’s Consortium Research in Knowledge Management 1. Sustaining Communities of Practice (2009) 2. Web 2.0 Practitioner’s Series (()2008) 3. Expertise Location and Social Networking (2008) 4. The Role of Evolving Technologies: Accelerating Collaboration and KldKnowledge TfTransfer (2007 and 2008) 5. Retaining Today’s Knowledge for Tomorrow’s Workforce (2007) 6. Leveraggging Knowledge Across the Value Chain ()(2006) 7. Using Communities of Practice to Drive Organizational Performance and Innovation (2005) 8. ItIntegra ting KM and OitilOrganizational LiLearning (2004) 9. Transfer of Best Practices (2004) 10. Virtual Collaboration (2003‐2004) 11. Expertise Locator Systems (2003) © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 22 APQC’s Consortium Research in Knowledge Management 12. Measuring the Impact of Knowledge Management (2003) 13. UiUsing KldKnowledge Management to DiDrive IiInnovation (2002) 14. Retaining Valuable Knowledge (2001) 15. Managing Content and Knowledge (2001) 16. Building and Sustaining Communities of Practice (2000) 17. Successfully Imppglementing KM (1999‐2000) 18. Creating a Knowledge Sharing Culture (1998‐99) 19. Expanding Knowledge Externally (1998) 20. Using Information Technology for KM (1997) 21. Emerging Best Practices in KM (1996) © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 23 APQC’s Knowledge Management Community h Eli Lilly ¾ PiPricewater house Coopers LLP h Ernst &Young ¾ Proctor and Gamble h Accenture h European Commission ¾ Raytheon h Aerotek h Federal Highway ¾ Rockwell h Air Products & Chemicals h Fluor ¾ Schlumberger h American Express h Ford Motor Co. ¾ Sequent Computer Systems h AiAmerican MtManagement StSystems h Gateway Computers ¾ ServiceMasters h Andersen Consulting h General Electric Co. ¾ Siemens AG h Apple Computers h Giant Eagle ¾ Siemens Westinghouse h ARDEC h ¾ h ARMY Halliburton Skandia AFS h AT&T h Hallmark Cards Inc. ¾ Sollac h Bank of Montreal h Hewlett‐Packard Consulting ¾ Solvay America h Best Buy h Honeywell ¾ St. Paul Companies h Boehringer Ingelheim h Hughes Space & Communications ¾ Strategic Decisions Group h Boeing Co. (IDS & Phantom Works) h IBM ¾ Symantec Corp. h Boeing Co., Rocketdyne Div. h IBM Global Services ¾ Tata Steel h BP Amoco h IBM/Lotus ¾ Tennessee Valley Authority h Bristol Myers Squibb h Intel ¾ Texas Instruments h BitihBritish TlTelecom h ¾ h Broderbund Software Johnson Controls 3M h Buckman Laboratories Int'l h Kaiser ¾ Turner Construction h Cap Gemini Ernst & Young h Lotus Development Corp. ¾ Unocal h Caterpillar Inc. h Manpower International ¾ U.S. Airforce Material Command h Charles Schwab h Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc. ¾ U.S. Department of State h Chevron Corporation h MITRE Corp. ¾ USU.S. Department of VA‐EES h Cigna Property & Casualty h Monsanto Co. ¾ U.S. National Security Agency h Cisco Systems h Motorola ¾ USAA h Context Integration h MWH Global ¾ VHA, Inc. h Corning Inc. h ¾ h DaimlerChrysler National Semiconductor Corp. Washington Mutual h Defense Acquisition h NASA and the Jet Propulsion Lab ¾ Washington State Library h Dow Chem ica l Co. h Nokia ¾ Wells Fargo h Dow Corning h Nortel Networks ¾ Weyerhauser h Du Pont h Northrop Grumman ¾ World Bank h Petrobras ¾ Xerox h Pink Elephant Group ¾ Xerox Connect © 2009 APQC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. 24.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Relationship Between Institutional Common Ownership, Marketing, and Firm Performance
    What if Your Owners Also Own Other Firms in Your Industry? The Relationship between Institutional Common Ownership, Marketing, and Firm Performance John Healey 1 Ofer Mintz 2 May 2021 Forthcoming in International Journal of Research in Marketing (IJRM) 1 John Healey ([email protected]) is Assistant Professor of Marketing, A.B. Freeman School of Business, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA. 2 Ofer Mintz ([email protected]) is Senior Lecturer and Associate Head (External Engagement) of the Marketing Department at the UTS Business School, and Research Associate at the UTS Australia-China Relations Institute, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia. Both authors contributed equally to the paper and are listed alphabetically. They are grateful for detailed feedback provided by Peter Danaher and Gerard Hoberg, and participants at the University of Adelaide, and at the 2017 UTS Marketing Discipline Group Research Camp, 2018 Winter American Marketing Association, 2018 Theory and Practice in Marketing, 2018 Marketing Science, and 2019 Marketing Meets Wall Street conferences. Further, they thank Yang Wang for her help with database programming. What if Your Owners Also Own Other Firms in Your Industry? The Relationship between Institutional Common Ownership, Marketing, and Firm Performance Abstract The growth in institutional holdings of public firms has led to increased interest in the concept of common ownership, in which the same investor owns stakes in multiple firms within the same industry. Economic theory suggests that common ownership could affect firm performance, but little empirical research has examined the nature of this effect or how a firm’s extant marketing potentially relates to this effect.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Marginable OTC Stocks
    List of Marginable OTC Stocks @ENTERTAINMENT, INC. ABACAN RESOURCE CORPORATION ACE CASH EXPRESS, INC. $.01 par common No par common $.01 par common 1ST BANCORP (Indiana) ABACUS DIRECT CORPORATION ACE*COMM CORPORATION $1.00 par common $.001 par common $.01 par common 1ST BERGEN BANCORP ABAXIS, INC. ACETO CORPORATION No par common No par common $.01 par common 1ST SOURCE CORPORATION ABC BANCORP (Georgia) ACMAT CORPORATION $1.00 par common $1.00 par common Class A, no par common Fixed rate cumulative trust preferred securities of 1st Source Capital ABC DISPENSING TECHNOLOGIES, INC. ACORN PRODUCTS, INC. Floating rate cumulative trust preferred $.01 par common $.001 par common securities of 1st Source ABC RAIL PRODUCTS CORPORATION ACRES GAMING INCORPORATED 3-D GEOPHYSICAL, INC. $.01 par common $.01 par common $.01 par common ABER RESOURCES LTD. ACRODYNE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. 3-D SYSTEMS CORPORATION No par common $.01 par common $.001 par common ABIGAIL ADAMS NATIONAL BANCORP, INC. †ACSYS, INC. 3COM CORPORATION $.01 par common No par common No par common ABINGTON BANCORP, INC. (Massachusetts) ACT MANUFACTURING, INC. 3D LABS INC. LIMITED $.10 par common $.01 par common $.01 par common ABIOMED, INC. ACT NETWORKS, INC. 3DFX INTERACTIVE, INC. $.01 par common $.01 par common No par common ABLE TELCOM HOLDING CORPORATION ACT TELECONFERENCING, INC. 3DO COMPANY, THE $.001 par common No par common $.01 par common ABR INFORMATION SERVICES INC. ACTEL CORPORATION 3DX TECHNOLOGIES, INC. $.01 par common $.001 par common $.01 par common ABRAMS INDUSTRIES, INC. ACTION PERFORMANCE COMPANIES, INC. 4 KIDS ENTERTAINMENT, INC. $1.00 par common $.01 par common $.01 par common 4FRONT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
    [Show full text]
  • Emerging Technologies Multi/Parallel Processing
    Emerging Technologies Multi/Parallel Processing Mary C. Kulas New Computing Structures Strategic Relations Group December 1987 For Internal Use Only Copyright @ 1987 by Digital Equipment Corporation. Printed in U.S.A. The information contained herein is confidential and proprietary. It is the property of Digital Equipment Corporation and shall not be reproduced or' copied in whole or in part without written permission. This is an unpublished work protected under the Federal copyright laws. The following are trademarks of Digital Equipment Corporation, Maynard, MA 01754. DECpage LN03 This report was produced by Educational Services with DECpage and the LN03 laser printer. Contents Acknowledgments. 1 Abstract. .. 3 Executive Summary. .. 5 I. Analysis . .. 7 A. The Players . .. 9 1. Number and Status . .. 9 2. Funding. .. 10 3. Strategic Alliances. .. 11 4. Sales. .. 13 a. Revenue/Units Installed . .. 13 h. European Sales. .. 14 B. The Product. .. 15 1. CPUs. .. 15 2. Chip . .. 15 3. Bus. .. 15 4. Vector Processing . .. 16 5. Operating System . .. 16 6. Languages. .. 17 7. Third-Party Applications . .. 18 8. Pricing. .. 18 C. ~BM and Other Major Computer Companies. .. 19 D. Why Success? Why Failure? . .. 21 E. Future Directions. .. 25 II. Company/Product Profiles. .. 27 A. Multi/Parallel Processors . .. 29 1. Alliant . .. 31 2. Astronautics. .. 35 3. Concurrent . .. 37 4. Cydrome. .. 41 5. Eastman Kodak. .. 45 6. Elxsi . .. 47 Contents iii 7. Encore ............... 51 8. Flexible . ... 55 9. Floating Point Systems - M64line ................... 59 10. International Parallel ........................... 61 11. Loral .................................... 63 12. Masscomp ................................. 65 13. Meiko .................................... 67 14. Multiflow. ~ ................................ 69 15. Sequent................................... 71 B. Massively Parallel . 75 1. Ametek.................................... 77 2. Bolt Beranek & Newman Advanced Computers ...........
    [Show full text]
  • Scalable Shared-Memory Multiprocessor Architectures
    NEW DIRECTIONS I Scalable Shared-Memory Multiprocessor Architectures New coherence schemes scale beyond single-bus-based, shared-memory architectures. This report describes three research efforts: one multiple-bus-based and two directory-based schemes. Introduction Shreekant Thakkar, Sequent Computer Systems Michel Dubois, University of Southern California Anthony T. Laundrie and Gurindar S. Sohi, University of Wisconsin-Madison There are two forms of shared-memory the bus as a broadcast medium to maintain interconnection. The following “coher- multiprocessor architectures: bus-based coherency; all the processors “snoop” on ence properties” form the basis for most of systems such as Sequent’s Symmetry, the bus to maintain coherent information in these schemes: Encore’s Multimax, SGI’s Iris, and Star- the caches. The protocols require the data Sharing readers. Identical copies of a dent’s Titan; and switching network-based in other caches to be invalidated or updated block of data may be present in several systems such as BBN’s Butterfly, IBM’s on a write by a processor if multiple copies caches. These caches are called readers. RP3, and New York University’s Ultra. of the modified data exist. The bus pro- Exclusive owners. Only one cache at a Because of the efficiency and ease of the vides free broadcast capability, but this - time may have permission to write to a shared-memory programming model, feature also limits its bandwidth. block of data. This cache is called the these machines are more popular for paral- New coherence schemes that scale be- owner. lel programming than distributed multi- yond single-bus-based, shared-memory processors such as NCube or Intel’s iPSC.
    [Show full text]
  • Lacrosse Footwear, Inc
    LACROSSE FOOTWEAR, INC. NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS To Be Held April 27, 2009 To: The Shareholders of LaCrosse Footwear, Inc.: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the annual meeting of shareholders of LaCrosse Footwear, Inc. will be held on Monday, April 27, 2009, at 3:00 P.M., Eastern Time, at LaCrosse Footwear, Inc.’s Distribution Center, 5352 Performance Way, Whitestown, Indiana, 46075 for the following purposes: 1. To elect three directors to hold office until the 2012 annual meeting of shareholders and until their successors are duly elected and qualified; 2. To consider and act upon such other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof. The close of business on February 27, 2009, has been fixed as the record date for the determination of shareholders entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the meeting and any adjournment or postponement thereof. A proxy for the meeting and a proxy statement are enclosed herewith. By Order of the Board of Directors LACROSSE FOOTWEAR, INC. David P. Carlson Secretary Portland, Oregon March 27, 2009 Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to Be Held on April 27, 2009. Pursuant to new rules promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, we have elected to provide access to our proxy materials both by sending you this full set of proxy materials, including a notice of annual meeting, and 2008 Annual Report to Shareholders, and by notifying you of the availability of our proxy materials on the Internet.
    [Show full text]
  • EOS: a Project to Investigate the Design and Construction of Real-Time Distributed Embedded Operating Systems
    c EOS: A Project to Investigate the Design and Construction of Real-Time Distributed Embedded Operating Systems. * (hASA-CR-18G971) EOS: A PbCJECZ 10 187-26577 INVESTIGATE TEE CESIGI AND CCES!I&CCIXOti OF GEBL-1IIBE DISZEIEOTEO EWBEECIC CEERATIN6 SPSTEI!!S Bid-Year lieport, 1QE7 (Illinois Unclas Gniv.) 246 p Avail: AlIS BC All/!!P A01 63/62 00362E8 Principal Investigator: R. H. Campbell. Research Assistants: Ray B. Essick, Gary Johnston, Kevin Kenny, p Vince Russo. i Software Systems Research Group University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Department of Computer Science 1304 West Springfield Avenue Urbana, Illinois 61801-2987 (217) 333-0215 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction. ........................................................................................................................... 1 2. Choices .................................................................................................................................... 1 3. CLASP .................................................................................................................................... 2 4. Path Pascal Release ................................................................................................................. 4 5. The Choices Interface Compiler ................................................................................................ 4 8. Summary ................................................................................................................................. 5 ABSTRACT: Project EOS is studying the problems
    [Show full text]
  • IBM Highlights, 1996-1999
    IBM HIGHLIGHTS, 1996 - 1999 Year Page(s) 1996 2 - 7 1997 7 - 13 1998 13- 21 1999 21 - 26 November 2004 1406HE05 2 1996 Business Performance IBM revenue reaches $75.94 billion, an increase of six percent over 1995, and earnings grow by nearly 30 percent to $5.42 billion. There are 240,615 employees and 622,594 stockholders at year end. Speaking in Atlanta to a group of shareholders, analysts and reporters at the corporation’s annual meeting, IBM chairman Louis V. Gerstner, Jr., discusses IBM’s condition, prospects for growth and the importance of network computing to the company’s future. IBM reaches agreement with the United States Department of Justice to terminate within five years all remaining provisions of the Consent Decree first entered into by IBM and the U.S. government in 1956. Organization IBM forms the Network Computer Division in November. The company says it will operate its worldwide services business under a single brand: IBM Global Services. IBM puts its industry-specific business units on a single global general manager. IBM and Tivoli Systems Inc. enter a merger agreement. Tivoli is a leading provider of systems management software and services for distributed client/server networks of personal computers and workstations. IBM’s acquisition of Tivoli extends the company’s strength in host-based systems management to multiplatform distributed systems. IBM and Edmark Corporation, a developer and publisher of consumer and education software, complete a merger in December. IBM acquires The Wilkerson Group, one of the world’s oldest and largest consulting firms dedicated to the pharmaceutical and medical products industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report Procurement Organization Sandia National Laboratories Fiscal Year 1996
    MAY SANDIA REPORT SAND97-0725 • UC-900 Unlimited Release Printed April 1997 Annual Report Procurement Organization .. ,: ,~ _" Sandia National Laboratories e-• \~.~<. l~ \{/ Fiscal Year 1996 D. L. Palmer Prepared by Sandia National Laborator'es Albuquerque, New 87185 and Livermore, California, 94550, Sandia is a multipro , m '1aboratory operated by Sandia Corporation, a Lockheed Martin Company, for the United States Department of Energy under Contr~ct DE-AC04°94AL115000, / - < \\'. ( ', . ' : . ..,- : . ' _·· i :•: Approved for.@bltc'release; ,; · , .: . ,'' SF2900O(8-81) Issued by Sandia National Laboratories, operated for the United States Department of Energy by Sandia Corporation. NOTICE: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Govern­ ment nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, prod­ uct, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe pri­ vately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors or subcontractors. The views and opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Govern­ ment, any agency thereof, or any of their contractors. Printed in the United States of America. This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy.
    [Show full text]
  • Sequent's NUMA-QTM SMP Architecture
    Sequent’s NUMA-QTM SMP Architecture How it works and where it fits in high-performance computer architectures Contents Introduction ........................................................................................ 1 Background terms and technologies................................................ 1 Latency, the key differentiator ........................................................ 10 How NUMA-Q works ........................................................................ 12 NUMA-Q memory configuration ........................................................ 12 Cache coherence in NUMA-Q............................................................ 14 Optimizing software for NUMA-Q ...................................................... 15 Memory latencies in NUMA-Q .......................................................... 15 IQ-Link bus bandwidth...................................................................... 16 Summary ............................................................................................ 17 Additional information ...................................................................... 17 References ........................................................................................ 18 Introduction also useful to go over the basics of The first white paper on Sequent’s new Symmetric Multiprocessing (SMP) high-performance computer architec- computing, clustered computing, ture, Sequent’s NUMA-Q™ Architecture, Massively Parallel Processing (MPP), explained the basic components of this and other high-speed
    [Show full text]
  • OTC) Margin Stocks
    F e d e r a l R e s e r v e B a n k OF DALLAS ROBERT D. MCTEER, JR. P R E S ID E N T DALLAS, TEXAS AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 75 265-590 6 March 7, 1996 Notice 96-27 TO: The Chief Executive Officer of each member bank and others concerned in the Eleventh Federal Reserve District SUBJECT Over-the-Counter (OTC) Margin Stocks DETAILS The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System has revised the list of over-the-counter (OTC) stocks that are subject to its margin regulations, effective February 12, 1996. Included with the list is a listing of foreign margin stocks that are subject to Regulation T. The foreign margin stocks listed are foreign equity securities eligible for margin treatment at broker-dealers. The Board publishes complete lists four times a year, and the Federal Register announces additions to and deletions from the lists. ATTACHMENTS Attached are the complete lists of OTC stocks and foreign margin stocks as of February 12, 1996. Please retain these lists, which supersede the complete lists published as of February 13, 1995. Announcements containing additions to and deletions from the lists will be provided quarterly. MORE INFORMATION For more information regarding marginable OTC stock requirements, please contact Eugene Coy at (214) 922-6201. For additional copies of this Bank’s notice and the complete lists, please contact the Public Affairs Department at (214) 922-5254. Sincerely yours, For additional copies, bankers and others are encouraged to use one of the following toll-free numbers in contacting the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas: Dallas Office (800) 333 -4460; El Paso Branch In trasta te (800) 592-1631, Intersta te (800) 351-1012; Houston B ra n ch In tra sta te (800) 392-4162, Intersta te (800) 221-0363; San Antonio Branch In tra sta te (800) 292-5810.
    [Show full text]
  • Vanport Society
    DONOR HONOR ROLL 2014-2015 | Recognizes gifts received between July 1, 2014 through June 30, 2015. Earle Chiles William Michael Foster Family Phil Bogue VANPORT Sue Cooley Friends from Indonesia Duncan and Cindy Campbell Jeannine Cowles Gerding Edlen Development Norm and Rickie Daniels SOCIETY Michael DeShane ◊ and Keren Brown Wilson ◊ John and Betty Gray Geography Fund of the Laura and Doug Eyer Mark and Ann Edlen Oregon Community Foundation Les and Nancy Fahey Diana Gerding Conrad N. Hilton Foundation Tom and Marilyn Fink The Vanport Society recognizes Terry Harrington Howard Hughes Medical Institute Bill and Jane Furman donors whose lifetime giving to Al and Nancy Jubitz Intel Corporation/Intel Foundation Jack and Deane Garrison Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Portland State University is Irving Levin and Stephanie Fowler Bob Gleason ◊ • W.M. Keck Foundation $100,000 or more. With deep Lawrence Levy and Pamela Lindholm- Levy Dan and Karen Halloran W. K. Kellogg Foundation gratitude, we honor all members Jack and Lynn Loacker Debra C. Harris ◊ The Lemelson Foundation of the Vanport Society. Lorry Lokey Art and Sandy James Bob and Sharon Miller LTX-Credence Phil and Penny Knight Rick and Erika Miller Maybelle Clark Macdonald Fund Davis and Judy Moriuchi Gordon and Betty Moore Mentor Graphics Corporation/Mentor Graphics Bob Rawson Foundation FREMONT MEMBERS Robert and Jane Morrow Julie and William Reiersgaard Meyer Memorial Trust $10 MILLION AND ABOVE Martha and John O’Malley Dick Solomon and Alyce Flitcraft M. J. Murdock Charitable Trust Jim and Shirley Rippey Spike Wadsworth and Sherry Sheng INDIVIDUALS Oracle America, Inc. John Salmon and Marcia Schulmerich Fariborz and Azam Maseeh The Oregon Community Foundation CORPORATIONS, FOUNDATIONS, Allen Ray Sandstrom ORGANIZATIONS The Pew Charitable Trusts CORPORATIONS, FOUNDATIONS, Arlene Schnitzer Anonymous ORGANIZATIONS Portland General Electric Company/PGE Jordan Schnitzer Foundation The Autzen Foundation Massiah Foundation, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Sequent Computer Systems, Inc
    FacetWin Manufacturing / Computers Sequent Computer Systems, Inc. Challenge: Solution: Sequent’s corporate distributed sys- Sequent Computer Systems imple- tems computing environment con- mented a 2,000+ user license of Facet- sists of NUMA-Q & Symmetry Win at their data-center. Sequent se- UNIX systems as well as NT servers lected FacetWin because of its ease of with thousands of Windows PCs. As administration and FacetCorp’s out- one might imagine, this immense standing technical support. data center requires a significant “FacetCorp’s technical support is what amount of resources to administer. convinced us that they were our best SUMMARY Saving the UNIX System Adminis- choice for Windows-to-UNIX connec- trator’s time was a priority. Chris tivity. They are an extremely compe- Corporate Profile: LaFournaise, IS Operations Manager tent group of support engineers.” com- Based in Beaverton, Oregon, Sequent mented LaFournaise. “We have used Computer Systems Inc. is a leading with Sequent, explained, “We vendor of Intel-based data center sys- wanted to avoid having to install several competing products in the tems. Sequent provides firms world- NFS on a thousand desktop devices.” past,” LaFournaise continued, “all of wide with the technology and exper- FacetWin provides connectivity to which were difficult to install and con- tise to maximize the business benefits figure properly.” Sequent’s choice of complex open systems projects. the UNIX host by using CIFS, an easier to manage alternative to NFS. and successful deployment of this Dilemma: Sequent was impressed by the tech- product is proof that FacetWin is a Sequent needed an easy to implement nology that FacetWin used, but Se- fully scaleable solution.
    [Show full text]