2. Work which the manager would do himself only at the expense of
something more important.
Deputizing your work so that your days are free for golfing or yachting
is far from the spirit of true organization. When a Schwab deputizes,
another job profits by the increased time he is able to give to it.
Every time he passes on a bit more responsibility, the whole enterprise
profits through his greater freedom for the big sweep of the business.
And when a manager fails because he has never learned to share
responsibilities, we shudder at his folly--never stopping to think that
the sole reason it was folly was because there was a bigger job for him
to do. Deputizing his work would have left him free to exercise big,
broad judgment in a way that only leisure and calmness could afford.
* * * * *
A few years ago, two young men went into business in a small Illinois
town. They were honest, industrious, well liked. Austin was a born
salesman; Black was a shrewd buyer. It looked like a good combination
and the local banker gave them a line of credit.
One year went by. Two years. Austin and Black were just skinning by. A
fair living was all they were getting out of the business. Volume--which
was what they needed--was increasing, oh, so slowly.
A salesman came along about that time and told them some things they
didn't know. A little more skill in watching the stock; cutting out
lines which weren't paying; trimming purchases on slow-moving stocks;
pushing specialties before they went bad on their hands--those were some
of the methods which meant added profits.
It certainly looked like good business to hire another clerk so that the
partners' time would be free for these new phases of the business.
The clerk was taken on--and things began to hum. Soon Austin and Black
saw other steps they ought to take. More attention must be given to
advertising. That meant another clerk. Next came a bookkeeper, an
assistant bookkeeper.
Trade was increasing, you see, and net profits were increasing. Extra
clerks were needed all right, but the proprietors went the whole hog and
put on so many that they themselves no longer had to stand behind a
counter. They were both badly bitten by the bug of supervision.
Finally the tide turned. It usually does.
And when Austin and Black went to the bank one day to get an extension
of credit, the shrewd old retired farmer on the other side of the desk
laid down the law.
They got the extension--but only on certain conditions.
The chief condition was that they do LESS MANAGING and MORE
MERCHANDISING.
[Illustration]
And that's what they are doing today.
There were two managers who organized their work, increased their
profits. Up to a certain point, every time they deputized their work,
it was an advantage, because it left them more time for better
merchandising.
But they weren't ORGANIZING according to our TWO FUNDAMENTALS.
Literally, they were _deputizing all the work that others could do_--and
not confining the work deputized to _work they themselves could do only
at the expense of something more important_.
How well the chart tells the story! The great big white piece of pie
marked "IDLE" shows exactly where Austin and Black went wrong. The worst
thing that ever happened to them was the day they went home from Chicago
and tried to run their business the way they thought Mr. James W.
Simpson runs his large retail emporium.
Somewhere along the line they tripped over the point of vanishing
returns and kept right on going.
And thus we come to the Scylla and Charybdis of our job of ORGANIZING.
Remember we are not interested in the mere knack of getting someone else
to take over every last responsibility that can be borne by another.
Perhaps that may be good management for a Schwab--in so far, at least,
as it leaves his mind free for the exercise of the broad judgment we
mentioned a while ago. Nor are we interested in the sheer industry and
application involved in doing without assistance everything that can
possibly be so done, although doing it may be equally good management
for, say, a file clerk. Rather is our interest in the KNACK OF SENSING
THE DIVIDING LINE between WORK to PERFORM and WORK to DEPUTIZE. It is
that ability which is the mark of the successful manager.
* * * * *
Where is this DIVIDING LINE? How shall we know where to DEPUTIZE and
when to PERFORM? What kind of work shall we turn over to subordinates?
What shall we reserve for ourselves?
Again, whatever the job or business we are engaged in organizing, there
are simple rules to follow.
But first an illustration which will help to make the point.
Consider the credit man for a large concern which sold machines on a
monthly payment plan.
He was always in a jam with the sales department. It took too long,
complained the sales manager, to get credit rulings. It was no fun to
put a whole lot of work into selling the customer, only to have the
order turned down by the house because of poor credit. Why couldn't the
credit man give them a ruling before they attempted to close a sale?
Sometimes it took so long to get an O.K. that the prospect got all cold
and went somewhere else.
The treasurer of the company was drawn into the picture when the sales
manager openly declared he'd "get" the credit man.
And it certainly looked as if the sales manager had a good case.
"But," protested the credit man, "I've made mighty few mistakes. As for
delays--well, I don't know how I could work any harder."
"Maybe you work too hard," the treasurer ventured.
"Hm, if I didn't do what I do, I don't know who would."
"Hold on, now, let's get this thing straight. You're valuable to the
company because of your long experience and good judgment on credits.
When you have all the dope on a man, I'll bet my last dollar on your
decision. The only mistakes you ever make are when you hurry your
decisions.
"But--and here's the point--you aren't any better at digging out the
facts than either of your two assistants. Yet here's what you do. You
divide salesmen's requests for credit rulings into two groups. You take
those that run over $500; your assistants get the others. Each of you
does his own investigating and digging--and except in puzzling cases,
you practically let your two men make their own decisions.
Myself Assistants
$500 Up Under $500
Mercantile Reports
Bank References
Special Investigations
"Briefing" Data
Final Ruling
Correspondence
$500 Up Under $500
{ Mercantile Reports
Assistants { Bank References
{ Special Investigations
{ "Briefing" Data
Myself { Final Ruling
{ Correspondence
"Why, listen. You, the best man we have on _decisions_, spend more than
half your time _digging_, while your assistants spend much of their
time making decisions. What's the result? Delay, the department in a
jam, some decisions made in a hurry, some by your assistants.
"The trouble with you is, you haven't organized your department right."
And the treasurer sketched the diagram reproduced in the upper chart on
page 105.
"Why, man, your job is to keep _all_ bad credits off the books--not just
the big ones. A bad risk--whether it's $5 or $5000--is a mistake. You're
an expert credit man--but as a MANAGER, you're a WASHOUT.
"This," he added, "is the way you ought to set up your department. Then
you, the best man on decisions, will do all the deciding. Your two
assistants, who are just as good as you are at digging, will spend all
their time getting you the facts." And as he spoke he sketched in the
lower chart.
The credit man had erred in the other direction from the two retail
merchants. He wasn't doing _enough_ managing. He was keeping too much
work for himself. And he was _deputizing the wrong kind of work_.
The merchants were deputizing work they should have done themselves--the
general supervision of stocks, advertising and sales did not require
their undivided attention--and the volume and profits of the business
wouldn't stand so much unproductive expense.
Our credit man, on the other hand, was doing work which others could
very well do for him--the time he spent on such work should have been
devoted to other and more important responsibilities.
In the story of the credit man, however, another fundamental of good
organization comes to light. Remember how the treasurer classified the
character of the work to be done? Not only was the credit man trying to
do too much work, but even when he _did_ assign work to his assistants,
he assigned the wrong kind. He deputized, true enough--but he erred in
regard to the KIND OF WORK HE DEPUTIZED. He thought he could deputize
small credits. It didn't take the treasurer long to show him that the
amount made no difference--it was the character of the work that
required consideration.
Plenty of managers make that same mistake. They judge the importance of
the task by its physical bigness--or by the amount of money
involved--instead of deciding according to the character of the work.
Before work can be safely deputized, then, it must be MORE INTELLIGENTLY
CLASSIFIED. And the key to better classification is found by dividing
the job or business into two elements.
One is ENTERPRISE. The other is ROUTINE.
_Enterprise_ is an arbitrary term which we shall choose to indicate
those factors of work which involve the use of judgment, initiative,
experiment or speculation.
_Routine_ we shall apply to those factors which follow settled
precedents or rules or come within the range of known ability to
perform.
Analyze your own job with these two terms in mind. The various duties
you perform will fall readily into one or the other of the two
classifications.
The things which come under the head of routine you have a right to
deputize if, when you chart both classifications--in as accurate a
proportion as possible to the capacities of the "principal" and the
"deputies"--you find you are not overloading the business with
unproductive management. A simple rule of thumb works here about as well
as anything: Base the division of work on how much or how little of the
routine the _principal_ can afford to carry.
* * * * *
You may safely deputize only so long as, by so doing, you leave yourself
free for the more important, more profitable decisions.
Don't forget for a moment, then--if you would organize
effectively--that there is a tremendous difference between enterprise
and routine work. Don't waste energy on the one. DON'T DEPUTIZE THE
OTHER--unless you can effectively organize a deputy's capacity for doing
it, and then only if it pays.
Don't be like the manager who got a taste of the savings to be made
through the application of mechanical handling equipment. He bought
conveyors--and more conveyors. He was DEPUTIZING the handling job to
machines. So far, so good. But the first thing you know he had a 50-ft.
conveyor connecting two points in his shipping room. It took one man to
load it, another to unload it. Previously one man with a hand truck had
moved the packages very nicely, and had a lot of time left over for
other duties. And here he needed an extra man--and owned a costly piece
of equipment to boot. Under such circumstances the conveyor became very
expensive scenery--not nearly so nice to look at as Yellowstone Park or
the Riviera--and the money invested in it would have bought a trip to
either.
Thus all savings through deputization don't pay. Many a machine will
save time and labor, but the interest on the investment, and upkeep and
the depreciation will more than eat up the saving--UNLESS THE TIME AND
LABOR SAVED CAN BE PROFITABLY TURNED TO SOMETHING ELSE.
* * * * *
No attempted exposition of the KNACK OF ORGANIZING can be complete
without something more than passing mention of a phase which may be all
too easily slid over or completed.
When work is deputized, the responsibility of the manager does not end
with the act of deputization. It is the manager's responsibility to see
that the work is done in the simplest and most effective manner.
A sales executive had allowed a bunch of call reports to accumulate.
There were several hundred of them. So he called in a stenographer whose
time was hanging fairly heavily on her hands, and asked her to put them
into alphabetical order preparatory to filing.
Fifteen minutes later he happened by and was startled to see that she
had covered two desks with the call reports and seemed to be making
haste very slowly indeed.
She had made a pile for every last letter in the alphabet. And every
time she picked up a report, she had to hunt for the proper pile to put
it in.
So he showed her how to sort first in five major piles--A, B, C, D in
one pile and so on. And then to sort each pile again into five piles,
one for each letter--and finally to sort each individual pile
alphabetically.
It sounded like more handling. And perhaps it was. But the job of
classification was greatly simplified. There was no more hunting for
the missing pile. The work proceeded quickly and accurately.
A rough illustration. He might have gone a step further and deputized
part of the girl's task to a machine instead of to the primitive system
described. That is to say, he might have seen that she was provided with
one of the preliminary filing baskets which file clerks often use. Then
the task of sorting alphabetically could have been done in a single
handling of each report.
But whatever the method he made available for the girl's use, the
illustration still serves to indicate that the manager's responsibility
does not end when he turns a job over to a subordinate. It remains his
care to see that the job is done by the most effective method--not
necessarily the speediest, but the one which gets the best results for
the effort involved.
To find this "one best" method, industry has evolved a complete
technique of time and motion study. And merely to hint at what may be
accomplished by breaking down an operation into its elementary
operations and observing the time required to perform them, becomes part
of our task in setting down the ways and means of organizing.
First we shall find that any job, simple or complex, may be divided into
three parts: make ready, do and put away.
Shaving, for example. First we get everything ready--razor, brush,
shaving cream, hot water. Then comes the actual operation of shaving.
And last, cleaning up--rinsing the brush, wiping the razor, and putting
things back where they belong.
Perhaps you're in the same boat as the old farmer who, approached by the
subscription salesman of an agricultural magazine, allowed he wa'nt
farmin' now half as good as he knew how.
Or perhaps you already hold speed records at giving your face the
once-over. But, you see, the whole point in studying the job is not
aimed at faster shaving, but at simplifying the "make ready" and "put
away" phases of the operation.
For example, the next time you shave, try picking up the tube of shaving
cream with one hand and unscrewing the cap while you're wetting your
brush with the other. It will be awkward as the dickens the first time
you try it. But try it again and again and again. It won't be long
before you'll be an expert at doing the job that way. Finish up that
part of the operation by screwing the cap back on while you are
lathering your face with the right hand. Does it require a stop watch to
point out the saving in time that you've made? Oh, it won't be easy the
first few times, but before you know it, you'll have taught yourself
good work habits.
Take a simple job like the assembly of a license bracket in an
automobile factory. An analysis of this operation (see "Micromotion
Technique," by F. J. Van Poppelen, _Factory and Industrial Management_,
Nov., 1930) showed that the right hand was busy all the time, while the
left did nothing most of the time except hold the piece.
At the risk of getting too technical--for after all we are interested,
not so much in the details, as in certain broad principles of organizing
the work--let us see how the operation was performed.
First the operator assembled a number of screws and leather washers by
picking up a screw with the left hand, a washer with the right, putting
them together and laying the assembly aside. Then he picked up a bracket
with the left hand and a screw and washer assembly with the right,
placing the screw through a slot in the bracket--continuing to hold
assembled pieces in his left hand while the right was picking up a flat
washer and assembling it to the screw; picking up lock washer,
assembling it to the screw; picking up acorn nut and starting it on the
screw; and finally picking up an open-end wrench and tightening the nut.
Then he assembled screw, washers and nut to the other side of the
bracket, whereupon wrench and bracket were laid aside, completing the
cycle.
An analysis of these motions, by right and left hands, is given in the
table on page 120. It illustrates the important point that the right
hand was busy all the time, but for a considerable part of the time the
left was doing nothing but holding the piece.
On pages 118 and 119 are shown drawings of the old and the new assembly
methods. Likewise, the lower table on page 120 analyzes, by right and
left hands, the motions required by the new method. Note first that
fewer elements--17 as against 26--are required. And note that both hands
are productively employed with shorter distances to travel for stock and
with decreased effort.
[Illustration:
Analysis of this assembly job shows ...
... that the right hand was busy all the time....]
[Illustration: