Of the many elements on which industrial development depends, the
question of specialization looms large.
Under the general term "specialization" we include all plans and
methods of work by which the scope of activity of man is
concentrated.
The highest degree of skill of artist or worker is attained by
concentration of energies to a restricted range of work. It is
through practice that the skill is acquired. The highest skill and
highest ability is attained by the degree of interested attention
and number of repetitions of a given kind of work.
Other things being equal, the practice, combined with keenness of
interest, makes the most successful man in a given profession or
work.
Repetition of operation becomes an automatic (habit) action in
which man accomplishes the most work for a given expenditure of
energy.
These two results--proficiency and easy performance--are of
greatest value, but repetition of action, like nearly all good
things, is not without its drawbacks. An overdose of one kind of
work with a limited range of action frequently leads to dulling
the senses. This stultifying effect produces a most undesirable
result. The harm begins when there is a loss of interest in the
work, for it is through the interest that the progress is made.
The dividing line between the good and bad results varies with
different types of men.
The simplest tasks may become of intense interest to the scientist
and he may achieve great success in a work that to others seems
monotonous drudgery. But with all its drawbacks it still is the
best way for man to work and while we must labor to eliminate the
condition of drudgery, we must face the plain fact that
competition between men, industries, states and nations makes it
absolutely necessary to specialize.
Specialization by the men and groups of men will determine the
question of superiority of advance in science, industry, commerce,
general wealth and welfare, as well as military strength in the
time of war.
While we have clearly before us the degrading effects of
repetition of distasteful tasks; we must not ignore the other
extreme.
The opposite condition is the employment of energies of mind and
body in ways that cannot produce high degree of ability. With such
desultory use of energies, a day's work is of relatively small
value, and there is no progress.
Of the two extremes we find the most prevalent to be the
scatter-brain and scatter ability type.
The industries of the higher type lead in providing the best
implements and in organization of best team work by which each
worker produces the greatest value for a given expenditure of
energy.
The essential bearing Of these facts is that the worker as well as
the business man should compare his work with the work of others
with whom he is in competition.
In these days of long distance transportation our competitors in
the market may be a long distance away.
If it is in agriculture, the question of climate, soil and degree
to which highly efficient implements can be used, are important
factors.
If it is in the professions we must see how we can acquire the
greatest proficiency and opportunity. This again involves the
question of the extent to which we must specialize.
The measure then of success is the value of our services as
compared with the services of others.
One of the important problems in industrial management is the
extent to which specialization should be practiced.
On one hand we see the ill effects of a routine repetition where
there has been an overdose of repetition--one that has gone beyond
the beneficial point--and on the other hand, we find that the
greatest achievements in the sciences and professions have been
wrought by those who have concentrated in a way that has given
them a higher development. Unfortunately in many of the
industries, the development of machinery has gone forward with the
sole end in view of dollars and cents, disregarding the effect on
the worker.
This is to be found in some of the industries in which originally
there was an opportunity for the worker to have a keen interest in
his work. Mention is made of this situation as it comes about with
certain stages of development of the manufacturing processes. It
is unfortunate and something that the engineers and managers
should endeavor to eliminate.
We have very few of such industries in Vermont; they can broadly
be classed as undesirable industries. The fact that there are such
industries should not in itself drive us from the scheme of
working by which men specialize. We should, however, see to it
that the degree of repetition of operation goes only to the
beneficial extent. Our greatest trouble in Vermont has been the
wasteful scattering of each man's energies over a variety of
tasks.
Competition with the outer world makes it absolutely necessary
that we use our energies in the most effective manner; that most
effective manner is the one by which through repetition and
experience we acquire skill and ability. The important matter to
decide is the degree to which we can specialize. This degree
varies with the work and the individual. To an alert and active
mentality routine work becomes drudgery, while to the opposite
type, mental work is annoying. In an industry, men gradually fit
in with the most suitable work. Each man's job should be one that
is best for him.
Nothing has been said thus far regarding the invention of new
forms of articles to manufacture, or of new methods of machinery
for manufacturing articles. These elements and many others are
necessary in order to complete a successful plant, but the
fundamentals embraced in a statement regarding the habit-action of
man represented by special ability and skill acquired by
experience, and the habit-action of the group acquired in the same
way, constitutes a measure in determining the way at ninety per
cent of the cross roads in industrial progress. Anyone undertaking
the creation of a new organization or the management of a going
concern must grasp these facts.
The value of experience, if acquired in an industry where such
fundamental principles have been recognized, should be given the
highest rating. Experience, however, in an industry where the
energies of men were not most effectively employed and where there
was not a recognition that the effective employment of man's
energies require a general development of mind and body up to the
man's capacity, cannot be counted as wholly good unless, through
force of purpose, there is the strength to adopt a new path.
[Footnote]INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT.
[Footnote text: A revision of material originally under title of
Human Factor in Works Management by James Hartness, published by
McGraw-Hill Publishing Co., New York.]
The navigator in preparing for a voyage carefully examines each of
his instruments. He must know the present error of his chronometer
and its rate of change, and its general reliability as indicated
by its past record. He must also know errors in his compasses for
each point, and he should have the fullest information regarding
the degree of reliability of every other means on which his
success depends; and, last but not least, he must accurately
determine his starting-point or point of departure.
In taking up the subject before us we will do well to follow his
example.
In doing so, our task will be to examine two principal elements:
one, the means on which we depend for interpreting the information
that is available; and the other, the source and character of the
information.
The means may be considered analogous to the navigator's
instruments, and is no less a thing than the brain or mental
machinery; and the information is simply the world about us as
seen in the existing things, such as machinery, methods, popular
notions, textbooks, etc., all of which may be classed as
environments, and may be considered as analogous to the charts and
other publications of our worthy example.
Like the mariner, we must determine the degree of reliability of
all these sources of information and our means for interpreting
observed facts.
When we have ascertained this we will know what allowance to make
from the "observed" to get the actual facts. With this knowledge
we will be able to accurately determine both our starting-point
and best course.
The importance of considering our own minds will be seen when we
realize that every new fact taken in must in a measure conform to
the previous ideas. If some of these old ideas are erroneous, the
mind must be more or less ready to discard them. It is very
difficult to dislodge deep-seated convictions. Contradictory ideas
are not assimilated. Only one of them is actually accepted. Even
when to the objective reasoning they seem false, they frequently
continue to control our actions.
Since we are loaded with the popular ideas which we have absorbed
from our environment, it will be well for us to begin by
critically examining our environment and the process by which
ideas have been taken in. This may enable us to put out some of
the erroneous views, and perhaps more firmly fix the true ideas;
thereby preparing the mind for a more ready acceptance of what
otherwise would be barred out as contradictory.
We shall not go deeply into the psychology of the subject, as it
will not be necessary to go contrary to or beyond the well-known
facts.
We shall not try to locate the man or refer to him as the ego or
inner man. We shall simply say that we know that we can use our
brains to think on any subject, and we can use our senses to
collect information regarding any chosen subject.
Our senses and mental faculties can be directed to consider one
element in a business, and for the moment be unmindful of the many
other elements. In other words, we can to a certain extent manage
our mental processes. Just as a horse can be managed, so may we
manage our brains. A driver may carefully control the expenditure
of energy and the course traveled, or he may throw the reins over
the dash and allow the horse to go his own gait and route. In the
same way we may manage or mismanage our brains.
Good Results with Moderate Effort.
A faster pace will not be advocated, for the present gait is
overstrenuous. We hope, however, to point out a way by which good
results may be obtained with, moderate effort.
If, in the past, the brain has been found wanting, we should not
lose confidence in its reliability until we have seen how it has
been managed.
Under some conditions its interpretations are absolutely correct;
in fact, under all conditions that would be called fair in testing
other kinds of mechanism.
Unfortunately, these conditions have not always existed. Opinions
regarding important matters have been formed when accurate
mentation has been impossible.
Physical Condition of Worker.
If the use of the machine induces either an adverse mental
attitude or physical condition of the worker, it will sooner or
later be adverse to the economic success of the machine.
We have indicated some of the problems and have suggested the
well-known method of mental control for this purpose. A keen
observer of men and machinery may not require as much of the
so-called practical experience; another may need many years of
actual work.
The practical experience in the various departments of machine
construction, its sale and its use, is undoubtedly almost
absolutely necessary for the average man in this work.
Its value is primarily to give an opportunity to see things in
actual operation. The shop affords an opportunity to see how a
machine stands up to its work, where it is weak, and a thousand
and one points that can best be seen in actual operation. But
there is still another phase that is comprehended more readily by
the practical experience, and this applies to the various
departments of business as well as to the works. It is the
knowledge of the men and their mental make-up and attitude.
A keen observer soon realizes that successful life in the
machinery world will not come easily to any one who lacks a good
understanding of others in the field.
Capacity for New Ideas.
The assimilating capacity of the industrial world is the real
gauge of the progress which should be indulged in. This capacity
to take in new ideas and to work by new methods is not the same in
all beings, and it is not the same in all organizations. There are
ways by which it may be measurably increased. New views are more
readily digestible if presented by enthusiastic advocates, as this
stimulates an interest. Any attempt to forcibly inject new ideas
only results in indigestion.
The assimilating capacity of an industrial organization can be
greatly increased by any scheme that awakens an interest. The
controlling policies should include advance in efficiency and
generally in the quality of work turned out, but this advance
should not involve a break in the output. It mould be based on a
knowledge of the whole business. In other words, it should not
only pay in the long run, but if possible it should pay from the
moment it goes into effect.
We have said that all changes should be of the digestible kind,
and the feeding process should not be a stuffing process; that the
ingestion should not exceed the digestion. We have also briefly
mentioned the importance of keeping the digestion tuned up to the
best speed by having the organization in a condition to most
readily take in changes.
That we must make some allowance for inertia of thought and habit
in all mortals goes without saying, but the exact amount to be
allowed is very difficult to estimate.
Successful management depends on the degree with which a man can
estimate the receptivity of other beings with whom he deals. This
knowledge of receptivity should include the thought and action of
men all the way from the unskilled worker to the directors, and
also that of all men in other organizations in any way affected by
his organization.
Just as food is more digestible if agreeable to the palate, so
this receptivity or assimilating power may be increased by
presenting new ideas and methods in agreeable form. A full
realization of the effect of this inertia of thought and habit
makes the great efficiency of specialization more comprehensible.
It is this human side that is the key, and if we do not act in
full accord with it we will probably be working against a great
handicap.
The inertia works two ways. It hurts a progressive man just as
much to be tied to a work that requires no brainwork as it hurts a
sleepy member to be disturbed by progressive talk.
Money not the Only Dividend.
The major policies of management that should be known to the
inventor are those which have been adopted to make the business
pay. Not necessarily to pay in dollars and cents today, but to pay
in every sense, and in the long run, in dollars and in other
things.
It cannot pay in dollars if the other things are missing. By other
things are meant good organization built on best conditions of
mind and body for each of the beings included in the organization.
On such things the stability of the organization depends.
No matter how much the manager of a business may wish to run it
for other things exclusively, or for dollars exclusively, he will
find that one is not attained without the other. He is forced to
run a business for the dollar if he wishes to make an ideal
organization for each member of the human family included in it.
And vice versa, he must work toward best conditions for all the
workers if he wishes to protect the capital invested by making a
stable and fairly long-lived organization.
This statement is inserted here to clear away doubts as to the
real value or necessity of "making a business pay," and to make it
clear that no thought is to be tolerated of any scheme of
management adverse to the real interest of the workers.
The men selected for each of the various positions should be men
who are fitted to fill these very positions. This does not mean
mere physical and mental fitness; it means each position should be
filled by one who wants it, one who knows he is "better off" in it
than in any other place he can find. Dissatisfied men are burdens.
It is better to have each position filled by a man who is barely
competent to fill it than to have it filled by a man who should
have a much better position.
Of course, this is the ideal, and all moves should be made in this
direction whenever it is possible. As a rule, it is easier to find
men on this basis than to find men who are bigger than the office.
This scheme leads to more promotions in the organization and has a
stimulating effect on all concerned.
Right Placing of Men.
The management's chief business should be to take man as he is
found on earth and place each one where he will accomplish the
best results for both the organization and himself.
Barring the disgruntled, the uncongenial and the habitually
inattentive, almost all men may be and should be profitably
employed, the prime requisite being reasonably close attention to
business. The thoughts must not habitually wander away from the
work.
Intrigue disappears when the management quits looking for it, and
assures everybody, by the general method of conducting the
business, that there will be no chance to oust this or that man.
That each man will be retained in his place if he will but give
reasonable application to the general interest of the organization
and the particular work of his office.
The management does not "manage" if it perpetually changes its
men. It should bolster up the man who lacks self-confidence; it
should puncture false ambitions, and it should use men as they are
found in the organization. It should not be inclined to "go back
on" a man who has blundered or who has been found lacking in
understanding.
It should not be over-ready to embrace a stranger just because his
faults are not known.
The financial hazard of a business enterprise is greatly minimized
by using men as they are found, and properly placing them at work
or in offices for which they are qualified.
Unimportant Details.
We can neither regulate the complexity of our environment nor the
number of problems which we must settle within a given time.
But we can improve the conditions very much by avoiding
overconcentration on unimportant details. The brain's best time
and energy should be reserved for our own immediate problems; it
should not be hampered by details of others.
The various officers of an industrial organization should know the
ins and outs of the thinking machine on which they depend for
guidance. With such knowledge each brain will give the greatest
results, and without such knowledge the best brain may be
untrustworthy.
One of the important characteristics of the mind is its tendency
to lose sight of everything except the subject in mind. One danger
is dodged by jumping into another which we have not seen. Both
dangers were plainly in sight to any one who had not concentrated
on one of them.
In the regular every-day business life, we seem to have ample time
to consider each problem. But in reality our great length of time
is offset by a great number of elements to consider, and a more
profound effect of long continued teaching or molding of our
environment.
For years engineers have concentrated energies on the steam-engine
of the reciprocating type. The master-minds have made important
improvements in the design, and many have given up their entire
existence to the science of analyzing the effects of each
variation in conditions of working the steam.
Our textbooks, our teaching, our observation all concentrated our
attention on this type.
For some reason Gustav deLaval, followed by C.A. Parsons and
Nikola Tesla, broke away from this spell, and we have the steam
turbine engine. These individuals are endowed with master-minds,
but the task of producing the turbines was probably no greater
than the task of others in improving the reciprocating type.
In one case a great step has been taken. In the other, we have an
example of men of undoubted ability laboring hard for entire
lifetimes with relatively small gain.
This example applies to more than the inventors' world. It has
many parallels in the cold business management of a manufactory
and in any one of its departments. Business management requires
the same kind of reasoning and getting away from the spell of
environment. But this phase we shall consider later under another
head.
The point to be brought out here is the effect of the spell of
environment in magnifying the importance of existing views and
methods, and the deceptive part this trusty brain plays in binding
us to unnecessarily hard work.
Cure for Mind Wandering.
The mind should not be allowed to wander, for wander it will if it
is not rationally directed. It should be furnished with some
interest, either in the form of study that is taken up out of
working hours, and which can be permitted to occupy the mind while
work of the habit kind is being done, or, if it is not a study,
there should be some wholesome interest or pleasure.
Music to some furnishes this need. Music heard in the home or
elsewhere will sometimes occupy the mind during working hours when
the work is of a monotonous character. In some instances music has
been provided during a certain part of the day, just for this need
of workers who are employed in an occupation that in itself
furnishes no mental nourishment.
But these extreme cases do not represent the vast majority. They
apply only to the needs of the mind of those engaged in a work in
which they can awaken no interest. Nearly all kinds of work offer
a chance for the average man to get interested directly in the
work itself. Such an interest soon bears fruit in the results as
well as in the comfort of the worker, and it is this phase on
which we must depend for making specialization comfortable and
profitable to the worker. It is this phase that is wholly
overlooked by those mentioned above who have seen or felt the joy
of work that comes to one who rambles into a new field. We fail to
see that the same kind of mental pleasure may be obtained while
working along the natural and efficient lines of habit, and that
in one case we have had pleasure at great expense of wasted
energy, and in the other case we may have made a true progress for
ourselves and others by moving along the rational way.
The Manager's View.
The important duty of weighing up these various views devolves on
the management, and its action should be in accordance with the
complete and corrected view. It must consider the subject from a
top viewpoint, and must then act.
The manager keeps in mind that the machines must be built,
purchased, and used by human beings, so he carefully studies their
peculiarities. He knows that change of thought or habit requires
time.
In looking over the history of one of the companies engaged in
machine building, we find that the cost of the labor has been
lowered to about one-fifth of the original. In view of this and
the fact that a very slight change in model sometimes involves a
temporary increase in the cost of labor three-fold or more, we see
good reason for reluctance in making changes, even though we know
that two or three years later the labor cost may drop as low as
that previous to the change in model.
The inventor, the promoter, the salesman, and the oversanguine
manager do not always foresee such things.
The manager sees the enthusiasm with which the selling
organization hails the new model. He realizes that they know the
faults of the previous type, and he also knows that no one knows
the faults of the new, but he lets it go. Some enthusiasm must be
had, even if it be dearly purchased. He knows there will be many a
troublesome delay due to the newness, even if the whole scheme
proves very much better than the previous type.
This manager knows that his business success rests on the facility
with which the machines are satisfactorily built, the readiness of
the buyers, and, last but not least, the facility with which the
product is used. The facility with which the product will be used,
to his mind, is almost beyond overestimation.
Sub-division of Work.
The division of work into separate operations makes it possible to
divide the subject into relatively small sub-problems. This
division of the subject itself brings it within the capacity of
the lesser brains and makes it very much easier for a brain of
greater power. In other words, the subdivision of work makes
places in which all mental equipments may be used.
It is of no benefit to any one to keep the problems difficult by
making each man think out a process for accomplishing each one of
a great variety of operations, when the work may be so divided
that it is only necessary for him to think of just one little part
of the whole. And we should not befog the issue by saying that
this is degrading.
Some of the greatest scientists that the world has known have
concentrated attention to the smallest conceivable part of this
world, pieces so small that the microscope alone revealed them to
the eye. There is a chance for the thinker in most any of these
places that have grown out of this process of finest subdivision
of work. The hardship comes only when the mind cannot get
interested in the work. In many cases this is undoubtedly due to a
misfit, but in most cases it seems to be due to a false notion
that there is nothing there of interest.
The subdivision of work must go on. If hindered in any one plant,
industry or nation more than in others, the result will be a loss
to that one, and on the other hand, the one that carries it to the
most efficient point will become the most powerful.
This subdivision develops greatest dexterity and skill, as well as
the keenest comprehension of the ways and means of attaining a
given end. And this dexterity of operation is more easily carried
on than is the fumbling uncertainty of the work of the more
primitive type.
Care in Applying New Theories.
The manual worker's energies are so absorbed in the physical tasks
that he is annoyed by any suggestion to change his method. If he
were given the position at a desk he would probably be interested
in the progressive schemes for betterment of methods of work or
management of business.
Bearing this state of affairs in mind, it behooves the progressive
man to approach the problem of applying his theories in a very
careful manner. He must realize that the men in various parts of
the work are under stress of every day's requirements that makes
it very difficult to intelligently take up any new scheme of
procedure. Many an ideal doctrine is a beautiful thing in theory
but of little value if its introduction requires an immense but
unavailable energy to put it into practise.
He must realize that it is the doing of work that counts and that
the men who are doing things must not be annoyed. All plans for
betterment must conform to the assimilating power of the men and
must not cut off their food in time of change. In other words, the
new plans should be so matched on to the old methods that the
change to the new will not interrupt the production.
We have seen that the most efficient way to use man's energies is
to allow him to follow habit lines of thought and action, and that
the highest efficiency is reached when these habits are habits of
concentration of attention and are restricted to the smallest
variety of work.
Progressive Energy.
Progressive energy is so valuable that it needs no praise at this
time. We have had its value stated so often that it is actually
over-rated in the average mind. Not that it has been over-valued,
but that the reiteration has obscured the importance of other
qualities. There should be a greater appreciation of the value of
energies that are wholly employed in accomplishing results by old
means and methods.
Progressive energy, when it is kept within certain bounds, is a
prime asset of an industrial organization. It is like a wholesome
amount of labor to man; it may be drawn upon without loss, and its
use actually strengthens its source. But when it is not wisely
kept in control it only annoys and interferes with real progress
and real accomplishment of results.
The only way to get work done is to let the worker move along
habit lines. The only way to progress efficiently is to make the
new ways and means lead off gradually from those in use.
The progressive man who actually directs work along such lines is
the most valuable to the world. The one who ignores the "moment of
inertia" is a disturber, whether he is a director or a "hewer of
wood and carrier of water".
The man who is doing the real work in the world is not the
so-called progressive. He is one who points out newer or better
methods which may be easily established by a gradual exchange of
old habits for new ones.
Profit by Experience.
In considering ways and means for efficient management of
industrial organizations, it is not necessary to commence at the
beginning of each plant. The method of dealing with the problems
of existing plants is also applicable to new organizations, for a
new organization is only new in a limited sense. It uses men of
experience. It uses existing machines and implements. It follows
existing methods of conducting business and in the general
management of its affairs.
Even the so-called new method which may be the center around which
the so-called new business is built contains very little that is
new. The newest things in the ordinary industrial world contain
many old and well-known elements. The very use of a so-called
new method or machine as a center around which to build an
organization is in itself so old that it is a confirmed habit with
us to be lured on to investing in such things by the statement
that some new process or means is to be employed.
A really new thing that calls for wholly new ways and new means
for manufacture is almost inconceivable. The nearer we approach to
newness in the industrial world the thinner becomes the ice on
which we are moving. Therefore, let us know that when we advise
following habit lines in all moves in management of an existing
organization we imply that the same course should be taken in
establishing a new company or organization.
In both cases we should employ existing ways and means,
experienced men and well-tried implements. Both old and new should
be conducted along the usual line in conformity with the state of
the art, the habits of the workers, and other conditions
indigenous to the locality. Any scheme of going contrary to the
existing customs and usage must be entered into with full
knowledge of the great need of patience, force and courage to
offset the barrier of inertia.
Dissipation of Energies.
This tendency to dissipate energies by wandering into other fields
is not confined to the worker; it is a most common tendency of
business men. A manager of an industrial establishment has to
continually combat his tendency to divert the energies of the
organization along new lines. He knows from past experience how
dearly bought is each new method that is introduced into his
organization. He knows for example that it would make all of his
men tardy at the plant in the morning if at the hour of arising he
has issued a request for each man to dress by carefully thinking
out each move. He knows that the day's work would never be well
done if he asked each one to think before acting.
Even conversation comes under the law of habit. It must follow the
line that has been carefully thought out.
We all know that when a man talks on subjects with which he is not
familiar his words carry little weight.
The so-called spontaneous utterances that seem so full of life and
are apparently the product of flashed thought are either the
welling up of some subconscious ideas quickly reconstructed to fit
the situation or they are a haphazard jumble either meaningless or
conveying an unintended impression. They are generally in the
humorous line and frequently make an impression that was not
anticipated by the utterer.
The really useful talk and work is the result of wholesome habit
of thought and action.
Tying up Capital in Stock in Process of Construction.
The amount of capital tied up in raw material supplies, stock in
process and finished product should not be greater than that which
is necessary to get the greatest output per dollar of investment.
In the machinery-building world there is no such thing as a steady
long-lived demand for any machine. Hence the proposition to build
a locomotive or printing-press by methods employed in watch or
sewing-machine manufacture is entirely ill-timed at least.
For this reason the stock in process must not necessarily be
considered insufficient if it appears to be on the hand-to-mouth
plan. The dividing line between excessive and insufficient stock
must be drawn in each individual case.
Raw material should be purchased in reasonable quantities with due
regard to the price which varies with quantities but there should
always be a regard for the amount of capital used for this
purpose. Any excess represents just that much extra capital
unnecessarily risked in the business.
There should be a constant supply of material throughout the
entire work. The stock in process should flow through the plant in
a rapid but thin stream. The quantity should be no greater than
absolutely necessary to insure a steady supply for all of the
workers, including the assembling and selling workers.
An excessive stock of this or that piece, or of all pieces, means
that much capital idle, and it also tends to slackness of
management. Frequently it is the outcome of carelessness.
A slip-shod management that disregards this point will use no care
in purchase of material or in putting in the shop orders. All that
is needed is to just hurry forward the stock that "happens" to be
"out", and at the same time allow the accumulation of the unneeded
stock to go on unchecked.
Immense storerooms for keeping finished stock are shown with
pride, unmindful of the fact that every dollar's worth of
unnecessary stock on the shelves in the stockroom, every dollar's
worth of unnecessary work in the plant, represents idle money and
faulty management.
If this money is to be retained in the business, the system should
be changed so that the money will be put where it will bring the
best return.
The excessive stock in process is sometimes an outcome of blind
progressiveness--the blindness that fails to see that there is as
much money tied up in stock in process and in finished product as
there is in the entire machinery equipment.
An adaptable equipment facilitates keeping down the amount tied up
in stock in process. The modern plant should take advantage of
these modern methods and machines which tend toward profitable use
of capital. Such machines are highly developed and true to the
controlling ideal of adaptability and largest output per dollar of
investment.
Cost of the Product.
The practice of disregarding the profit, when considering changes
in machine equipment, is the natural outgrowth of the separation
of the mechanical and the business departments.
The changes in the equipment are usually determined by the
mechanical department, and this is done with particular regard for
the quality of work and the cost per piece. The relation between
the profit and the net labor cost is not considered.
The cost of the product of the average machinery-building plant
may be divided into three nearly equal parts: the material, the
labor, and the burden; or, in four equal parts, if a reasonable
interest charge is made for the use of the capital invested.
The material is the iron, steel and other material that enters
into the construction of the machine, and it is taken in the
condition in which it usually comes to the machine shop.
The burden includes all expenses and salaries necessary for the
maintenance of the business.
About one-half the amount paid for labor goes to the men who run
the machine tools, and the other half is paid to workmen who do
the other work, such as handwork, assembling, transporting, etc.
Therefore, the cost of machining is either one-sixth or one-eighth
of the total cost.
On top of the net cost of the product there should be a profit. If
it is not there, the sooner something happens the better. If it is
there, then it is proportioned to the volume of the output.
Therefore, both the size of the output and the labor cost should
be kept in mind.
The size of the profit per unit of output is not generally known
to the mechanical departments. But even if it is not known, there
is no reason for their being uninformed as to the importance of
large output for cost of the plant.
Largest Profit Per Dollar Invested.
One of the most satisfactory policies of management is that which
tends toward getting the best return or profit per dollar of
investment.
We shall not refer to the quality of the product, the design, or
any other elements which affect the good name and standing of the
business, for it goes without saying that no business can be
maintained where these are disregarded. The point to be brought
out here is that, These thing being equal, the best scheme of
management for profit is one that puts the capital where it will
do the most good.
The above statement is one with which all will agree, but
strangely enough there has been a tendency to tie up capital in
ways that actually throttle the output of the entire business.
Furthermore, this is frequently done by increasing the portion of
the investment that is irrevocably tied to the existing product,
thus not only reducing the earning power of each dollar invested,
but also increasing the hazard by tying the capital to the present
product, which soon may be unsuited to the market demand.
One of the most common errors in this respect is the one that
regards the reduction of the labor cost as the paramount
consideration.
Reduction in labor cost has been the war-cry. The pay-roll has
been talked about so much that it has seemed to become the whole
thing. A man who declares that the labor cost per piece is not the
most important element is at once branded as an advocate of
old-fashioned methods.
It is needless to give assurance that there is no intention to
disregard the labor cost. The net cost per piece is a very
important element, but it should neither eclipse the question of
profit per dollar invested, nor the risk of the capital tied up.
What is the gain if the means for reduction of the net labor cost
reduces the profit more than the saving in labor? If doing so
results in an actual loss of profit, why is it done?
We can readily see that the overhopeful managers may disregard the
risk of the money invested, but we cannot see why the relative
importance, or rather unimportance, of the labor cost should be so
disregarded.
The machine tools in a plant usually determine its character. This
character is not one that can be quickly changed, but every
addition to the equipment does change it for better or worse.
Usually the installation of a new machine is hailed as a
progressive move, just because the new machine works better than
the old, but its effect may be very bad. It may be changing the
character of the plant adversely to the interests of all
concerned. Therefore, the controlling spirit should see to it that
each move is made on a basis that is economically sound.
It is in these changes that the scheme of management has a chance
to make a great difference in the earning power of the entire
business.
If too large a proportion of the total available capital is tied
up in the machine equipment, the business is handicapped. There is
a right amount which bears a certain relation to the total
required to carry on the enterprise.
With a given amount of capital for machine equipment, the output
of the plant will be seriously throttled if the net cost of labor
per piece machined is allowed to become the controlling element.
The Workers Help Bring Success.
The inventor, the officers, and mayhap the foreman, taken all
together, do not and cannot make a successful machine or business
without this supplemental work or ideas that come from actual work
of all workers.
This new kind of knowledge should not take away a man's courage;
on the contrary, it should give him a true sense of value of
existing, "going" things. With this knowledge he can confidently
and earnestly push a machine that is the product of a good
organization. He will know the great value of much experience and
practise of each of the many men in the organization. He will
neither kill the business by half-hearted indorsement, nor
increase the hazard of investment by urging this or that
modification. Nor will he advocate this or that machine being
added to a line that is already too great.
The invention, the general organization, the proper direction of
the business, are essential to success. But without that
organization which is only obtained by actual, thoughtful
experience of the men who do things, all the knowledge and
industry of the leaders are utterly useless.
This knowledge produces a new kind of confidence that has greater
faith in the existing and running things than in the claims for
something that has not had the development of practice. It is the
confidence that knows that the right fundamental ideas and the
policy of "sticking to one thing" will accomplish the best
results.
This is not a doctrine of optimism that holds there is no inferior
machine. The "best" implies the existence of the inferior. In
nearly all lines there are many grades from the best to the worst,
but the loss of faith in the relative value of a machine is most
commonly due to a lack of full knowledge of the other types, and
it is this kind of loss of courage, confidence, or whatever it may
be, that this chapter is intended to offset.
Have Faith in Your Products.
What has been said regarding the optimist, the pessimist, and the
vacillating man, from the designing and manufacturing point of
view of a machine business, applies with equal force to the
business organization.
The business is pushed forward by men who have confidence in the
project and in the product. If these men lose their faith in their
own business, they not only lose their usefulness as pushers and
managers, but they become drags on the industry, and remain so
until restored to normality. The hazard of investment is greatly
increased by such conditions.
Instances without number have been observed in which men who have
been successful have become unsuccessful through loss of
confidence due to acquiring the "dangerous half-knowledge."
The man who has acquired the dangerous half-knowledge should take
a post graduate course in some institution where men are treated
by all the most powerful agencies known to science. There may be
no institutions of this kind in existence, but the great need will
doubtless bring the establishment of many.
The men who have lost faith in their own machinery should be told
that no company can survive the effects of weak-kneed advocates.
Any company is better for a certain amount of aggressive
competition. Any company can stand more or less opposition from
its friends the enemy, but no company can continue to exist under
the blighting effects of the men who have lost this confidence in
them or their product.
The post graduate course for restoration of the near-wise man
should include educational means of all kinds. The means should be
especially adapted to the need of each student or patient.
There might be a phonograph in each room, which should work all
night and all day. This machine should repeat over and over a few
short sentences like the following:
"The only perfect machine is the one you do not know."
"Study the machines offered by your competitors, just to get the
same degree of knowledge of the 'other' machines--not for the
purpose of slandering or even mentioning--but just to restore your
confidence in the relative value of your own machine."
"Don't try to get back your belief that your own machine is
perfect--that has gone forever--only look at the other machines
and learn that your own is the best."
This kind of confidence will not be exuberant, but it will have
marked efficiency in the cold gray world in which you are to again
try your strength.
Specialization.
We find that in keeping with the trend toward specialization, the
machine shop is now manned and directed by specialists, whose
close application to the technical science of their respective
specialties has in a degree obscured other elements with which
their interests should be coordinated. Among these we generally
find the so-called human element. This feature of specialization,
which is the natural result of concentration and undivided
attention to the work in hand, has entailed a string of
consequences that has lessened the spirit of fellowship and
co-operation.
The workman in the old machine shop was known as a machinist, an
apprentice or a helper. The machinist trade required skill at
bench, vise and forge, and in the operation of the lathe and
planer. It also required a general knowledge and resourcefulness
which enabled the machinist to make good with the meager
facilities. The large specialized shop of today was not known.
Today the machine shop is filled with a variety of machines which
have grown out of the original types. Each shop's equipment is
selected to serve the needs of that shop, and since each shop has
a special purpose, its equipment seldom includes the full range of
machine-shop machinery.
Today the work flows through the machine shop in lots of large
numbers of pieces of a kind, and each machine, as well as each
worker, is kept at one kind of work and usually at one simple
operation.
The worker in the machine shop of today is no longer known as a
machinist, because that term does not cover the present
range of positions. Even the term "all-round machinist" is no
longer satisfactory.
Specialization has made so many divisions in the work that it has
resulted in developing men for special branches, so that today we
have relatively few men who can skillfully operate for instance
the engine lathe and planer. Even if there are those who ever had
that ability, most of them have lost it through disuse.
The workers are now designated by many names indicating their
special work.
The all-embracing term machine shop is divided into departments
for drafting, designing, accounting, production, flow of work
control, cost accounting and many other divisions. Each calls for
executives and workers having special titles.
The subdivision of work has resulted in each executive and worker
acquiring a high degree of ability and skill for work of his kind,
and it keeps each one doing the highest class of work for which he
is qualified so that his time is not wasted in the simpler
operations which can be performed by men of lesser ability.
We can readily see the economic gain that accrues when the worker
becomes more efficient; first, though the greater skill acquired
as a result of fewer operations to perform, and second, through
the use of the highly developed special machines, for then he is
able to produce a greater value for a given expenditure of effort.
We can also see the gain that results from specialization by the
executives, for each one's attention is concentrated to the
management of a smaller range of work; but the average mortal has
not yet reached the point of accepting the fact that to some
extent there should be a division between mental and physical
tasks. It is needless to say that no one in these days would
suggest even a possibility of a general division of the work along
the line between the abilities of the brain and hand and in these
days of construction and operation of intricate mechanisms like
electric and telephone instruments and machinery, aeroplane,
automobiles, railroad machinery, machine shop machinery, army and
navy machinery, from the smallest instrument and small arms to the
big machines like the battleship. The need of the man in whom is
combined the ability of brain and hand transcends any possibility
of our meeting the demand. But specialization does require both
kinds of division. The one that divides along the line between
mental and physical tasks provides great opportunities for those
men who have special ability at either the mental or physical
tasks. It is undoubtedly true that the greatest achievements have
been attained by those who have been unable to combine the great
mental and physical ability. Such men by nature and preference are
most fitted and most comfortable in the positions in which there
is a greater proportion of use for either the brains or fingers.
Every student of this subject early recognizes that the man at the
physical task should not be unnecessarily distracted by the vexing
problems of planning and directing the work. In some way this does
not seem to fit a democracy, but rather seems to lead toward
autocracy. However, let us keep in mind that specialization is
essential, not only at each physical task, but at the tasks at
which there may be expended a combination of the mental and
physical, and also at those tasks that are wholly mental, and that
a division should be made to get the best results from the whole
organization. While it may seem autocratic to leave to one group
the determination of the methods of work, and to another the task
of doing the work, the fact remains that this is an element of
specialization. That which seems so objectionable to a man with an
alert mind, is not so objectionable when he realizes that many men
of the highest type are happiest when given a chance to work out
tasks unembarrassed by problems of procedure. While this has been
one of the great tragedies of industrial life, when square pegs
have been put in round holes, it is one of the most important
questions that an engineer has to consider.
The human view will make us all labor towards the complete
elimination of degrading tasks, by changing machinery and
processes so as to fit the various types of men available. Through
it all, we must see to it, that our scheme of work is true to the
fundamental law of specialization, and that we recognize that
there must be some division between the physical and mental tasks,
and that this does not necessarily lead away from democracy. In
fact, we must recognize there are two extremes. At one extreme we
find the ideal of a highly specialized organization in which the
greatest value in quality of work and quantity of output is
possible through a complete co-ordination of the work of all types
of men, each at his own kind of work, in which each can excel; and
the other extreme in which we find a general disorganization which
returns us to the primitive condition in which man's energies were
most inefficiently used. Such a state is the natural result of
anarchy, and it is a state that would leave this or any other
country an easy prey to a country in which specialization existed.
One means team work of great wealth-producing capacity, and the
other a state in which the struggle for mere existence would be
severe.
The salvation of the world will be worked out if there is at least
one well disposed nation that stands firmly for specialized
industrial organizations. This will result in both industrial and
military supremacy--for it is now well known that military
supremacy cannot exist without the highest types of machinery
building shops.
Such a nation could dominate all others and could ultimately check
the disorganizing activities of the well-intentioned but
shortsighted reformers.
The higher form fits our highest civilization and national
security, and the other is a direct step toward chaos.
Nevertheless there is almost a stampede of sentiment against
specialization and its product--the large industrial organization.
This stampede has taken many of our otherwise well informed
people, and now we are seeing its extreme effect in the
iconoclastic fever that is raging in Russia and elsewhere.
We know that the individual, the industry or the nation that
specializes will produce the greatest results with a given
expenditure of energy, and we know that all this plan of
specialization requires a co-ordination of the work of all.
There should be brought about through specialization the highest
degree of ability on the part of the executive officers, as well
as the highest skill of the workers, and each man should have the
satisfaction of knowing that no one on the face of the globe can
excel him at his specialty, and furthermore that his energies are
expended in the best way to produce value.
Many men have already realized this ideal. Many industrial
organizations have also attained it in a very high degree,
and while there was a trend of some of the nations toward
specialization before the war, there was developed in America a
spirit of antagonism toward the large units that had grown up as a
result of this specialization. Not that specialization was
objectionable, but that industrial supremacy of an organization
was thought to be a distinct menace.
Since it is in these specialized industries that the individual
should find his best opportunity to produce the greatest wealth
for a given expenditure of effort, such organizations should be
maintained and all others should be gradually changed over so as
to make the most economical use of the man power of the nation.
We have found by experience that industrial organizations are
successful if they specialize. We have handed down to us the
saying that "The Jack of all trades is master of none". Our brains
accept these statements, we recognize them as facts, but owing to
one of the irrational traits of the human being, it is one
thing to believe and another to practice. It is one thing to
superficially know that it is important for us to specialize as
individuals, and it is quite another matter to bring ourselves to
act in conformity with this fundamental law.
The great economic gain or advantage possessed by the Ford
Company, and many of the other companies in this country, is not
due to the fact that they have selected a wonderful model that is
superior to others in every way, but it is based on the fact that
specialization makes it possible for the various officers and
workers to become the foremost men in their respective offices.
Specialization of an industry becomes effective only when each man
continues at a given job or work. Shifting men about the plant is
harmful, excepting in so far as it may be good to promote men from
position to position to fit the development of the men and the
industry. The plant can be wrecked by changing men from position
to position without changing the product. It can also be, wrecked
by changing the form of its product in fact any change, whether it
is a change of the product or a change of the men, which
interferes with the continuity of operation of a man along habit
lines is an economic loss to that organization.
We have stated that each man should specialize in order to produce
the greatest value for a given expenditure of energy--that
specialization of the industries is necessary.
That each man has some special knowledge that fits his
environment.
That the skilled worker has a special knowledge for his duties.
We have pointed out the need of a closer relationship between the
specialists. That they are all interdependent and must cooperate.
In setting forth the importance of the worker we must remember the
equal importance of every other member of a well-balanced
industry.
Lay directors and even lay chief officers are not necessarily a
menace or even burdens, if they have a fair conception of human
nature and the importance of each element in an organization, and
the full necessity of coordination of all.
They should know, however, that every man should be paid first in
cash and second in honor, appreciation, esteem, good will
inspiration, commendation for his good work and good qualities,
careful consideration of his troubles and a genuine knowledge that
his interests are being justly considered.