THE PSYCHOLOGY

OF

MANAGEMENT

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

NEW YORK • BOSTON • CHICAGO • DALLAS
ATLANTA • SAN FRANCISCO

MACMILLAN & CO., LIMITED

LONDON • BOMBAY • CALCUTTA
MELBOURNE

THE MACMILLAN CO. OF CANADA, LTD.

TORONTO

THE PSYCHOLOGY

OF

MANAGEMENT

The Function of the Mind in Determining,
Teaching and Installing Methods
of Least Waste

BY

L.M. GILBRETH, PH.D.

New York
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
1921

1914,
BY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY

Set up and electrotyped. Published March, 1914

TO MY
FATHER AND MOTHER

CONTENTS

[CHAPTER I]

[CHAPTER II]

[CHAPTER III]

[CHAPTER IV]

[CHAPTER V]

[CHAPTER VI]

[CHAPTER VII]

[CHAPTER VIII]

[CHAPTER IX]

[CHAPTER X]

The Psychology of Management

[CHAPTER I]

DESCRIPTION AND GENERAL OUTLINE OF

Definition of Psychology of Management. — The Psychology of Management, as here used, means, — the effect of the mind that is directing work upon that work which is directed, and the effect of this undirected and directed work upon the mind of the worker.

Importance of the Subject. — Before defining the terms that will be used more in detail, and outlining the method of treatment to be followed, it is well to consider the importance of the subject matter of this book, for upon the reader's interest in the subject, and his desire, from the outset, to follow what is said, and to respond to it, rests a large part of the value of this book.

Value of Psychology. — First of all, then, what is there in the subject of psychology to demand the attention of the manager?

Psychology, in the popular phrase, is "the study of the mind." It has for years been included in the training of all teachers, and has been one of the first steps for the student of philosophy; but it has not, usually, been included among the studies of the young

scientific or engineering student, or of any students in other lines than Philosophy and Education. This, not because its value as a "culture subject" was not understood, but because the course of the average student is so crowded with technical preparation necessary to his life work, and because the practical value of psychology has not been recognized. It is well recognized that the teacher must understand the working of the mind in order best to impart his information in that way that will enable the student to grasp it most readily. It was not recognized that every man going out into the world needs all the knowledge that he can get as to the working of the human mind in order not only to give but to receive information with the least waste and expenditure of energy, nor was it recognized that in the industrial, as well as the academic world, almost every man is a teacher.

Value of Management. — The second question demanding attention is; — Of what value is the study of management?

The study of management has been omitted from the student's training until comparatively recently, for a very different reason than was psychology. It was never doubted that a knowledge of management would be of great value to anyone and everyone, and many were the queer schemes for obtaining that knowledge after graduation. It was doubted that management could be studied otherwise than by observation and practice. [¹] Few teachers, if any, believed in the existence, or possibility, of a teaching

science of management. Management was assumed by many to be an art, by even more it was thought to be a divinely bestowed gift or talent, rather than an acquired accomplishment. It was common belief that one could learn to manage only by going out on the work and watching other managers, or by trying to manage, and not by studying about management in a class room or in a text book; that watching a good manager might help one, but no one could hope really to succeed who had not "the knack born in him."

With the advent of "Scientific Management," and its demonstration that the best management is founded on laws that have been determined, and can be taught, the study of management in the class room as well as on the work became possible and actual.[²]

Value of Psychology of Management. — Third, we must consider the value of the study of the psychology of management.[³]

This question, like the one that precedes it, is answered by Scientific Management. It has demonstrated that the emphasis in successful management lies on the man, not on the work; that efficiency is best secured by placing the emphasis on the man, and modifying the equipment, materials and methods to make the most of the man. It has, further, recognized that the man's mind is a controlling factor in his efficiency, and has, by teaching, enabled

the man to make the most of his powers. [⁴] In order to understand this teaching element that is such a large part of management, a knowledge of psychology is imperative; and this study of psychology, as it applies to the work of the manager or the managed, is exactly what the "psychology of management" is.

Five Indications of This Value. — In order to realize the importance of the psychology of management it is necessary to consider the following five points: —

1. Management is a life study of every man who works with other men. He must either manage, or be managed, or both; in any case, he can never work to best advantage until he understands both the psychological and managerial laws by which he governs or is governed.

2. A knowledge of the underlying laws of management is the most important asset that one can carry with him into his life work, even though he will never manage any but himself. It is useful, practical, commercially valuable.

3. This knowledge is to be had now. The men who have it are ready and glad to impart it to all who are interested and who will pass it on.[⁵] The text books are at hand now. The opportunities for practical experience in Scientific Management will meet all demands as fast as they are made.

4. The psychology of, that is, the mind's

place in management is only one part, element or variable of management; one of numerous, almost numberless, variables.

5. It is a division well fitted to occupy the attention of the beginner, as well as the more experienced, because it is a most excellent place to start the study of management. A careful study of the relations of psychology to management should develop in the student a method of attack in learning his selected life work that should help him to grasp quickly the orderly array of facts that the other variables, as treated by the great managers, bring to him.

Purpose of This Book. — It is scarcely necessary to mention that this book can hope to do little more than arouse an interest in the subject and point the way to the detailed books where such an interest can be more deeply aroused and more fully satisfied.

What This Book Will Not Do. — It is not the purpose of this book to give an exhaustive treatment of psychology. Neither is it possible in this book to attempt to give a detailed account of management in general, or of the Taylor plan of "Scientific Management" so-called, in particular. All of the literature on the subject has been carefully studied and reviewed for the purpose of writing this book, — not only what is in print, but considerable that is as yet in manuscript. No statement has been made that is not along the line of the accepted thought and standardized practice of the authorities. The foot notes have been prepared with great care. By reading

the references there given one can verify statements in the text, and can also, if he desires, inform himself at length on any branch of the subject that especially interests him.

What This Book Will Do. — This book aims not so much to instruct as to arouse an interest in its subject, and to point the way whence instruction comes. If it can serve as an introduction to psychology and to management, can suggest the relation of these two fields of inquiries and can ultimately enroll its readers as investigators in a resultant great field of inquiry, it will have accomplished its aim.

Definition of Management. — To discuss this subject more in detail —

First: What is "Management"?

"Management," as defined by the Century Dictionary, is "the art of managing by direction or regulation."

Successful management of the old type was an art based on no measurement. Scientific Management is an art based upon a science, — upon laws deducted from measurement. Management continues to be what it has always been, — the art of directing activity.

Change in the Accepted Meaning. — "Management," until recent years, and the emphasis placed on Scientific Management was undoubtedly associated, in the average mind, with the managing part of the organization only, neglecting that vital part — the best interests of the managed, almost entirely. Since we have come to realize that management signifies the relationship between the managing

and the managed in doing work, a new realization of its importance has come about. [⁶]

Inadequacy of the Terms Used. — It is unfortunate that the English language is so poor in synonyms in this field that the same word must have two such different and conflicting meanings, for, though the new definition of management be accepted, the "Fringe" of associations that belong to the old are apt to remain.[⁷] The thoughts of "knack, aptitude, tact, adroitness," — not to speak of the less desirable "Brute Force," "shrewdness, subtlety, cunning, artifice, deceit, duplicity," of the older idea of management remain in the background of the mind and make it difficult, even when one is convinced that management is a science, to think and act as if it were.

It must be noticed and constantly remembered that one of the greatest difficulties to overcome in studying management and its development is the meaning of the terms used. It is most unfortunate that the new ideas have been forced to content themselves with old forms as best they may.

Psychological Interest of the Terms. — Psychology could ask no more interesting subject than a study of the mental processes that lie back of many of these terms. It is most unfortunate for the obtaining of clearness, that new terms were not invented for the new ideas. There is, however, an excellent reason for using the old terms. By their use it is emphasized that the new thought is a logical outgrowth

of the old, and experience has proved that this close relationship to established ideas is a powerful argument for the new science; but such terms as "task," "foreman," "speed boss," "piece-rate" and "bonus," as used in the science of management, suffer from misunderstanding caused by old and now false associations. Furthermore, in order to compare old and new interpretations of the ideas of management, the older terms of management should have their traditional meanings only. The two sets of meanings are a source of endless confusion, unwarranted prejudice, and worse. This is well recognized by the authorities on Management.

The Three Types of Management. — We note this inadequacy of terms again when we discuss the various types of Management.

We may divide all management into three types —

(1) Traditional

(2) Transitory

(3) Scientific, or measured functional. [⁸]

Traditional Management, the first, has been variously called "Military," "Driver," the "Marquis of Queensberry type," "Initiative and Incentive Management," as well as "Traditional" management.

Definition of the First Type. — In the first type, the power of managing lies, theoretically at least, in the hands of one man, a capable "all-around" manager. The line of authority and of responsibility is clear, fixed and single. Each man comes in direct contact with but one man above him. A man may or may not manage more than one man beneath him,

but, however this may be, he is managed by but one man above him.

Preferable Name for the First Type. — The names "Traditional," or "Initiative and Incentive," are the preferable titles for this form of management. It is true they lack in specificness, but the other names, while aiming to be descriptive, really emphasize one feature only, and in some cases with unfortunate results.

The Name "Military" Inadvisable. — The direct line of authority suggested the name "Military," [⁹] and at the time of the adoption of that name it was probably appropriate as well as complimentary.[¹⁰] Appropriate in the respect referred to only, for the old type of management varied so widely in its manifestations that the comparison to the procedure of the Army was most inaccurate. "Military" has always been a synonym for "systematized", "orderly," "definite," while the old type of management was more often quite the opposite of the meaning of all these terms. The term "Military Management" though often used in an uncomplimentary sense would, today, if understood, be more complimentary than ever it was in the past. The introduction of various features of Scientific Management into the Army and Navy, — and such features are being incorporated steadily and constantly, — is raising the standard of management there to a high degree.

This but renders the name "Military" Management for the old type more inaccurate and misleading.

It is plain that the stirring associations of the word "military" make its use for the old type, by advocates of the old type, a weapon against Scientific Management that only the careful thinker can turn aside.

The Names "Driver" and "Marquis of Queensberry" Unfortunate. — The name "Driver" suggests an opposition between the managers and the men, an opposition which the term "Marquis of Queensberry" emphasizes. This term "Marquis of Queensberry" has been given to that management which is thought of as a mental and physical contest, waged "according to the rules of the game." These two names are most valuable pictorially, or in furnishing oratorical material. They are constant reminders of the constant desire of the managers to get all the work that is possible out of the men, but they are scarcely descriptive in any satisfactory sense, and the visions they summon, while they are perhaps definite, are certainly, for the inexperienced in management, inaccurate. In other words, they usually lead to imagination rather than to perception.

The Name "Initiative and Incentive" Authoritative. — The term "Initiative and Incentive" is used by Dr. Taylor, and is fully described by him. [¹¹] The words themselves suggest, truly, that he gives the old form of management its due. He does more than this. He points out in his definition of the terms the likenesses between the old and new forms.

The Name "Traditional" Brief and Descriptive. — The only excuses for the term "Traditional," since Dr. Taylor's term is available, are its brevity and its descriptiveness. The fact that it is indefinite is really no fault in it, as the subject it describes is equally indefinite. The "fringe" [¹²] of this word is especially good. It calls up ideas of information handed down from generation to generation orally, the only way of teaching under the old type of management. It recalls the idea of the inaccurate perpetuation of unthinking custom, and the "myth" element always present in tradition, — again undeniable accusations against the old type of management. The fundamental idea of the tradition, that it is oral, is the essence of the difference of the old type of management from science, or even system, which must be written.

It is not necessary to make more definite here the content of this oldest type of management, rather being satisfied with the extent, and accepting for working use the name "Traditional" with the generally accepted definition of that name.

Definition of the Second Type of Management. — The second type of management is called "Interim" or "Transitory" management. It includes all management that is consciously passing into Scientific Management and embraces all stages, from management that has incorporated one scientifically derived principle, to management that has adopted all but one such principle.

Preferable Name for Second Type of Management.

— Perhaps the name "Transitory" is slightly preferable in that, though the element of temporariness is present in both words, it is more strongly emphasized in the latter. The usual habit of associating with it the ideas of "fleeting, evanescent, ephemeral, momentary, short-lived," may have an influence on hastening the completion of the installing of Scientific Management.

Definition of the Third Type of Management. — The third form of management is called "Ultimate," "measured Functional," or "Scientific," management, and might also be called, — but for the objection of Dr. Taylor, the "Taylor Plan of Management." This differs from the first two types mentioned in that it is a definite plan of management synthesized from scientific analysis of the data of management. In other words, Scientific Management is that management which is a science, i.e., which operates according to known, formulated, and applied laws.[¹³]

Preferable Name of the Third Type of Management. — The name "Ultimate" has, especially to the person operating under the transitory stage, all the charm and inspiration of a goal. It has all the incentives to accomplishment of a clearly circumscribed task. Its very definiteness makes it seem possible of attainment. It is a great satisfaction to one who, during a lifetime of managing effort, has tried one offered improvement after another to be convinced that he has found the right road at last. The name

is, perhaps, of greatest value in attracting the attention of the uninformed and, as the possibilities of the subject can fulfill the most exacting demands, the attention once secured can be held.

The name "measured functional" is the most descriptive, but demands the most explanation. The principle of functionalization is one of the underlying, fundamental principles of Scientific Management. It is not as necessary to stop to define it here, as it is necessary to discuss the definition, the principle, and the underlying psychology, at length later.

The name "scientific" while in some respects not as appropriate as are any of the other names, has already received the stamp of popular approval. In derivation it is beyond criticism. It also describes exactly, as has been said, the difference between the older forms of management and the new. Even its "fringe" of association is, or at least was when first used, all that could be desired; but the name is, unfortunately, occasionally used indiscriminately for any sort of system and for schemes of operation that are not based on time study. It has gradually become identified more or less closely with

1. the Taylor Plan of Management

2. what we have defined as the "Transitory" plan of management

3. management which not only is not striving to be scientific, but which confounds "science" with "system." Both its advocates and opponents have been guilty of misuse of the word. Still, in spite of this, the very fact that the word has had a wide use, that it has become habitual to think of the new type

of management as "Scientific," makes its choice advisable. We shall use it, but restrict its content. With us "Scientific Management" is used to mean the complete Taylor plan of management, with no modifications and no deviations.

We may summarize by saying that:

1. the popular name is Scientific Management,

2. the inspiring name is Ultimate management,

3. the descriptive name is measured Functional management,

4. the distinctive name is the Taylor Plan of Management.

For the purpose of this book, Scientific Management is, then, the most appropriate name. Through its use, the reader is enabled to utilize all his associations, and through his study he is able to restrict and order the content of the term.

Relationship Between the Three Types of Management. — From the foregoing definitions and descriptions it will be clear that the three types of management are closely related. Three of the names given bring out this relationship most clearly. These are Traditional (i.e., Primitive), Interim, and Ultimate. These show, also, that the relationship is genetic, i.e., that the second form grows out of the first, but passes through to the third. The growth is evolutional.

Under the first type, or in the first stage of management, the laws or principles underlying right management are usually unknown, hence disregarded.

In the second stage, the laws are known and installed as fast as functional foremen can be taught

their new duties and the resistances of human nature can be overcome.[¹⁴]

In the third stage the managing is operated in accordance with the recognized laws of management.

Psychological Significance of This Relationship. — The importance of the knowledge and of the desire for it can scarcely be overestimated. This again makes plain the value of the psychological study of management.

Possible Psychological Studies of Management. — In making this psychological study of management, it would be possible to take up the three types as defined above, separately and in order, and to discuss the place of the mind in each, at length; but such a method would not only result in needless repetition, but also in most difficult comparisons when final results were to be deduced and formulated.

It would, again, be possible to take up the various elements or divisions of psychological study as determined by a consensus of psychologists, and to illustrate each in turn from the three types of management; but the results from any such method would be apt to seem unrelated and impractical, i.e., it would be a lengthy process to get results that would be of immediate, practical use in managing.

Plan of Psychological Study Used Here. — It has, therefore, seemed best to base the discussion that is to follow upon arbitrary divisions of scientific management, that is —

1. To enumerate the underlying principles on which scientific management rests.

2. To show in how far the other two types of management vary from Scientific Management.

3. To discuss the psychological aspect of each principle.

Advantages of This Plan of Study. — In this way the reader can gain an idea of

1. The relation of Scientific Management to the other types of management.

2. The structure of Scientific Management.

3. The relation between the various elements of Scientific Management.

4. The psychology of management in general, and of the three types of management in particular.

Underlying Ideas and Divisions of Scientific Management. — These underlying ideas are grouped under nine divisions, as follows: —

1. Individuality.

2. Functionalization.

3. Measurement.

4. Analysis and Synthesis.

5. Standardization.

6. Records and Programmes.

7. Teaching.

8. Incentives.

9. Welfare.

It is here only necessary to enumerate these divisions. Each will be made the subject of a chapter.

Derivation of These Divisions. — These divisions lay no claim to being anything but underlying ideas of Scientific Management, that embrace varying numbers

of established elements that can easily be subjected to the scrutiny of psychological investigation.

The discussion will be as little technical as is possible, will take nothing for granted and will cite references at every step. This is a new field of investigation, and the utmost care is necessary to avoid generalizing from insufficient data.

Derivation of Scientific Management. — There has been much speculation as to the age and origin of Scientific Management. The results of this are interesting, but are not of enough practical value to be repeated here. Many ideas of Scientific Management can be traced back, more or less clearly and directly, to thinkers of the past; but the Science of Management, as such, was discovered, and the deduction of its laws, or "principles," made possible when Dr. Frederick W. Taylor discovered and applied Time Study. Having discovered this, he constructed from it and the other fundamental principles a complete whole.

Mr. George Iles in that most interesting and instructive of books, "Inventors at Work," [¹⁵] has pointed out the importance, to development in any line of progress or science, of measuring devices and methods. Contemporaneous with, or previous to, the discovery of the device or method, must come the discovery or determination of the most profitable unit of measurement which will, of itself, best show the variations in efficiency from class. When Dr. Taylor discovered units of measurement for determining, prior to performance, the amount of any kind of

work that a worker could do and the amount of rest he must have during the performance of that work, then, and not until then, did management become a science. On this hangs the science of management.[¹⁶]

Outline of Method of Investigation. — In the discussion of each of the nine divisions of Scientific Management, the following topics must be treated:

1. Definition of the division and its underlying idea.

2. Appearance and importance of the idea in Traditional and Transitory Management.

3. Appearance and importance of the idea in Scientific Management.

4. Elements of Scientific Management which show the effects of the idea.

5. Results of the idea upon work and workers.

These topics will be discussed in such order as the particular division investigated demands. The psychological significance of the appearance or non-appearance of the idea, and of the effect of the idea, will be noted. The results will be summarized at the close of each chapter, in order to furnish data for drawing conclusions at the close of the discussion.

Conclusions to be Reached. — These conclusions will include the following: —

1. "Scientific Management" is a science.

2. It alone, of the Three Types of Management, is a science.

3. Contrary to a widespread belief that Scientific Management kills individuality, it is built on the basic

principle of recognition of the individual, not only as an economic unit but also as a personality, with all the idiosyncrasies that distinguish a person.

4. Scientific Management fosters individuality by functionalizing work.

5. Measurement, in Scientific Management, is of ultimate units of subdivision.

6. These measured ultimate units are combined into methods of least waste.

7. Standardization under Scientific Management applies to all elements.

8. The accurate records of Scientific Management make accurate programmes possible of fulfillment.

9. Through the teaching of Scientific Management the management is unified and made self-perpetuating.

10. The method of teaching of Scientific Management is a distinct and valuable contribution to Education.

11. Incentives under Scientific Management not only stimulate but benefit the worker.

12. It is for the ultimate as well as immediate welfare of the worker to work under Scientific Management.

13. Scientific Management is applicable to all fields of activity, and to mental as well as physical work.

14. Scientific Management is applicable to self-management as well as to managing others.

15. It teaches men to coöperate with the management as well as to manage.

16. It is a device capable of use by all.

17. The psychological element of Scientific Management is the most important element.

18. Because Scientific Management is psychologically right it is the ultimate form of management.

19. This psychological study of Scientific Management emphasizes especially the teaching features.

20. Scientific Management simultaneously

a. increases output and wages and lowers costs.

b. eliminates waste.

c. turns unskilled labor into skilled.

d. provides a system of self-perpetuating welfare.

e. reduces the cost of living.

f. bridges the gap between the college trained and the apprenticeship trained worker.

g. forces capital and labor to coöperate and to promote industrial peace.

[ 1]. Charles Babbage, Economy of Manufacturers. Preface, p. v.

[ 2]. Halbert P. Gillette, Paper No. 1, American Society of Engineering Contractors.

[ 3]. Gillette and Dana, Cost Keeping and Management, p. 5.

[ 4]. F.B. Gilbreth, Motion Study, p. 98.

[ 5]. F.W. Taylor, Principles of Scientific Management, p. 144.

[ 6]. F.W. Taylor, Shop Management, para. 16, Am. Soc. M.E., Paper No. 1003.

[ 7]. William James, Psychology, Vol. I, p. 258.

[ 8]. F.B. Gilbreth, Cost Reducing System, Chap. 1.

[ 9]. Morris Llewellyn Cooke, Bulletin No. 5 of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, p. 17.

[10]. F.W. Taylor, Shop Management, para. 234, Am. Soc. M.E., Paper No. 1003.

[11]. F.W. Taylor, Principles of Scientific Management, pp. 33-38.

[12]. The idea called to mind by the use of a given word. — Ed.

[13]. Henry R. Towne, Introduction to Shop Management. (Harper & Bros.)

[14]. F.W. Taylor, Principles of Scientific Management, p. 123. (Harper & Bros.)

[15]. Doubleday, Page & Co.

[16]. F.W. Taylor, Principles of Scientific Management, p. 137. (Harper & Bros.)

[CHAPTER II]

INDIVIDUALITY

Definition of Individuality. — "An individual is a single thing, a being that is, or is regarded as, a unit. An individual is opposed to a crowd. Individual action is opposed to associate action. Individual interests are opposed to common or community interests." These definitions give us some idea of the extent of individuality. Individuality is a particular or distinctive characteristic of an individual; "that quality or aggregate of qualities which distinguishes one person or thing from another, idiosyncrasy." This indicates the content.

For our purpose, we may define the study of individuality as a consideration of the individual as a unit with special characteristics. That it is a unit signifies that it is one of many and that it has likeness to the many. That it has special characteristics shows that it is one of many, but different from the many. This consideration of individuality emphasizes both the common element and the diverging characteristics.

Individuality as Treated in This Chapter. — The recognition of individuality is the subject of this chapter. The utilization of this individuality in its deviation

from class, is the subject of the chapter that follows, Functionalization.

Individuality as Considered by Psychology. — Psychology has not always emphasized the importance of the individual as a unit for study. Prof. Ladd's definition of psychology, quoted and endorsed by Prof. James, is "the description and explanation of states of consciousness, as such." [¹] "By states of consciousness," says James, "are meant such things as sensation, desires, emotions, cognitions, reasonings, decisions, volitions, and the like." This puts the emphasis on such divisions of consciousness as, "attention," "interest," and "will."

With the day of experimental psychology has come the importance of the individual self as a subject of study, [²] and psychology has come to be defined, as Calkins defines it, as a "science of the self as conscious." [³]

We hear much in the talk of today of the "psychology of the crowd," the "psychology of the mob," and the "psychology of the type," etc., but the mind that is being measured, and from whose measurements the laws are being deduced and formulated is, at the present the individual mind. [⁴]

The psychology which interested itself particularly in studying such divisions of mental activity as attention, will, habit, etc., emphasizes more particularly the likenesses of minds. It is necessary to understand

thoroughly all of these likenesses before one can be sure what the differences, or idiosyncrasies, are, and how important they are, because, while the likenesses furnish the background, it is the differences that are most often actually utilized by management. These must be determined in order to compute and set the proper individual task for the given man from standard data of the standard, or first-class man.

In any study of the individual, the following facts must be noted: —

1. The importance of the study of the individual, and the comparatively small amount of work that has as yet been done in that field.

2. The difficulty of the study, and the necessity for great care, not only in the study itself, but in deducing laws from it.

3. The necessity of considering any one individual trait as modified by all the other traits of the individual.

4. The importance of the individual as distinct from the type.

Many students are so interested in studying types and deducing laws which apply to types in general, that they lose sight of the fact that the individual is the basis of the study, — that individuality is that for which they must seek and for which they must constantly account. As Sully says, we must not emphasize "typical developments in a new individual," at the expense of "typical development in a new individual." [⁵] It is the fact that the development

occurs in an individual, and not that the development is typical, that we should emphasize.

Individuality Seldom Recognized Under Traditional Management. — Under Traditional Management there was little or no systematized method for the recognition of individuality or individual fitness. [⁶] The worker usually was, in the mind of the manager, one of a crowd, his only distinguishing mark being the amount of work which he was capable of performing.

Selecting Workers Under Traditional Management. — In selecting men to do work, there was little or no attempt to study the individuals who applied for work. The matter of selection was more of a process of "guess work" than of exact measurement, and the highest form of test was considered to be that of having the man actually tried out by being given a chance at the work itself. There was not only a great waste of time on the work, because men unfitted to it could not turn it out so successfully, but there also was a waste of the worker, and many times a positive injury to the worker, by his being put at work which he was unfitted either to perform, to work at continuously, or both.

In the most progressive type of Traditional Management there was usually a feeling, however, that if the labor market offered even temporarily a greater supply than the work in hand demanded, it was wise to choose those men to do the work who were best fitted for it, or who were willing to work for less wages. It is surprising to find in the traditional type,

even up to the present day, how often men were selected for their strength and physique, rather than for any special capabilities fitting them for working in, or at, the particular line of work to be done.

Output Seldom Separated Under Traditional Management. — Under Traditional Management especially on day work the output of the men was not usually separated, nor was the output recorded separately, as can be done even with the work of gangs.

Few Individual Tasks Under Traditional Management. — Seldom, if ever, was an individual task set for a worker on day work, or piece work, and even if one were set, it was not scientifically determined. The men were simply set to work alone or in gangs, as the work demanded, and if the foreman was overworked or lazy, allowed to take practically their own time to do the work. If, on the other hand, the foreman was a "good driver," the men might be pushed to their utmost limit of their individual undirected speed, regardless of their welfare.

Little Individual Teaching Under Traditional Management. — Not having a clear idea either of the present fitness and the future possibilities of the worker, or the requirements of the work, no intelligent attempt could be made at efficient individual teaching. What teaching was done was in the form of directions for all, concerning the work in general, the directions being given by an overworked foreman, the holding of whose position often depended more upon whether his employer made money than upon the way his men were taught, or worked.

Seldom an Individual Reward Under Traditional Management. — As a typical example of disregard of individuality, the worker in the household may be cited, and especially the "general housework girl." Selected with no knowledge of her capabilities, and with little or no scientific or even systematized knowledge of the work that she is expected to do, there is little or no thought of a prescribed and definite task, no teaching specially adapted to the individual needs of the taught, and no reward in proportion to efficiency.

Cause of These Lacks Under Traditional Management. — The fault lies not in any desire of the managers to do poor or wasteful work, or to treat their workers unfairly, — but in a lack of knowledge and of accurate methods for obtaining, conserving and transmitting knowledge. Under Traditional Management no one individual knows precisely what is to be done. Such management seldom knows how work could best be done; — never knows how much work each individual can do. [⁷] Understanding neither work nor workers, it can not adjust the one to the other so as to obtain least waste. Having no conception of the importance of accurate measurement, it has no thought of the individual as a unit.

Individuality Recognized Under Transitory Management. — Recognition of individuality is one of the principles first apparent under Transitory Management.

This is apt to demonstrate itself first of all in causing the outputs of the workers to "show up" separately,

rewarding these separated outputs, and rewarding each worker for his individual output.

Benefits of This Recognition. — The benefits of introducing these features first are that the worker, (1) seeing his individual output, is stimulated to measure it, and (2) receiving compensation in accordance with his output, is satisfied; and (3) observing that records are necessary to determine the amount of output and pay, is glad to have accurate measurement and the other features of Scientific Management introduced.

Individuality a Fundamental Principle of Scientific Management. — Under Scientific Management the individual is the unit to be measured. Functionalization is based upon utilizing the particular powers and special abilities of each man. Measurement is of the individual man and his work. Analysis and synthesis build up methods by which the individual can best do his work. Standards are of the work of an individual, a standard man, and the task is always for an individual, being that percentage of the standard man's task that the particular individual can do. Records are of individuals, and are made in order to show and reward individual effort. Specific individuals are taught those things that they, individually, require. Incentives are individual both in the cases of rewards and punishments, and, finally, it is the welfare of the individual worker that is considered, without the sacrifice of any for the good of the whole.

Individuality Considered in Selecting Workers. — Under Scientific Management individuality is considered

in selecting workers as it could not be under either of the other two forms of management. This for several reasons:

1. The work is more specialized, hence requires more carefully selected men.

2. With standardized methods comes a knowledge to the managers of the qualifications of the "standard men" who can best do the work and continuously thrive.

3. Motion study, in its investigation of the worker, supplies a list of variations in workers that can be utilized in selecting men.[⁸]

Variables of the Worker. — This list now includes at least 50 or 60 variables, and shows the possible elements which may demand consideration. When it is remembered that the individual selected may need a large or small proportion of most of the variables in order to do his particular work most successfully, and that every single one of these variables, as related to the others, may, in some way affect his output and his welfare in doing his assigned work, the importance of taking account of individuality in selection is apparent.

Scientific Management Needs Support in Studying Workers. — The best of management is by no means at its ultimate stage in practice in this field. This, not because of a lack in the laws of management, but because, so far, Scientific Management has not received proper support from other lines of activity.

Present Lack of Knowledge of Applicants. — At present, the men who apply to the Industries for positions

have no scientifically determined idea of their own capabilities, neither has there been any effort in the training or experience of most of those who apply for work for the first time to show them how fit they really are to do the work which they wish to do.

Supplements Demanded by Scientific Management. — Before the worker can be scientifically selected so that his individuality can be appreciated, Scientific Management must be supplemented in two ways: —

1. By psychological and physiological study of workers under it. By such study of the effect of various kinds of standardized work upon the mind and body, standard requirements for men who desire to do the work can be made.

2. By scientific study of the worker made before he comes into the Industries, the results of which shall show his capabilities and possibilities.[⁹]

Whence This Help Must Come. — This study must be made

a. In the Vocational Guidance Work.

b. In the Academic Work, and in both fields psychological and physiological investigations are called for.

Work of Vocational Guidance Bureaus. — Vocational Guidance Bureaus are, at present, doing a wonderful work in their line. This work divides itself into two parts:

1. Determining the capabilities of the boy, that is,

seeing what he is, by nature and training, best fitted to do.

2. Determining the possibilities of his securing work in the line where he is best fitted to work, that is, studying the industrial opportunities that offer, and the "welfare" of the worker under each, using the word welfare in the broadest sense, of general wellbeing, mental, physical, moral and financial.

Work of Academic World. — The Academic World is also, wherever it is progressive, attempting to study the student, and to develop him so that he can be the most efficient individual. Progressive educators realize that schools and colleges must stand or fall, as efficient, as the men they train become successful or unsuccessful in their vocations, as well as in their personal culture.

Need for Psychological Study in All Fields. — In both these complementary lines of activity, as in Scientific Management itself, the need for psychological study is evident.[¹⁰] Through it, only, can scientific progress come. Here is emphasized again the importance of measurement. Through accurate measurement of the mind and the body only can individuality be recognized, conserved and developed as it should be.

Preparedness of Experimental Psychology. — Experimental psychology has instruments of precision with which to measure and test the minds and bodies brought to it, and its leading exponents are so broadening the scope of its activities that it is ready and glad to plan for investigations.

Method of Selection Under Ultimate Management. — Under Ultimate Management, the minds of the workers, — and of the managers too, — will have been studied, and the results recorded from earliest childhood. This record, made by trained investigators, will enable vocational guidance directors to tell the child what he is fitted to be, and thus to help the schools and colleges to know how best to train him, that is to say, to provide what he will need to know to do his life work, and also those cultural studies that his vocational work may lack, and that may be required to build out his best development as an individual.

It is not always recognized that even the student who can afford to postpone his technical training until he has completed a general culture course, requires that his culture course be carefully planned. Not only must he choose those general courses that will serve as a foundation for his special study, and that will broaden and enrich his study, but also he must be provided with a counter-balance, — with interests that his special work might never arouse in him. Thus the field of Scientific Management can be narrowed to determining and preparing standard plans for standard specialized men, and selecting men to fill these places from competent applicants.

What part of the specialized training needed by the special work shall be given in schools and what in the industries themselves can be determined later. The "twin apprentice" plan offers one solution of the problem that has proved satisfactory in many places. The psychological study should determine

through which agency knowledge can best come at any particular stage of mental growth.

Effect on Workers of Such Selection. — As will be shown at greater length under "Incentives," Scientific Management aims in every way to encourage initiative. The outline here given as to how men must, ultimately, under Scientific Management, be selected serves to show that, far from being "made machines of," men are selected to reach that special place where their individuality can be recognized and rewarded to the greatest extent.

Selection Under Scientific Management To-day. — At the present day, the most that Scientific Management can do, in the average case, is to determine the type of men needed for any particular kind of work, and then to select that man who seems, from such observations as can be made, best to conform to the type. The accurate knowledge of the requirements of the work, and the knowledge of variables of the worker make even a cursory observation more rich in results than it would otherwise be. Even such an apparently obvious observation, as that the very fact that a man claims that he can do the work implies desire and will on his part to do it that may overcome many natural lacks, — even this is an advance in recognizing individuality.

Effect of This Selection. — The result of this scientific selection of the workman is not only better work, but also, and more important from the psychological side, the development of his individuality. It is not always recognized that the work itself is a great

educator, and that acute cleverness in the line of work to which he is fitted comes to the worker.

Individuality Developed by Separating Outputs. — Under Scientific Management the work of each man is arranged either so that his output shows up separately and on the individual records, or, if the Work is such that it seems best to do it in gangs, the output can often be so recorded that the individual's output can be computed from the records.

Purpose of Separating Outputs. — The primary purpose of separating the output is to see what the man can do, to record this, and to reward the man according to his work, but this separating of output has also an individual result, which is even more important than the result aimed at, and that is the development of individuality.

Under Traditional Management and the usual "day work," much of the work is done by gangs and is observed or recorded as of gangs. Only now and then, when the work of some particular individual shows up decidedly better or worse than that of his fellows, and when the foreman or superintendent, or other onlooker, happens to observe this is the individual appreciated, and then only in the most inexact, unsystematic manner.

Under Scientific Management, making individual output show up separately allows of individual recording, tasks, teaching and rewards.

Effect on Athletic Contests. — Also, with this separation of the work of the individual under Scientific Management comes the possibility of a real,

scientific, "athletic contest." This athletic contest, which proves itself so successful in Traditional Management, even when the men are grouped as gangs and their work is not recorded or thought of separately, proves itself quite as efficient or more efficient under Scientific Management, when the work of the man shows up separately. It might be objected that the old gang spirit, or it might be called "team" spirit, would disappear with the separation of the work. This is not so, as will be noted by a comparison to a baseball team, where each man has his separate place and his separate work and where his work shows up separately with separate records, such as "batting average" and "fielding average." Team spirit is the result of being grouped together against a common opponent, and it will be the same in any sort of work when the men are so grouped, or given to understand that they belong on the same side.

The following twelve rules for an Athletic Contest under Transitory System are quoted as exemplifying the benefits which accrue to Individuality.

1. Men must have square deal.

2. Conditions must be similar.

3. Men must be properly spaced and placed.

4. Output must show up separately.

5. Men must be properly started.

6. Causes for delay must be eliminated.

7. Pace maker must be provided.

8. Time for rest must be provided.

9. Individual scores must be kept and posted.

10. "Audience" must be provided.

11. Rewards must be prompt and provided for all good scores — not for winners only.

12. Appreciation must be shown. [¹¹]

This list shows the effects of many fundamental principles of Scientific Management, — but we note particularly here that over half the rules demand that outputs be separated as a prerequisite.

None of the benefits of the Athletic Contest are lost under Scientific Management. The only restrictions placed are that the men shall not be grouped according to any distinction that would cause hatred or ill feeling, that the results shall be ultimately beneficial to the workers themselves, and that all high scores shall win high prizes.

As will be brought out later under "Incentives," no competition is approved under Scientific Management which speeds up the men uselessly, or which brings any ill feeling between the men or any feeling that the weaker ones have not a fair chance. All of these things are contrary to Scientific Management, as well as contrary to common sense, for it goes without saying that no man is capable of doing his best work permanently if he is worried by the idea that he will not receive the square deal, that someone stronger than he will be allowed to cheat or to domineer over him, or that he will be speeded up to such an extent that while his work will increase for one day, the next day his work will fall down because of the effect of the fatigue of the day before.

The field of the contests is widened, as separating

of the work of the individual not only allows for competition between individuals, but for the competition of the individual with his own records. This competition is not only a great, constant and helpful incentive to every worker, but it is also an excellent means of developing individuality.

Advantages to Managers of Separating Output. — The advantages to the managers of separating the work are that there is a chance to know exactly who is making the high output, and that the spirit of competition which prevails when men compare their outputs to their own former records or others, leads to increased effort.

Advantages to Workers of Separating Output. — As for advantages to the men:

By separation of the individual work, not only is the man's work itself shown, but at the same time the work of all other people is separated, cut away and put aside, and he can locate the man who is delaying him by, for example, not keeping him supplied with materials. The man has not only an opportunity to concentrate, but every possible incentive to exercise his will and his desire to do things. His attention is concentrated on the fact that he as an individual is expected to do his very best. He has the moral stimulus of responsibility. He has the emotional stimulus of competition. He has the mental stimulus of definiteness. He has, most valuable of all, a chance to be an entity rather than one of an undiscriminated gang. This chance to be an individual, or personality, is in great contradistinction to the popular opinion of Scientific Management,

which thinks it turns men into machines. A very simple example of the effect of the worker's seeing his output show up separately in response to and in proportion to his effort and skill is that of boys in the lumber producing districts chopping edgings for fire wood. Here the chopping is so comparatively light that the output increased very rapidly, and the boy delights to "see his pile of fire wood grow."

With the separation of the work comes not only the opportunity for the men to see their own work, but also to see that of others, and there comes with this the spirit of imitation, or the spirit of friendly opposition, either of which, while valuable in itself is even more valuable as the by-product of being a life-giving thought, and of putting life into the work such as there never could be when the men were working together, more or less objectless, because they could not see plainly either what they were doing themselves, or what others were doing.

Separation of the output of the men gives them the greatest opportunity to develop. It gives them a chance to concentrate their attention at the work on which they are, because it is not necessary for them to waste any time to find out what that work is. Their work stands out by itself; they can put their whole minds to that work; they can become interested in that work and its outcome, and they can be positive that what they have done will be appreciated and recognized, and that it will have a good effect, with no possibility of evil effect, upon their chance for work and their chance for pay and promotion in the future. Definiteness of the boundaries, then, is