Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Scientific Management Systematic Managment Nelson
Scientific Management Systematic Managment Nelson
Scientific Management Systematic Managment Nelson
Association of Machinists. See Monthly loumal, I.A.M., vol. 6 (November, 1894), 430-431.
"" Copley includes little information on Taylor's fortune, but there are enough fragments
in the Taylor collection to confirm his judgment that it was based on patent sales and shrewd
investments, particularly in the mining industry. Copley, Taylor, I, 393-395. Taylor's dis-
coveries insured his prominence among fellow engineers and led to the presidency of the
ASME in 1906-1907. See Frederick R. Hutton, A HistoT'J of the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers from 1880 to 1915 (New York, 1915), 115--116, and Layton, Revolt
of the Engineers, Ch. 7.
SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT 483
materials, and forms. Whenever possible he introduced time study
and the differential piece rate. In 1897 he employed Sanford E.
Thompson, a young civil engineer who had worked for the Manu-
facturing Investment Company, to develop time study and apply it
to the construction industry. Thompson, working independently
of Taylor, became the first time study expert of the Taylor move-
ment. 21
But Taylor also added new features to his system of management.
The most important of these was a method of accounting that aided
in controlling operations and costs. Taylor took his basic ideas from
a leading railroad accountant; he never maintained that his account-
ing procedures were unique or original.2 2 His major innovations
were a series of standardized forms and procedures and a monthly
balance of accounts. As a result, his techniques were more elaborate
than those of most contemporary writers on accounting practice
and were never widely adopted. 23 Yet in the 1890s he became
known as an expert in accounting, and several of his consulting
assignments were primarily to introduce improved accounting pro-
cedures. 24
Taylor's other important developments of the 1890s, a system of
production planning and "functional" foremanship, also grew out
of systematic management. Restriction of output and low produc-
tivity, Taylor believed, were essentially the fault of management,
the inevitable consequence of vesting inordinate power in the over-
worked foreman. 25 Systematic management removed much of the
foreman's power over production and costs; time study reduced his
authority as trainer and rate setter. By 1897 Taylor was ready to
complete the process by eliminating the traditional foreman alto-
gether. When the foremen at the Simonds Rolling Machine Com-
pany resigned en masse, he replaced them with functional super-
visors, a group of men who each performed in a systematic way
part of the traditional foreman's job. Henceforth separate super-
2 5 Taylor invariably began his articles and talks with a discussion of "soldiering" or
restriction of output, which he attributed to poor management. See Taylor, "A Piece Rate
System," 860-863; Taylor, "Shop Management," 1349-1352; Taylor, "Testimony,"
Hearings Before Special Committee of the House of Representatives to Investigate the Taylor
and Other Systems of Shop Management, III (Washington, 1912), 8-25. [Pagination for
Taylor's "Testimony" is from the more readily available reprint, Taylor, Scientific Manage-
ment (New York, 1947)]; Taylor, The Principles of Scientific Management (New York,
1912), 13-18.
ment," 1376-1378; Taylor, Principles, 39-42; Henry Laurence Gantt, Work, Wages, and
Profits (New York, 1913), 104-113; and L. P. Alford, Henry Laurence Gantt, Leader in
Industry (New York, 1934), 87-91.
28 Taylor, "Testimony," 66-77; Taylor, Principles, 80-81.
29 Edna Yost, Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, Partners for Life ( New Brunswick, 1949),
219-222.
30 See the Taylor-Gilbreth Correspondence, File 59A, Taylor Collection, and Gilbreth's
letters to his wife in the Gilbreth Papers (Purdue University Library, West Lafayette, Ind.),
1912-1914. Milton J. Nadwomy ably describes the split between Taylor and Gilbreth in
"Frederick Taylor and Frank Gilbreth: Competition in Scientific Management," Business
History Review, XXXI (Spring, 1957), 23-34. The famous confrontation between the
Gilbreths and the Taylor disciples in 1920 is reported in the Bulletin of the Taylor Society,
VI (June, 1921).
138.
M There are numerous statements of this view in U.S. House of Representatives, Hearings,
I and II.
""Sumner Slicher describes union policies toward incentive wage plans in Union Policies
and Industrial Management (Washington, 1941), 296-309; Nadwomy, Scientific Manage-
ment and the Unions, Ch. 4, traces the opposition to Taylor and his system.
TABLE 1
INSTITUTIONS INTRODUCING SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT, 1901-1917
PRINCIPAL
FIRM TAYLOR EXPERT( S) DATES
1 Tabor Mfg., Phila. Barth, Hathaway 1903-
2 Stokes and Smith, Phila. Gantt 1902-03?
3 Link Belt Engr., Phila. Barth 1903-07
4 Sayles Bleachery, Saylesville, R.I. Gantt 1904-08
5 Yale & Towne, Stamford, Conn. Barth 1905-07
6 Santa Fe Railroad, Topeka, Kan. Emerson 1904-07
7 Brighton Mills, Passaic, N.J. Gantt 1905-08
8 Ferracute Machine, Bridgeton, N.J. Parkhurst 1907-10
9 H. H. Franklin, Syracuse, N.Y. Barth 1909-10, 1911
10 Canadian Pacific Railroad,
Montreal Gantt 1908-11
11 Smith & Furbush Machine, Phila. Barth 1908-10
builder during World War I. See Holden A. Evans, One Man's Fight for a Better Navy
(New York, 1940). The government facilities were atypical because of the workers' union
affiliations and political contacts and the likelihood of overt labor disputes if problems arose.
• 0 These were the Lewis F. Shoemaker Company, F. B. Stearns Company, Universal
Winding Company, Franz Premier Company, Goldie & McCulloch, Burgess Sulphite Company,
Williamson Brothers, Westinghouse Electric, Standard Roller Bearing Company, Bausch &
Lomb, Lowell Machine Works, Barcalo Company, Acme Wire Company, F. R. Patch Com-
pany, Williams & Wilkins, Sewell Clapp Company, Plymouth Cordage Company, Robins
Conveying Belt, and the American Locomotive Company shops (where Gantt worked in
1902 and Emerson in 1907). There are also references to at least three other firms, the
Manhattan Press, Chester Steel Castings Company, and the Erie Forge Company, in the
Taylor Collection, but I have not included them in Table I because of the paucity of
information about them.
'1 Taylor to H. K. Hathaway, February 3, 1914, Taylor Collection, File 123A. Taylor
and Emerson corresponded frequently during this period. Emerson wrote that "I would
rather have your approval . . . than of [sic] any other man living or dead." Emerson to
Taylor, November 17, 1905, Taylor Collection, File 58C. Also Harrington Emerson, "Dis-
cussion," ASME Transactions, vol. 24 (1903), 1463, and "Discussion," ASME Trans-
actions, vol. 25 (1903-1904), 73. Parkhurst was close to Gilbreth and Robert Thurston
Kent, though not to the other Taylor associates. His Applied Methods of Scientific Manage-
ment first appeared in Kent's Industrial Engineering and the Engineering Digest in 1911.
He discussed his exclusion from the Taylor circle in a conversation with Gilbreth in 1915.
Frank B. Gilbreth to Lillian M. Gilbreth, September 24, 1915, Gilbreth Papers.
"By 1910 many progressive firms had installed detailed cost accounting systems. After
his retirement, Taylor increasingly deemphasized the importance of costkeeping to scientific
management. In a properly managed shop it would be an incidental product of planning
department activities. Copley, Taylor, I, 365-371; II, 375-377•
.. As Table I suggests, scientific management was introduced in many industries and
plants employing radically different production methods. Taylor's experience was largely in
machine shops, and he only recommended men whom he considered to have a high level of
technical proficiency such as Barth and Hathaway for machine shop work. For Taylor'•
comments on the textile industry, see "A Piece Rate System," 867.
" Many of the firms listed in Table I - such as Remington, Pullman, Link Belt, Cheney
Brothers, Plimpton Press, Ferracute Machine, Joseph & Feiss, and Yale & Towne - were well
known for their advanced methods and equipment. See Gantt's "Discussion," "Present State
of the Art of Industrial Management," 180.
'"R. R. Keely to Taylor, May 14, 1914, Taylor Collection, File 137C; Barth to J. S.
Runnels, March 6, 1913, Carl G. Barth Papers (Baker Library, Harvard Business School,
Boston), Drawer 2.
SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT 491
away, the most orthodox of the Taylor disciples, devoted them-
selves almost exclusively to the preliminary activities, leaving other
aspects of the work to assistants. Cooke apparently adopted a simi-
lar approach; Gantt supposedly became less interested in this
phase of the work after 1910; and Emerson, even in 1904-1907, re-
vealed some tendency to cut corners in this area. 46
In most cases there is evidence of a planning department, al-
though the nature of its activity varied. At the Montreal shops of
the Canadian Pacific Railroad, the Plimpton Press, and the Mare
Island Ship Yard, it was probably the most significant feature of the
reorganization effort. 47 At the H. H. Franklin Company the plan-
ning department coordinated the entire manufacturing process,
dispatching 1,500 jobs to workmen every day. 48 At Tabor, Link
Belt, and Watertown Arsenal, it managed the fl.ow of work and
materials, issued instruction cards, kept records, and directed the
functional foremen. 49 In most plants, however, planning depart-
ment duties must have been more circumscribed, for they received
relatively little attention in accounts of the experts' work.
The experience of the twenty-nine plants suggests that the pres-
ence of functional supervisors was the best indication of a thorough
installation of the Taylor system. There is direct evidence of them
only at Tabor, Link Belt, Plimpton Press, New England Butt, Fer-
racute Machine Works, and, in modified form, Watertown Arsenal.
Gantt did not introduce them on any of his jobs listed in Table I,
apparently due to a belief ( shared by many of the experts) that
the Taylor system made the foreman's job feasible for the first time.
Even Barth, supposedly the most faithful of Taylor's adherents,
compromised on functional foremanship. At the Winchester Re-
peating Arms Company, for example, he agreed to the retention of
46 This appears to have been true for Cooke, though there is little direct evidence. Cooke
devoted most of his time to non-industrial activities. The Plimpton Press and Williams &
Wilkins Company were apparently his only important jobs before World War I. Gantt
reported in 1914 that he typically spent a year or more on his jobs "setting [the] house in
order." U.S. Commission on Industrial Relations, Final Report, I, 956. For an able critique
of Emerson's work, see Fred H. Colvin, "How Bonus Works on the Santa Fe, II," American
Machinist, XXXVI (February 1, 1912), 168.
<7 "Scheduling Locomotive Repair Work on the Canadian Pacific Railway," IEED, VIII
(November, 1910), 380-383; Railway Age Gazette, vol. 50 (April 7, 1911), 836-837;
Hollis Godfrey to Taylor, May 4, 1912, Taylor Collection, File 59B2; Holden A. Evans, Cost
Keeping and Scientific Management (New York, 1911), 186-231.
ta George D. Babcock and Reginald Trautschold, The Taywr System in Franklin
Management (New York, 1917), 77.
•• Wilfred Lewis, "An Object Lesson in Efficiency," IEED, IX (May, 1911 ), 383. The
Barth Papers contain numerous planning department forms from the Tabor Company. "Tabor
Manufacturing Company," Drawer 2; also ''Barcalo Manufacturing Company Report of
Philadelphia Trip, November 25, 1912," Taylor Collection, File 138B. The Link Belt
planning department is described in "Methods of Management that Made Money," IEED,
IX (January, 1911), 23-25; and James M. Dodge, "A History of the Introduction of a
System of Shop Management," ASME Transactions, vol. 27 ( 1906 ), 720-725; Aitken,
Taywrlsm, 96-100, 125-134.
492 BUSINESS HISTORY REVIEW
the traditional system with the addition of "general foremen," who
were intermediaries between the first-level supervisors and the de-
partment superintendent, and functional "overseers," who were as-
sistants to the general foremen. 5°
The experts' attitudes towards functional foremanship reveal
much about their view of labor and personnel problems generally.
Three of Taylor's functional supervisors, the "gang boss," the "speed
boss," and the "disciplinarian," performed potentially important
personnel functions. The "gang" and "speed" bosses supposedly
taught the worker to do his job correctly ( i.e., in accordance with
the planning office's instructions and the requirements of the ma-
chinery), and the "disciplinarian" hired, fired, and handled all dis-
cipline problems. Yet Taylor's conceptions of the specific duties of
the foremen were exceedingly crude and cannot realistically be re-
lated to the development of personnel management. 51 His follow-
ers, by neglecting functional foremanship, showed even less presci-
ence in this area of shop management. Gantt, who developed a
reputation as a labor expert because of his emphasis on "training"
workmen, hardly appears in retrospect to have been a pioneer in
the development of personnel work. He had little interest in voca-
tional education or apprenticeship systems, subjects that were at-
tracting considerable attention at the time, and emphasized instead
what he termed "training in habits of industry" or more specifically
in obeying orders so that "we can give specific orders, and see that
they are carried out." 52 The trade union charge that scientific man-
agement transformed men into machines would have been more
appropriately leveled against Gantt than against Taylor. The other
Taylor disciples, at least in the period before World War I, revealed
no more sophistication than Taylor on the subject of industrial edu-
cation or training.
Even more grievous was their failure to develop the role of the
"disciplinarian." Taylor's disciplinarian performed most of the labor
functions of the conventional foreman. His followers, despite a simi-
lar preoccupation with the "scientific" selection of workmen, promo-
tions on the basis of ability, and shop morale, paid even less attention
60 H. M. Wilcox, "Organization and System in the Cartridge Department of the Winchester
Repeating Arms Company for the Control of Mass Production," December 1, 1917, Barth
Papers, Drawer 2. Williamson notes only time study. Harold F. Williamson, WinchestM,
The Gun that Won the West (Washington, 1952), 232.
51 See Taylor, "Shop Management," 1392-1394, 1418-1421. In The Principles of
Scientific Management, Taylor, apparently influenced by Gantt's characterizations, called the
"gang'' and "speed" bosses and the inspectors "teachers." See Principles, 123-124.
•• Gantt, Work, Wages, and Profits, 155, 269. For more sympathetic views of Gantt's
ideas, see Alford, Gantt and L. Urwick and E. F. L. Brech, The Making of Scientific Manage-
ment, (London, 1945), I, 77-78.
SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT 493
to the disciplinarian's potential. Like their mentor, they presumably
believed that time study, coupled with an incentive wage, would
insure high morale and guarantee that the right men were in the
right jobs. Probably no example better illustrates the close connec-
tion between systematic and scientific management. During World
War I several of the firms listed in Table I pioneered the introduc-
tion of formal personnel management, but with one or two excep-
tions the experts had nothing to do with this activity. 53
There are references to time study in virtually all the twenty-
nine plants. The major difference among the disciples was over
who was to conduct the time studies. Barth and Hathaway relied
on professional time study men like Dwight V. Merrick to do their
initial work and train men in the plant to follow them. 54 Gantt, on
the other hand, developed his own experts and, because of his in-
terest in the bonus wage, did some of the work himself. Both groups,
however, employed the techniques that Taylor and Sanford Thomp-
son had originated in the 1890s.
It was Gilbreth rather than the men closest to Taylor who inno-
vated in the field of time study. His work at the New England Butt
Company, his first industrial job, was the most significant and fruit-
ful of his career. Gilbreth assured Taylor that he was following
"'Shop Management' from cover to cover," and a detailed descrip-
tion of his activities indicates that he was thoroughly conventional
in most areas. 55 Yet Gilbreth could not contain his enthusiasm for
motion study and soon introduced a "betterment" room, "route
models," and above all his "micro-motion" technique of time study. 56
After the Hermann Aukam job, which ended in 1914, Gilbreth in-
creasingly devoted his attention to motion study and routing prob-
lems. In this limited sphere he became to Taylor what Taylor had
M The leaders included the Plimpton Press, Joseph & Feiss, Eastern Manufacturing Com-
pany, and Cheney Brothers. Henry Kendall, general manager of Plimpton Press and sup-
porter of scientific management, was responsible for the introduction of formal personnel
work there. Richard A. Feiss' role is described later. In the other cases, however, the two
developments were distinct. See e.g., Sanford E. Thompson et al., "Development of Scien-
tific Methods of Management in a Manufacturing Plant," ASME Transactions, vol. 39
( 1917), 129.
•• Time study men from Tabor and Link Belt often assisted Barth and Hathaway, Sanford
E. Thompson's partner, William 0. Lichtner, also was employed on several jobs. See Dwight
Merrick, Time Studies as a Basis for Rate Setting (New York, 1920), and William O.
Lichtner, Time Study and Job Analysis (New York, 1921 ).
66 Gilbreth to Taylor, September 15, 1913, Gilbreth Papers; H. N. Stronch, "A Report on
the Operation of Scientific Management at the New England Butt Company," October 18,
1913, Gilbreth Papers.
66 See Stronch, "Report," Gilbreth Papers; "Micro-Motion Study," IEED, XIII (January,
1913), 1-4; "A New Development in Factory Study, IEED, XIII (February, 1913), 58-61;
"Discussion," ASME Transactions, vol. 34 ( 1912), 1182-1187. For Gilbreth's later work,
see K. H. Condit, "Management Methods and Principles of Frank B. Gilbreth, Inc., American
Machinist, vol. 58 (January 4, February 22, March 22, May 3, 1923), 33-35, 293-295,
443-447, 665-667; vol. 59 (July 5, August 30, 1923), 25-27, 329-334.