COxNSIDERATIONS IN SILVICULTURAL RESEARCH 797 



In the present part I wish to apply the principles of the new psy- 

 chology of work to the selection of forestry men for two distinct lines 

 of work into which all forestry work divides itself. There will always 

 be at least two distinct types of work in all forestry enterprises, no 

 matter whether they be carried on by private, State, or Government 

 interests, and these two types of work will require more or less distinct 

 types of men. Research and experimental work will require research 

 men with a research type of mind, and directive or administrative work 

 will require men with a directive type of mind. In order to give full 

 recognition to research work in all its bearings, it is of the utmost im- 

 portance that the forestry schools and the forestry departments of the 

 States and the nation recognize the research type of forester and his 

 peculiar qualifications and characteristics as something quite distinct 

 and apart from the administrative type. 



There must necessarily, sooner or later, be a combined efifort upon 

 the part of the principal forestry schools of the country and sole pres- 

 ent employee of forestry investigators — the Forest Service — to recog- 

 nize research ability in foresters. At least they must learn the lesson 

 that competent work in research cannot be done by men not tempera- 

 mentally fit for the work and adequately trained in the fundamental 

 sciences. When this recognition comes about, and not until then, can 

 we expect a wholesome and rational development in forestry research 

 in this country. 



In selecting men for different branches of forestry work we must 

 employ the new psychology of work, so often referred to lately, as the 

 only rational basis for fitting the man to the job and the job to the man. 

 This psychology recognizes two important facts : that every individual 

 has, upon analysis, certain general traits, characteristics, and qualifica- 

 tions, and that every job, in a similar way, has certain general charac- 

 teristics. The problem then resolves itself into interpreting the traits 

 of the individual and classifying the characteristics of the job, where- 

 upon the individual is guided into the job for which he is supremely 

 fitted. It thus happens that failure at one job merely points the way 

 to success in a job probably of the opposite type. 



The research type of mind is in many ways opposite in character to 

 the administrative tyjje. Research men are apt to be of a retiring dis- 

 position ; administrative men are often more social and are "good 

 mixers." Investigators are often of a studious nature and they may 

 even be what we call "dreamers." How important this studious habit 

 is in research men may be gathered from what Dr. L. H. Bailev said 

 at a meeting of the Society for Horticultural Science in 1017 and which 



