144 
FOURTEENTH REPORT. 
engineering centers around the treatment of the wage earners. It is 
more a problem concerned with the relations existing between the em- 
ployer and his employees than it is a problem of bookkeeping or of the 
care of machines or of the selection of tools. The pioneer and leading 
exponent of efficiency engineering, Mr. F. W. Taylor, writes: "This 
close, intimate, personal cooperation between the management and the 
men is of the essence of modern scientific or task management.” And 
Harrington Emerson asserts that "to establish rational work standards 
for men requires indeed motion and time studies of all operations, but 
it requires in addition all the skill of the planning manager, all the skill 
of the physician, of the humanitarian, of the physiologist; it requires 
infinite knowledge directed, guided and restrained by hope, faith and 
compassion.” 
In theory, according to its advocates, scientific management stands 
for increased productive capacity without increased effort; it aims to 
do away with lost motion and useless movements. It means maximum 
results with a minimum of effort; it does not mean “frenzied produc- 
tion.” Now, these objects are certainly worthy of approval. Opposition 
to efficiency engineering must arise because of the methods employed in 
carrying out the policy. Our attention evidently must be directed to- 
ward this inquiry : How, then, can this “close, intimate, personal co- 
operation” of which Mr. Taylor speaks, be secured? 
It is perhaps worth while at the outset to call attention to the fact 
that Ihe man who is "working for himself” does not object to methods 
or systems which lighten his work. The farmer is glad to get a tool 
which will increase his productivity. Even the conservative wife of the 
farmer is not adverse to the installation of a new or better pump, a 
cream separator, or some scheme which will save steps. Why then does 
the wage earner so frequently resist the introduction of new machinery 
or of new and scientific methods of performing work? The farmer and 
the farmer's wife do not fear that the new machines or methods will 
cause them to lose their positions, or that they will be called upon to do 
much work for little more pay. They believe, on the contrary, that 
their income will be increased and the length of their working day 
reduced. In short, they are confident that the results of their efforts 
will be multiplied. On the other hand, the wage earner feels instinct- 
ively, too often as the result of past experience, that the system of 
scientific management is some subtle scheme to advance the interests 
of his employer at the expense of the workers individually or as a 
class. How can the viewpoint of the worker be modified until it coin- 
cides in this particular with that of the farmer or with that of the man 
who is “working for himself”? This is another fundamental problem 
for the efficiency engineer to solve. 
The wage earner, however, demands that a portion of his share in the 
advantages accruing from improved machinery and scientific manage- 
ment be given to him in the form of a shorter working day. His con- 
ception of a desirable form of society in the twentieth century is not 
one in which a certain number of individuals work long hours at high 
speed; but one in which all work during a short working day. * There are 
obviously at least two alternative methods which may be pursued in 
producing a given quota of economic goods and services: a small num- 
ber of men may be employed for a long working day or a larger number 
