ABSTRACT
Carl G. Barth. I am gratified with the report as an endorsement of the kind of work I am permanently engaged in; particularly as I find among the names of the members of the committee who have signed the majority report, that of a personal friend who, only through this investigation has become a convert to scientific management. I am unable to take as broad a view of the matter as the committee have attempted, as I am tied down too closely to the daily details and difficulties of the practical introduction of scientific management to devote much time to its broad historical and economic aspects. Part of the report, also, has a rather amusing side for those of us who now for several years past have been working with some success in this field, in that it is virtually a declaration to the effect that the committee have assured themselves that there really is such a thing as “scientific management,” and that it does accomplish some of the things, at least, which its exponents allege that it does. It reminds me of the farmer who came to town in the early days of the automobile to assure himself that there really was such a thing as a horseless wagon not requiring tracks to run on, and that it actually did carry people around in the streets without running wild and upsetting everything in its way, except when in the hands of a driver possessing more ambition than experience and sense of responsibility.
