SCIENCE TO THE RESCUE.
Economics of Fatigue and Unrest and the Efficiency of Labour in English and American Industry. By P. Sargant Florence. (Allen and Unwin. 16s. net.) Economics for Helen. By Hilaire Belloc. (Arrowsmith. 5s. net.)
Tnn modern world can look back now over a good century- and-a-half of the triumphs of Applied Science, and can see the results. They have transformed the face of the whole earth. And it is extremely natural,- now that our social affairs have got into something of -a tangle, that we should be casting longing eyes towards this all-powerful agency, and be whispering to one another, " Cannot science help us out ? " True, illusions and disillusionments lie thick around here. Yet Science is always bravely tucking up its sleeves again. All through Dr. Florence's massive and masterly book one can hardly but be reminded of this. Its real theme is Science in " the handling of the human factor " in industry. It is not exactly a pioneer book. It is a survey of achievement, much of it being, nevertheless, the author's own achievement. It is a survey of achievement in that rich and comparatively new field of scientific investigation— the borderland between Psychology and Economics. It has had its predecessors and has tried to learn by their mistakes. Previous to it there had gone, in particular, the advocacy of that important scheme of industrial theory and practice known as Scientific Management, originated by Dr. Frederick W. Taylor. And that good story—not too hackneyed yet—of the brush between Scientific Management and the forces of Labour is well fitted to give the reader some introduction to Dr. Florence's position.
The brush was simple enough. Dr. Taylor, it seems, took up the subject of efficiency in bricklaying. By an intimate study of every movement of the bricklayer's body, hand and mind, he was able exactly to formulate the. optimum conditions for good work, and evolve a more or less frictionless system, which increased the output of the gang he was studying by a startling percentage of bricks laid per man per day. 'tills was news to the industrial world. Apparently, Science_ applied to the human factor could increase efficiency almost as startlingly as when applied to the devising of machines.
But what did Labour say ? Labour, taking a -surface glance at this device " for the _good of both employer and employee," bluntly called it sweating. It worked itself into a fury, even ; especially at the idea that it was scientific. " Psychology in the service of the Devil " was a phrase that figured in the rencontre. And it registered its sentiments in unmistakable fashion in the American Legislature, by having a law passed in 1915 against the conducting of any such studies in the United. States Army workshops. The pathetic part is that these good people thought that their work was all for the welfare of Labour.
Labour, then, shall we say, is recalcitrant, ungrateful, ill-humoured ? Yes. But what does all this really mean ? To the author of this comprehensive text-book, at least, it means simply that Science has not got at its problem. And so, swallowing its disillusionments, it must get to work again. It must redefine its-task. Having tackled inefficiency, it cannot stand by and see its results upset by the other phenomenon, unrest. The unrest itself must be taken in as •part of the inefficiency to be removed. Science must get to work again, upon a larger problem. The author aims, then, at showing what conditions of the human factor work• out as uneconomical. After he has elaborately and ably collated the results of statistical investigation he turns to the results of laboratory and quasi-laboratory study. Here he finds, from tests, experiments and questionnaires, that " much the same industrial conditions " as make for excessive turnover, absence, failure in output, accidents, sickness and other uneconomic things, do also affect "workers' bodies and minds," in the way of unsettlement and unrest. The dynamic of the book lies here. There are things at the root of unrest itself that Science can tackle. Science is not being beaten by the fact that Labour is disgruntled. It is going to see what is wrong with Labour.
And if it is a pleasure to welcome this book from the Univer- sities on the subtle psychological points which industry needs to watch if it would avoid fretting and rasping men into a state of unrest, it is hardly less of a pleasure to welcome a really competent book issuing from the heart of industry itself, showing the practical lines along which employers who are anxious to increase their production by introducing " payment by results " may proceed. Mr. Powell is no faddist. While " payment by results " has enhanced pro- duction, it has carried a deal of fretting and rasping along with it. The author acknowledges, too, that this has too often been the result of what Dr. Florence would call the mere " bad will " on the part of employers. But he is as clear as Dr. Florence that the right way to prevent it is by showing employers an alternative plan, and not merely appealing to their honour. And so he • sets out to show how to- avoid friction and get a "free run " for the system ; and this over a wide field of industry.
It is impossible to overestimate the value of work like this when, as in the case of Mr. Powell, it is the fruit of long and intimate contact with the actual problems themselves. But it is valuable, of course, always under a proviso. The proviso is that production and output are valuable. With this in mind it is somewhat startling, to say the least, to turn from his and Dr. Florence's works to the two short books by Major Douglas and his popularizer, Major Arthur E. Powell, and learn that this proviso may embody a mere mistake ; that it is possible exactly to invert the whole thing ; read it upside down ; and instead of looking on production (after the devastation of the War) as a world-need, look on the cry for " production " as a world fallacy One must, of course, be collected and calm and consider an allegation like this dispassionately. It is undeniable that we have at least had production enough to stock our ware- houses just now. They are full. There is 'something in English common sense, too, that is shocked by the mere paradox of starving in the midst of plenty. Everybody wants the circulation of goods to go on. But for some mysterious reason the whole machine has stuck. Is it all going to be altered by the mere turning of a button ? There is something savouring of necromancy in this that offends common sense again. We only wish there were space to discuss these Credit proposals. There is little doubt that Major Douglas has succeeded in knitting up some 'thoughts
that have been vaguely occupying many minds and has thrown them off in a highly challenging way. But is there not a fallacy somewhere in his simple proposal ? One might attempt, perhaps, to nail the issue down to a single point. What—all prejudice apart—is the common sense of the !ituation, where an able-bodied willing man is unemployed ? His position is that he has not the money to buy the things he needs. Major Douglas seems—we put it no higher—to suggest that it is only common sense to give him the money. Want of money is all that is wrong. Supposing all of the million unemployed found by chance a bag of sovereigns a-piece to-morrow, what would be the effect ? It would restart the industrial machine. They would spend the money, release the warehouses, set up a call for more goods, and so get employment again. The question, however, that immediately arises in the plain man's mind here is, what if after this fairy-godmother experience the individual took to looking for sovereigns instead of looking for work ? Major Douglas is, of course, abundantly aware of this question. Yet it is difficult to make out what is exactly his answer. And, meanwhile, we may perhaps be permitted to suggest there is, theoretically, an alterna' tive to giving the man the money. That would be to give him the power himself to make the things. This consideration does not fail to occur to Major Douglas. But he dismisses it.
It is with the strangest feelings that one turns from all this to Mr. Belloc and his Economics for Helen. Poor Helen, we may note, is only sixteen, and (as Sheila Kaye-Smith might put it) he lectures her just " somethin' tar'ble." But it is not that. It is the uncanny spectacle of Mr. Belloc devoting all the force of his battering-rams to undermining the foundation of the very defences which his comrade-in- arms, Major Douglas, is striving to erect against their common enemy! No one could well sympathize more with Major Douglas's determination to " break the power of the banks " and be rid of the " hidden government " of Jewish financiers
than does Mr. Belloc. But Major Douglas's " made " money will never do anything if people do not trust it. And
Mr. Belloc is doing his utmost to make them not trust it. Just in proportion as the rest of the world overhears Helen's lessons on money and takes them to heart, they will be preparing to stultify the Douglas measures on the threshold. For Helen is to believe that the only real money is gold, or something with intrinsic value. Paper is suspect. And yet —this is the startling thing—on the one occasion when Belloe raises a hand to Douglas in the course of the book, it is not to curse him ; if anything, it is to salute him.
Verily, a strange place is the forum. What a power these two publicists—competitors, backing opposite plans—would be in combination if their cause were good. Indeed, what hope of economic salvation is there unless such as they are combined ? But what power Could combine them ? What power on earth could ever make either of them really lower his own individual flag and rank up behind the other ? Certainly no power in any extant " science." Even by this, may we not see the importance of what none of all these books takes upon it to emphasize. None of them, not even Mr. Belloc's, seizes the importance of morality as a weapon of economic reform. And yet, what else is there in the world, in the last resort, to count on ? J. W. Scow.
Previous page
