Frederick Winslow Taylor, the Father of the Scientific Management Movement, was among the very first (along with his associates), to study the labor process scientifically. His core belief was that making people work as hard as they could was not efficient in optimizing productivity and diligence. Rather, he believed that managers and employees should frequently work together, which was a foreign concept during the early twentieth century. Additionally, perpetuated employment - the studied workers’ motivation, was not as effective as higher wages. Ultimately, he concluded that particular workers could work more thoroughly than others, and thus more selective managers would also increase efficiency. How does the recent rise of high-skilled, sedentary work affect the original Principles of Taylor’s Scientific Management? (–Nate Stringer)

Carlton here writes about how America and the greater world are entering a new era of industry and social progress having seemingly utilized a great amount of natural resources and land. I’m not sure in what month and/or what knowledge has already emerged about WWI at his time of writing, but I suppose no one at the time could imagine what significant effects WWI would have on the American economy and its manufacturing processes. I wonder then if Carlton would agree that WWI was crucial, if not necessary, for American development in the global market and that without it the US may still have remained a debtor country trying to figure out scientific efficiency in engineering and its place in the world. - Dillyn Scott