Anglo-Saxons seeing themselves as superior than others is an obvious trend throughout history and Adas' “Machines as the Measure of Men” is another example of that trend. After decades of attempting to claim superiority through superficial means (fashion trends, head size, eating practices, etc.), a need for a quantitative trait grew. This was the foundation for the idea that industrialization was equivalent to progress; that less developed countries needed the assistance of major manufacturing powerhouses in order to move up in society. This idea is still at play today, but there is an counter movement growing. As discussed briefly in class prior, companies would brag about the size of their factories and showcase the smoke plums as signs of their productivity. Today, the idea is drastically different. While the 20th century focused on exporting to less developed countries in order to spread influence and “superiority”, there is a shift away from that in consumer desires in the modern era. I think that there is a higher demand for more local and less manufactured goods in exchange for wanting to export our culture. -Kim Eastridge

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)

I found it interesting how even the poorest housewife could use a scientific method of management. I found that the way that every chore in a household can possibly standardized very intriguing. When Frederick discusses how to make a cake using the scientific management method he makes little changes such as arrangement of utensils and ingredients(277). He uses these steps to lessen the wasted motion it takes to do a task thus saving time. I never really thought about managing mundane tasks such as doing the dishes or washing my car by using this method. I think this passage shows the capability this theory has for big corporate factories as well as everyday households.-(Kendell Jenkins)

I think it is interesting to think about wast motion. Frederick describes making a cake with the least amount of wasted motion as possible. While I was reading this I was thinking about how I make a cake. I definitely waste a lot of motion in doing that task. There can be a scientific method or approach for everything that we do but how much does it really help in the long run? Besides having a strict schedule to keep track of. – Erin Madden

James O'Connell was an affiliate of the American Federation of Labor, or AFL. In his letter he describes the dangers of the system of Taylorism, a new form of organizing and standardizing labor during the industrializing time.

O'Connell denotes three key differences between Taylorism and previous methods of work. First, the system employs four specialized “subject-area” foremen instead of one. Second, instead of workers using their expertise to judge construction, a “planning department” would set standard guidelines that could be followed by any low-wage worker. Finally, O'Connell describes the introduction of “clocking in,” in which workers are paid by their time, rather than by the piece.

O'Connell worries that such a system leaves no trust or honor in place to the workers, and instead, seeks to replace once skilled workers with either machines or low-waged, no-skill, easily replaceable men who will complete “life-destroying work” in “intolerable conditions,” all with no organized Union protections (281)

It is interesting to look at the shift in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in the United States from piecemeal work to that of a wage laborer. While O'Connell could not predict the rise of middleman office jobs by the latter half of the twentieth century, he was correct in arguing that without a system of organization for workers, they could easily be exploited by employers seeking to maximize profits.

Even nowadays, there are many ethical questions about replacing low-skill workers - primarily now in the service industry - with kiosks and other forms of artificial intelligence. On one hand, such jobs have undesirable conditions, so it would make sense to have them done by machines. On the other hand, those with few skills often lack the resources needed to obtain further skills, leaving them with few options. ==Glynnis Farleigh

James O'Connell had an essential part in recognizing Taylorism from other forms of work. Taylorism “seeks machine and work efficiency.” O'Connell is worried about this new form of work because it could turn workers against managers and leave the workplace with no signs of trust. When these high-skilled workers are forced to leave, low-skilled workers will come in; this leaves room for injuries and mess-ups in the factories and companies. Low-skilled workers bring lousy work conditions and no Union protections. They are working with unsafe equipment, long workdays with minimal breaks, and close quarters. - Reilly Miller

Highpockets is a term used for a factory worker who “bent every muscle towed helping the company.” Nelson Algren explains his perfect employee. It was interesting in the very beginning how the highpocket was a “hillbilly.” They assumed this simply from how he walked. But he worked twice as hard as the others and agreed to do more by the “time-study” mans request. It was interesting they they said this was a tall tale because it did not sound too out of the ordinary. The boss seemed to take advantage of this person while the other employees watched and pushed for him to do more. There was also multiple uses of comparisons (similes and metaphors) and rhyming. For me, it made it slightly confusing to fully understand.– Erika M.

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