Did you ever read an article or a book wherein the author seems to have side-stepped all the recognised straight jacket methods of dealing with his subject, and hands out a few sentences that make you know that he knows what he is talking about—and no blarney about it either?

The other day I read such a book (“The Human Element in Organisation,” by Frederic Meron, M.E., E.E., University of Liege, Belgium) in the form of an educational treatise on the handling of men. It is the first time I have ever found a work of a Continental engineer written in such an aggressive and “live” strain. So much, in these days, is written in the “dry as dust” formal style, that it is not to be wondered at that much of it never gets read at all.

If you are for maintaining the ancient order of things and “know all about everything” this book would hurt your feelings.

If, however, you are not afraid of a new view-point, a fearless exposition of some home truths—to have what we know are our real problems laid bare—there is a lot of profit to be had out of the above book.

Right after his opening remarks the author's first sub-heading is “Elimination of Waste in the Factory.” That's how important he considers waste in the modern organisation problem. M. Meron goes on to say:—

“As everybody knows, when a wounded soldier on the battlefield is brought to the surgeon, the first thing the latter does is to have the wounded man's dirty clothes changed for clean ones.

“After this, the man's wounds must be washed, particular attention being given to disinfecting the wound.

Only after all this has been done is it possible for the surgeon to begin the methodical curing of the affected part.

The same thing happens in the factory.

The first thing to be done is:—

1.	To eliminate unnecessary waste which, in many cases, is very considerable and means the loss of large sums of money.

Until this elimination of waste is effected it is impossible to go ahead with any degree of success in the introduction of a new system.

We must diminish the cost, but how are we to do it?

2.	Find readily all the losses as well as their causes.
3.	Find the proper means to reduce to their lowest value the causes of these losses by means of the least possible expense, both of money and time.
4.	Indicate in every case a special system of supervision allowing the head officer to follow, without difficulty, day by day, the exact amount of the losses, of their causes, and of the effect produced on the latter by the means adopted to combat them.

To know how to employ men and have records that are simple, clear and precise, so that all those concerned can judge at a glance how the business is progressing.

To the four general rules just enumerated I can (goes on M. Meron) add the following:—

It is absolutely necessary:

5.	To know how to eliminate, as much as possible, all kinds of unnecessary waste which exists in almost every factory.

Waste is to be found in all factories, in some less, in others more, it depends only upon how the factory is managed.

6.	To determine exactly the actual maximum output of the machines and workmen which page 11 it is possible to obtain under existing conditions.
7.	To find out the best means of increasing the output of machinery and men to the maximum.
8.	To find out the source of the best machinery used by competitors.
9.	To determine the exact unit cost before the prices are given in the factory, and not afterwards.”

I quote the foregoing because of its general application to the management of any industry, whether in office, warehouse or factory.

Those associated with the production methods and reorganisation work we now have in hand will recognise the principles—in those lines cited. As I have often stated, there is no justification at all for waste, whether it be in materials or labour. To do work efficiently at the lowest cost does not mean doing harder work in the muscular sense, it means more brain work to conserve the physical labour for where it is needed. In my experience the men who get the best results never appear overloaded, and, what is more, they are not. This is a matter of organisation.

The danger of our isolation from the progress of the Northern Hemisphere is that we may think we are “it.” Don't make that mistake. The successful executives of the most progressive concerns are those who most appreciate how much they don't know. Moreover, they are always trying to learn.