Increasing Efficiency In Business by Walter Dill Scott (desktop ebook reader .txt) 📕

the completion

of the addition sixty grips were taken by

the right hand and sixty by the left. The total

pressure exerted by each individual in the 240

trials (four minutes) was then recorded and

expressed in kilograms. The result of the

experiment is shown in curve B of Fig. 1.

The average total pressure for each of the

five persons was for the first day 620 kilograms;

for the twenty-fourth day 1400 kilograms.

Our increase was very rapid for the

<p 226>

first few days, and no general slump was encountered

till the last week of practice. In

one particular our results in the test on physical

strength were not anticipated—we did not

suppose that by practicing four minutes daily

for thirty days we could double our physical

strength in any such a series of maximum

grips with the thumb and forefinger.

 

It is a simple matter to measure day by day

the accomplishment of one learning to use the

typewriter. All beginners who take the work

seriously and work industriously pass through

similar stages in this learning process. Figure

2 represents the record for the first eighty-six days of a learner who was devoting, in all,

sixty minutes daily to actual writing. The

numbers to the left of the figure in the vertical

column indicate the number of strokes (including

punctuations and shifts) made in ten

minutes. The numbers on the base line indicate

the days of practice. Thus on the ninth

day the learner wrote 700 strokes in the ten

minutes; on the fifty-fourth day 1300 strokes;

on the eighty-sixth day over 1400 strokes.

<p 227>

 

Figure 3 represents the results of a writer

of some little experience who spent one hour a

day writing a special form of copy.

 

In this curve it will be observed that the

 

{illust. caption = FIG. 2.}

 

increase in efficiency was very great during

the first few weeks, but that during the

succeeding weeks little improvement was

made.—BOOK, W. R, “The Psychology of

Skill,” p. 20.

<p 228>

 

The progress of a telegraph operator is

determined by the number of words which he

 

{illust. caption = FIG. 3.}

 

can send or receive with accuracy per minute.

In learning telegraphy, progress is rapid for a

few weeks and then follow many weeks of less

rapid improvement. Figure 4 presents the

<p 229

history of a student of telegraphy who was

devoting all his time to sending and receiving

messages. His speed was measured once a

week from his first week to the time when he

 

{illust. caption = FIG. 4.}

 

could be classed as a fully accomplished operator.

By the twentieth week this operator

could receive less than 70 letters a minute,

although he could send over 120 letters a minute.

At the end of the fortieth week he had

<p 230>

reached a speed of sending which he would

probably never greatly excel even though

his speed was far below that attained by many

operators. The receiving rate might possibly

rise either slowly or rapidly until it equaled

or exceeded the sending rate.—BRYAN &

HARTER, “Studies in the Physiology and Psychology

of the Telegraphic Language,” _Psychological

Review_, Vol. IV, p. 49.

 

There are certain forms of learning and

practice which do not readily admit of quantitative

determinations. Nevertheless very successful

attempts have been made even in the

most difficult realms of learning. A beginner

with the Russian language spent 30 minutes

daily in industrious study and then was tested

for 15 minutes as to the number of Russian

words he could translate. Figure 5 shows

diagrammatically the results of the experiment.

Thus on the thirteenth day 22 words

were translated; on the fiftieth day 45 words.

Improvement was rather rapid until the nineteenth

day, and then followed a slump till the

forty-sixth day. Improvement was very ir-

<p 231>

regular.—SWIFT, E. J., “Mind in the Making,”

p. 198.

 

These five figures are typical of nearly all

 

{illust. caption = FIG. 5.}

 

practice, or learning, curves. They depict the

rate at which the beginner increases his

efficiency. In every case we discover very great

<p 232>

fluctuations. On one day or at one moment

there is a sudden phenomenal improvement.

The next day or even the next moment the

increase may be lost and a return made to a

lower stage of efficiency.

 

There are certain forms of skill which cannot

be acquired rapidly in the beginning. In

such instances a period of time is necessary

in which to “warm up” or in which to acquire

the knack of the operation or the necessary

degree of familiarity and self-confidence before

improvement becomes possible. This is

true particularly in the “breaking in” of new

operators on large machines like steam hammers,

cranes, and the like, where the mass and

power of the machine awes the new man, even

though he has had experience with smaller

units of some kind. It applies also to new

inspectors of mechanical parts and completed

products in factories—especially where the

factor of judgment enters into the operation.

Such instances are exceptions, however, and

differ from those cited only in having a period of

slow advance preliminary to the rapid progress.

<p 233>

 

Apparently, improvement should be continuous

until the learner has entered into the

class of experts or has reached his possible

maximum. As a matter of fact the curve

which expresses his advance towards efficiency

never rises steadily from a low degree to a high

one. Periods of improvement are universally

followed by stages of stagnation or retrogression.

These periods of little or no improvement

following periods of rapid improvement

are called “plateaus” and are found in the experience

of all who are acquiring skill in any

line.

 

These plateaus are not all due to the same

cause.

 

They differ somewhat with individuals and

even more with the nature of the task in which

skill is being acquired. With all, however, the

following four factors are the most important

influence:—

 

1. _The enthusiasm dependent upon novelty

becomes exhausted_.

 

2. All easy improvements have been made.

 

3. A period of “incubation” is needed in

<p 234>

_which the new habits under formation may

have time to develop_.

 

4. _Voluntary attention cannot be sustained

for a long period of time_.

 

These four factors are not only the causes

of the first plateau, but, as soon as any

particular plateau is overcome and advance

again begun, they are likely to arrest the advance

and to cause another period of recession

or of no advance. These four factors

are therefore most significant to every man

who is trying to increase his own efficiency or

promote the progress of others.

 

_When the interest in work is dependent on

novelty, the plateau comes early in the development,

and further progress is possible only by the

injection of new motives to action_.

 

Many young persons begin things with enthusiasm,

but drop them when the novelty has

worn off. They develop no stable interests

and in all their tasks are superficial. They

often have great potential ability, but lack

training in habits of industry and of continued

application. They change positions

<p 235>

often, acquire much diversified experience,

and frequently, in a new position, give promise

of developing unusual skill or ability. This

is due to the fact that during the first weeks or

months of their new employment the novelty

of the work stimulates them to activity, and the

methods or habits learned in other trades are

available for application to the new tasks.

When the novelty wears off, however, they

become wearied and cast about for a fresh and

therefore more alluring field. Such nomads

prove unprofitable employees even when they

are the means of introducing new methods or

short cuts into a business. They strike a

plateau and lose interest and initiative just

at the point where more industrious and less

superficial men would begin to be of the

greatest value.

 

Plateaus are not confined to clerks and other

subordinates. Executives frequently “go

stale” on their jobs and lose their accustomed

energy and initiative. Sometimes they are

able to diagnose their own condition and

provide the corrective stimulus. Again the

<p 236>

man higher up, if he has the wisdom and

discernment which some gain from experience,

observes the situation and prescribes

for his troubled lieutenant. In the majority

of cases, however, the occupant of a

plateau, if he continues thereon for any

length of time, either resigns despondent or

is dismissed.

 

Such a case, coming under my notice recently,

illustrates the man-losses suffered by

organizations whose heads do not realize that

salaries alone will not buy efficiency.

 

A young advertising man had almost grown

up with his house, coming to it when not yet

twenty in a minor position in the sales department.

Enthusiastic about his possibilities,

with the friendship and co<o:>peration of

his immediate superior, he carried out well the

successive duties put to him. Promotion was

rapid. No position was retained more than

six months. In five years he had occupied

nearly every subordinate position in the sales

department, and was promoted to the head of

the mail-order section.

<p 237>

 

His fertility in originating plans, his schemes,

his booklets, and advertising copy brought

results with regularity. He became known as

a man who could “put the thing over” in a

pinch, with a vigor and enthusiasm that

seemed irresistible. He fairly earned his

standing as the live wire among executives

of the second rank.

 

So, when the general sales manager resigned,

there was no question but that this young man

should succeed him. He had been a personal

friend of his predecessor, had co<o:>perated with

him in many phases of his work, and knew his

new duties well; in fact, he took them up with

little necessity for “breaking in.”

 

This apparently favorable condition was the

very reason for his lack of success in the new

work. There was not the novelty in this position

that there had been in his former successive

positions. In such an executive position,

it was not a question of taking care of an emergency

demand, but of organization, of establishing

routine, of organizing bigger campaigns.

Before the end of the first season it became evi-

<p 238>

dent that the new sales manager was not making

good. Everything—organization, discipline,

routine system, ginger—had deserted

him. Neither he himself nor his employers,

however, found the real cause. “I have lost

my grip,” he told the general manager. “I

am worn out and of no further use to this

business.”

 

Furthermore he thought he was of no use

to any business. But he made a connection

with a big house which had a large advertising

campaign on its hands. He threw himself

into the task of recasting the firm’s selling

literature, the planning of new campaigns,

and the reorganization of the correspondence

department. Within the year, he had duplicated

on a magnified scale his early triumphs

with his first employers. Moreover, he continued

this record of efficiency the second year,

thus entirely refuting the fear of himself

and his friends that he would “last less

than a year” and that he lacked staying

power.

 

His first employer described the case for me

<p 239>

the other day, requesting that I discover the

reason for the young man’s initial failure among

friends and his subsequent triumph in a new

environment. He had kept in close touch with

the other’s progress and supplied a hundred

details which helped to make the situation

clear. Finally, after consideration, he agreed

with my diagnosis that his young friend’s

falling off in efficiency—his plateau—had

been due to the exhaustion of novelty interest

in his work.

 

His first success was built on a long series

of separate plans or “stunts,” each of which

was begun