GOOD-BYE TO SMALL WORKS? NO!
Page 17
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
By "The Inspector.'
AQUESTION that has always been a muchdiscussed one in the columns of the technical Press devoted to the motor-vehicle industry is that as to the relative merits of manufacture by assembly of complete units or as a whole. This muchdebated problem now once again comes up for notice, because, as was pointed out in a recent editorial in THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR, a report of the Engineering Trades Committee of the Board of Trade expressed the opinion that the continued existence of the small manufacturer is not compatible with the system of efficient production which the Committee regards as essential for the future. In other words, this 'body, charged with examination into the conditions of the various branches of the engineering tradeas they were before the war, as they are now, and as they should be hereafter, votes substantially and apparently exclusively for the development of big organizations or amalgamations.
To those who have any special faculty or opportunity for examining the essentials of such economic business problems, the suggestion that the small man cannot compete successfullyin the coming new world's markets is the obvious and the easy one. We see all round us huge organizations built up under subsidy of and with the powerful support of, 'Government services, tackling huge jobs with inflated staffs and unlimited financial resources. We, as ordinary civilians, here and there with some knowledge of what factory • organization implies, are naturally therefore being forced to the view that only by large conception can maintenance of our position in the -world's trade be achieved.
There is jast a danger that much support which this opinion may secure may arise from the very fact that all the big things that are being done in the world at the present time are being achieved by virtue of big control, big organization, big programmes—and big money. We must not forget that the success that is being achieved at every hand 'in War production is not necessarily a commercial one. The mistakes that are being made are, to those who know, very often colossal, although often perfectly justifiable in the special circumstances. They are very seldom commercially defensible. Expense hardly matters at all if, from the war-time point of view, the end may be considered to justify the means. The only competition is in that for "priority." Not only is this overwhelming result present in our own industries at home, but we see the same conditions working in the countries of our allies, and, we presume, from past knowledge of the Hun, that organization regardless of expense and other considerations is not the least factor in his scheme of things which has conduced to the remarkable results winch the Central Powers have undoubtedly secured.
• We are constantly being reminded in these days of the probability of the world's early regeneration after the war, of the fact that we shall all look at things very differently, that we shall never go back to the old way of doing things, that men who have been accustomed to four years of fresh air will never again grace the office stool. We are just a little inclined to be carried a-way by this wave of lightly-considered opinion. We neglect to remember that the man who has had four years in the open air may, in not a few cases, be heartily sick of it. We take no pains to remind ourselves that the huge trust-like corporation, co-ordinating effort in every direction, may-well serve the Government's needs in such times as these, at a price, but that the community as a whole is not neces
sarily benefited by similar treatment. I am not one who holds that this country can dispense with the small manufacturer. I hold that he has a very definite niche in the trade organization of this country. Let him co-operate, encourage his education, foster his ,ambition, allow him to expand, if he wishaai to, and show him the very definite direction in Which his activities can he usefully employed. There remains every use for the "one-man business," or at any rate its industrial equivalent.
It is very often to the small manufacturer that we have to look for detailed. improvement, for breakaways from convention and from the very definite restrictions imposed by colossal output of standardized articles. The individual counts for very little in a huge organization, and it is not alight thing that we 'Should do anything to crush the individualism of the small British manufacturer—a very valuable and
peculiar characteristic.
We shall, of course, as a matter of practical politics, never dispense with the small organization, despite the pious expressions of opinion from the Board of Trade Committee quoted above. We shall never be without the individual who is prepared to back his own opinions against a world of criticism and hostility. We shall probably continue to have with us the small manufacturer, for instance, of chassis who here and there will develop design-in. a manner entirely different from that to be looked for from a huge manufacturing corporation, with its tremendous standardized commitments. Not a few of our most successful chassis owe their origin to the individuality of small concerns, albeit their subsequent development has been in the hands of corporations.with.unlimited capacity for multiple production.
It is suggested that the small man can still-live if he toe the lino as a factor in assembly organization, if he he satisfied to specialize inithe production of some more or less trivial unit, as a subordinate of the big main concern_ That there is money to be earned for the small man in this direction it would be foolish to deny, it so far as the manufacturer proper is concerned, t is probably necessary to admit that there is more likelihood of the small man's earlpfinancial success in this direction than if he attempted to produce complete chassis—shall we say ?—in his own small way. But the industry ownstother: ways of earning modest livings than in the production of the complete chassis. The day of the general engineer is by no means yet over Ile is a decidedly aseful factor both to the general Public, and as an auxiliary to the bigger concerns.
I hold, therefore, that there is no need for discouragement to the -small man, as in the opinion of the Engineering Trades Committee. There is a vast deal more general work to be done than is. suggested in this expression of official criticism. I am not an advocate 'of the possibility of the cheap production of the efficient complete-ear in a small way, nor am I in favour of the assembled car as compared with that designed' throughout under one hat, but that the small man's day. is past 'I am by no means convinced—even in respect of chassis construction of certain kinds. It would be a bad day for the commercial-vehicle industry, which will increasingly depend for its success on numberlesssmall engineering shops throughout the country, which can undertake maintenance, repair and manufacture in a small way, if these shops had to shat up or to be absorbed into the mere huge corporations who have neither bodies to be kicked nor souls to be damned, nor the brains to be individual.