'To begin with, we need to find out where businesses get their ideas for new R+D based products. Fortunately Cohen, Nelson and Walsh asked just this question in 2002 as part of a Carnegie Mellon survey on industrial R+D. They also reviewed the contributions of university and government research labs - ''public reseach'' - to industrial innovation. Their survey showed that customers were the best source of ideas for business projects (named by 90% of respondents), with the next best source being manufacturing operations (74%). Public research comes second bottom on the list (32%). So, the best business ideas do not come from the lab but from business and the market. Where the scientists come in is identifying the technology capable of meeting customer need.'
From 'People not ideas' by Stephen Allott. Prospect, April 2005.(
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=6806&category=&author=2258&AuthKey=4dc30ca20268632045f4bc407587a210).
'American farmers were lobbying manufacturers to make cars with detachable back seats as early as 1909. It took Detroit more than a decade to 'invent' the pick up truck.'
'One really exciting thing about about user led innovation is that customers seem willing to donate their creativity freely. . . . . some firms are starting to believe that there really is such a thing as a free lunch.'
Both from 'The future of innovation - The rise of the creative consumer'. The Economist, March 12th - 18th 2005
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=S%27%29%280%28RA7%26%20%40%22L%0ASee also The Creativity Gap by James Heartfield.
http://www.design4design.com/broadsides/creative.pdfInnovation and the workplace?
(a.k.a. 'An anger statement against employers'.)
Introduction.
This has been something of a mental battle as considering the mechanics of developing an idea many other factors came to bear, so much that a consideration of the barriers to innovation became more necessary.
By innovation I mean the standard dictionary definition of to introduce something new, to which I would prefer to add, to aid a positive outcome. This is stated as despite innovation mostly having positive connotations and suggesting progressive aims, in practice and intent it can be anything but.
I choose to look at the subject primarily from a manufacturing aspect ie. a hands on approach, although this not to fetishise manual labour as much of the ends of this process are of as much use as other work. In so calling into question the products and labours of one then all labour necessitates justification and the ends to which it is put. A much bigger question and one best answered collectively.
Neither does this approach assume that all or even the best ideas come from the ground up. I merely make the point that an operative familiar with his or her job is most often better placed to make improvements. What works on the drawing board doesn’t necessarily materialise without modification in practice.
The bulk of this ‘essay’ stems from some 3 years as an employee and discussions with personnel at all levels at a well known manufacturer of modular buildings.
(Interestingly enough, the company was borne out of the endeavours of one of the founders building trailers in his garage.)
Various other working experiences are drawn on for backup.
Www.dictionary.com and thesaurus provided a key in offering rambling (amongst many others) thus giving the subject some lateral scope and me an entry.
Innovation clearly does not come from one source - accident, intent, flash of inspiration, cross over of ideas or some unknown triggering influence.
‘Trying is the first step towards failure’ (works graffiti).
Developing an idea leads to a broadening of horizons, akin to climbing a ladder and being able to see further with each step. Lateral and vertical planes, each a plateau of opportunity or pitfall, as much daunting as fruitful. With each step forward different factors may influence our decisions, prior knowledge is challenged by that of others and modifications occur – strengthening, refinement, accommodation or a tangent.
Mistakes or setbacks are a natural part of developing ideas (if you’re not making any then perhaps you aren’t trying hard enough.)
Innovation may be driven by a negative outlook, even arising when humanity is at its most inhumane. Wartime’s urgent necessities require continuous refinement and new development as one seeks to be ahead of the game; science, technology, culture and labour put to nefarious use. It exposes class relations in their most regimented and naked form. The working class tamed and trained to bark and rollover, any questioning tantamount to treason and the lower ranks making it all work whilst suffering the shortcomings. The officer class write the rules and give themselves plaudits while our boys and girls do all their dirty work.
It’s a job, but a crap one.
See Military Innovation in the Interwar Period synopsis and reviews (incl. Newt Gingrich)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0521637600/qid=1123504172/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-7307011-3373767ABC
Innovation need not necessarily be anything too inventive. Temporary problems do not require complex solutions. A contemporary primitive example could be something as simple as shoving a book under a wobbly sofa. A temporary solution to a temporary problem, mission accomplished and we pretty much all do something like it when needs must.
A brief mention of the home ‘handyperson’ (man then). Where previously the home handyman may have been pleased to fashion something out of a few scraps from a skip, today he finds an abundance of relatively inexpensive tools, materials and a whole range of ‘how to’ books, programs and so forth, allowing him to take a measure of pride in getting things to fit and adapting . . . . . probably sheds and shelves to put all his DIY stuff in and on.
Inadvertently, I helped a mate potty train his son when I took him with me to the gents. The next morning, and to our amazement, he stubbornly refused his nappy, stood up and aped what he had seen the night before. I was so impressed that helping him with the stairgate catches he was struggling with didn’t seem too bad an idea.
Dave, the doting father and keen pilot, was alarmed until remembering jumping from the top of the stairs onto piled up coats in his youth.
Children can learn very early, and despite being cute everything works out better if they are gently encouraged to progress from early on. After all, who knows where the little buggers (yorks. sl) may fly to tomorrow?
Nathan, a sometime colleague of mine, after a lifetime of monkeying around, is very adept with bits and pieces. For instance he was able to unlock his flat using a twig, his shoelace and belt. Unfortunately he is currently spending some time ‘pleasuring Her Majesty’ when previously he was actually a damn fine but under rewarded worker. He claims dyslexia yet makes the complicated seem easy and can explain so.
As a rookie on a construction site he ‘twocked’ the biggest vehicle there was, a 100ft scissor lifter and proceeded to knock spots off men with 2-3 years experience, achieving new records and setting a high standard. Initially enthusiastic and glad to have the chance to mend his ways yet stuck in routine and low paid work. Welcome to the real world, mate. (1)
Incidentally, this company has a ‘Bash on!’ culture - rough ‘n’ ready but gets the job done. After working with them and witnessing them overcome many a problem in a typical day, I asked a director why he didn’t treat ‘the lads’ with some respect. His reply: ‘they’re nuggets!’ and he didn’t mean gold.
Muddy site, biting winds, machinery fumes – where there’s muck there is definitely brass.
Self- employment.
With self-employment things become more interesting. Acquiring some status and access to business accounts gives far greater scope to be inventive. It can be a tinkers' dream but also a nightmare.
The oft reported long hours culture of the self employed can perhaps be explained to some extent by an intimate involvement with the product and meticulous attention to detail – ‘my name is on the product’ commonly quoted. It could be argued that this pertains to an early stage ie. that of the pre-employee sole trader or small business (or those operating in a more profitable niche market). Reason being market dynamics do not allow for much slack and the sole trader can become a busy fool doing everything at market rate (or less) whilst not having the means to sustain this, thus resorting to lengthening the working days and weeks to accommodate.
The most basic task in production is organisation – although in reality this has to be accompanied by a degree of flexibility. Nonetheless organising work so that effort is minimised, allowing efficient throughput of work is essential. This may be obvious yet it is surprising how little it occurs. It is by no means confined to small industry, although small industry is often ahead of the game albeit within the confines of its operation.
Hand in hand with design, manufacture is where true innovation lies ie. within the actual creative process itself. Oft repeated or similar tasks readily lend themselves to batch processes and the making and modification of tools, jigs or implementing of a controlling system. A great deal of time and effort may go into either so as to constantly make gains each time a process is performed. There can, however, be a tendency to become too absorbed in one particular aspect to the detriment of others and over refinement may occur. For instance, a collapsible light-stand once involved with caused considerable manufacturing problems until Shaun, a casual worker, devised a beautiful but complex solution.
A much simpler and easier to manufacture version of the same product is now made elsewhere but this is not to dismiss the experience as the process of trying and testing something new yields beneficial results in other circumstances. It is a matter of direction, effort and learning from mistakes.
New products, component parts and systems can significantly speed up production, add to functionality, appearance and have an accumulative effect.
Even two bit businesses are bombarded with tool, product and material brochures and the like. Obviously, these products are not magicked out of thin air.
Many is the time that a potential customer at a trade fair will know better what to expect from a product than the vendor unless he has intimate knowledge either through working with it or similar kit, or being the originator. This is not the same as merely studying the spec sheet and noting facts and figures. The brochure, blurb and salesman are mere fronts but what are they selling?
Designing, manufacturing and redesigning a product can be an exhilarating experience. It can also be physically and mentally exhausting, so much that the simplest of tasks can prove elusive, one and one somehow just not making two.
The beauty for the self-employed is the chance to work and experiment whilst alone. The downside to this is that it is usually carried out late on into the night, the phone’s stopped ringing and there are no callers, a modicum of tranquility and a chance to put thoughts into action.
Small businesses by their very nature operate within limits – that of reduced manpower, limited resources and therefore limited capacity. By no means perfect, big business has significant advantage in these areas. More involved work can be spread over more operatives and machinery greatly enhancing efficiency and productivity.
The successful or dynamic small business lends itself to expansion – larger premises, more equipment and employees – design, technical and support staff, operatives and management. Here though, the proprietor finds himself increasingly removed from the design and manufacturing process proper and moved into more of a management role. Despite maybe maintaining an interest in the actual production process this is necessarily evermore limited and delegated to subordinates. The same circumstances that the business developed under are now spread over more people and, more importantly, in more departments.
On the shop-floor similar features that the self-employed encountered still exist but are now in the hands of operatives, the labours of one divided between many, specialised operatives skilled in a fragment of a more productive whole.
This has huge benefits but perversely the reverse is more the truth.
Most often the man on the job best knows how to operate his kit and how to adapt it to get the best performance. The same person doing the same work as an employee hits many a problem -
· No longer having the same status he becomes a part of the company’s
machinery.
· He runs around the job and not the other way around as previous.
· The kit is no longer solely his and is shared with other operatives.
· That which was done as favour and out of interest is now expected to cue and not necessarily in sequence.
· Expertise and capability is taken for granted.
Management.
Management have limited ideas when it comes to innovation. A company director admitted as much when he candidly stated enjoying discussing counter posing viewpoints with employees as much useful information is gathered.
Similarly, the suggestion box has long been gathering dust as ideas presented got knocked back as being unworkable, naïve, expensive, etc. only to reappear in modified guise some time later with management’s name all over them. Good job, well done – and yes, we have been.
The ideas of shop floor employees are coaxed and manipulated for management’s own ends, freely absorbed, in fact, positively stolen. This happens in a manner of ways – as discussed above, passed around by supervisors eager for their extra bonus and being helpful, through the company bonus scheme and informally between operatives.
Company directors can, in some instances, be likened to Captain Mainwairing figures – detached, pompous, arrogant, patronising and rarely making sense - but then they are just doing their job. Their lower ranking minions, the supervisors, can be thus likened to corporals and sergeants, serving to keep the men in line, acting as channels of information between worker and management and, increasingly, between workers. Much of this information true and parts of it rumour or speculation. Maybe I judge harshly but for some it forms a significant part of their fabrication.
These loyal lackeys of the officer class, part of the general body of men but will most often fall into line with the bosses despite claiming or believing otherwise. From them management get a picture of the shop floor and can gauge the temperature or mood of the men.
Increased surveillance in the form of cctv provides a clearer picture but also mirrors insecurity and further exposes a lack of trust. It also shows they have little better to do than to spy on the workforce, so much that they have developed a peculiar, if not perverse, habit of cruising the toilet block.
If management knew what was good for them, the product, productivity and even, dare I say, profitability then they ought to take a step back. The shop floor is a much better organised and productive environment when there is less interference. A taste of this can be had during overtime when there is little of management around. An informal atmosphere develops and the place, oddly enough, is almost a joy to work in.
Although it must be remembered that this is prime and precious time.
Night time working is a particular oddity - life, literally, turned upside-down. The beauty again being a limited management structure, more space, less waiting for major plant and a chance to develop ideas if one is interested enough.
Perhaps most revealing of all are the rare occasions when there is no official management structure at all. Unsupervised and self-managed workers are able to get on with their work without hindrance – more productive, much more relaxed and tidier. There is no chain of command to follow or indeed chase and restrictions are limited.
Interestingly enough, on the latest occasion when word got around that there were no supervisors to be present, more men than usual turned in and organised themselves easily and quite naturally. At the end of the day you do what you have to and it is so much easier when no one is on your case.
In this rarefied atmosphere men are at their most cooperative, no hierarchy, just a willingness to get on with the job. The company enjoyable and almost civilised.
Management at all levels expend so much wasteful energy spying on and prying into the affairs of the workforce that they do not seem to understand the mechanics of production. Either that or they are wary of it in a more real and less fettered form. Elements of both are likely true.
Revolutionaries the men are not. For the most part the workforce just want to go to work, do a decent job and get paid a wage that affords a decent life – end of story.
The shop floor can and ought to be a hotbed of ideas and development. Instead ideas are buried, thwarted, withheld or develop haphazardly; true growth becomes stunted. This became apparent when the company employed a technical process officer to analyse ways of increasing performance. In all this should have been a good thing but was not positively viewed amongst the workforce. Instead of acknowledging our positive role and fully applying it there can be a leaning towards Luddism.
The enthusiastic worker is played off against others as not being up to scratch, that so and so are much quicker, etc, etc, so why the problem? Yet the same people that goad and harry have been known to book themselves and their cronies onto your job and ride you. One wonders why it takes longer than expected to have a pay review although, admittedly, the company rulebook states reviews are after 13 weeks, not at. In practice they tend to be well after this period, sometimes many months after. Within the 13 week period the diligent employee has more than likely banged in all the overtime, produced plenty and is already training up new recruits.
This flexible approach runs throughout company policy and procedure.
One of the directors let the cat out of the bag when he boasted at the Xmas presentation of how marvellous they all were (and that they ‘couldn’t have done it without you guys’). He rightfully stated that the company has an aggressive position in the sales and buying market. Akin to the maxim of foreign policy having it’s domestic counterpart then management have a similar stance in their dealings with employees with health and safety as the humanitarian arm of home-front relations.
Health and safety
Health and safety issues, fought for by generations of our predecessors and now, in these depoliticised times, at the forefront of employer/employee relations. Here for our protection and who would argue against that?
People go to work to earn a living, to get somewhere in life and not to kill, maim or wear themselves out in the process. Most of us accept the belief that we are in it for the long run, pace ourselves accordingly and, in a familiar environment, understand what works best for us and the job.
H+S regulations in application make little common sense. Everything sought to be formalised and accounted for. 'Difficult' issues are delayed, repackaged and usually restricted. Reasonably practical is the buzz phrase, as in ‘that’s not’ whenever the workplace requires something of consideration. The representation from the shop floor is mostly non-contributory, everything to be in writing and checked for grammar, spelling, whatever but not so often the content. Management, for their part, cross most of their T’s and dot about the same amount of i’s but that doesn’t make up for dishonesty.
The preference is to twist round our requests and use them against us. Health and safety becomes see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil and question little. Any grievance dealt with by lengthy and tiresome procedure, and rarely judged on the issue. More sophistry than sophistication despite having a process for everything.
For management, the reverse of this is true. The response immediate, on some occasions backdated and always in writing, even when evidence is hearsay. To hear there are christians among these good people makes for more than irony when they act like the devil.
There are those in management who take H+S to heart and believe it to be looking after the general interest; take for instance the hearing and lung function tests - good idea but generally understood to be the company covering their backsides. Perhaps given away by questions asking whether there is a history of related illness in the family. Do we answer yes, and have them tested too? Perhaps to receive treatment? Perhaps not.
A more revealing example of the doublespeak of company rules and practice is the case of a supervisor catching his finger in the upstroke of an operation. The operation was carried out in a work area where steel is often ‘temporarily’ stored and access can be tricky. A worn punch caused the material to rock and nip the tip of his finger off. The real pain though was the loss of two weeks’ wages and monthly bonus. Not bad for 13 years loyal service.
H+S, seemingly a valuable tool acts more like a limp left wrist to the disciplining right hook, but the outcome is similar. In truth H+S provides an extra element of control - laissez-faire regulations for everything, anything or nothing, depending on who needs the treatment. The softer side of management, as opposed to being busted from your shift for attitude or having wages docked via reductions in bonus.
Football and control
What was a firm, fair, fast and furious game proved to be not only an excellent 4 times a week workout but led to greater informalising of worker relations and increased cooperation.
One or two design faults where a previous and unnecessary conflict of interests arose were ironed out of the product. Incidentally, the supervisors involved were more interested in getting the job out rather than sorting out problems in the factory. Maybe this is unfair as they were only following orders (or chasing their extra bonus).
The game was a huge bonus to morale, we were keen to get to work, get stuck in and enjoy a limited freedom. No one got hurt and the game was almost a delight to watch. So, everybody happy? Not management. In fact, management got the jitters, banned the game and altered the break times, paradoxically, on health and safety grounds.
Whereas men once had regular exercise that had an accumulative effect now they sit around, smoke, eat 'crap' and are, it’s fair to say, unhealthier.
Management for their part seek some shared collective experience and provide it in logoed fleece jackets, a rule book that follows the ‘reasonably practicable’ route and an Xmas party.
Xmas
Xmas fare often leaves a bad taste in the mouth as it is traditionally a time when management turn the heat up, settle scores and make disruptions. Their aspiration to encourage the view that they run some element of the show rather than merely being in charge, encourages a Stooge mentality, whatever the increase in output. The tendency for the rate of profitability to decline may also play a role here but there is a hefty degree of malice in the recipe.
The recipe is:
September – November time (ish) – allow a gentle rise in pay around about equal to that of inflation (August figure).
Gently run down the bonus payment to quite low, any excuse will do.
Sack one or two operatives and make life awkward for one or two more (optional but advised as a test).
In xmas pay packet give mini extra bonus, throw in a speech and have a party.
Peace and goodwill to all!
Delia Smith consultancy and ideal conditions
Modern industry rarely works in an integrated manner. The workshop is a constant battle against the nature of production as ‘modern factory’ conditions are far from ideal. Many processes happen in close proximity to one another, vying for contradicting conditions and subject to different pressures.
Although not quite 'Hell with the lid off' a glimpse of The Somme can be gained when retrieving deliveries from the yard, over many an obstacle and in adverse weather. A health and safety officer’s nightmare (unless of course one is protected by safety specs and ear protection) but neither the other men or machines are out to kill you, and you get to go home.
Installation – site work adds a further dimension as petty rivalries between different trades and their immediate concerns become more pronounced in the form of separate companies.
Grahame, my brother, a fine worker and one-time company stalwart, had the good fortune to work on a prestigious development in London. No doubt also picked for his keen and oh-so blue eyes, he soon came to describe the situation as gutting.
When previously outfits cooperated over deliveries, storage and plan of working everything went as well as it could. Then completion stages came to the fore and every company looked after number #1. Semi organised chaos - people on top of each other, work ripped out more than once and once good effort reduced to half-hearted or slapdash – like keystone cops but not as funny.
Good workers losing heart, interest and in a couple of cases their jobs as scapegoats were sought. Back at the factory bonuses were reduced.
Not to worry – it does what it says in the brochure. And the directors all got new cars, which is nice.
At the factory a smart consultancy was drafted in to encourage the junior ranks to run an efficient set up. For abstraction and levity they chose a pancake making example where all the ingredients were laid out in exact quantities and sequence and the task flows smoothly. The irony wasn’t lost on the supervisors.
Shopfloor innovations
There is a tendency for an individual employee to selfishly and pettily claim themselves to be the originator of an improvement, either for some element of status or maybe as a bargaining chip in wage review negotiations.
Often such improvements are a sum of parts and come from more than one source.
For example: simple board cutting ‘program’ for 32’ x10’ bases.
Gav showed #1 cut mark on the saw bed.
Well over a year later, Boothy, our pilot friend, from a different shift, matter of factly passed on the info that the boards had to be cut at 32 and 57 inches - not something readily noticed in millimetres where the odd 4-5mm wasn’t amiss (and the mind perhaps elsewhere.)
The third cut being the longest, combining the two previous at 89”. Info courtesy of, quite literally Mad, Lee Robinson.
Finally our humble Mr. Booth told of his favoured fourth position which allowed the boards to be handled in a different manner.
This then jumped to having 4 marks on the saw bed, order of boards for least handling, quantity of boards for common jobs, the saw powered up once for the duration of the ‘program’ and a 45min dawdle transformed into a 10 min doddle and this on every corresponding job.
* No tape or measuring required, job accurate and efficient.
The neatness of the operation lent to the idea of batch cutting, dedicated job, recorded sizes, known repeat offcuts, possible investment in a router and a dedicated area to operate rather than the half thought out option that prevails.
Incidentally, the supervisor said it would be a good job for a labourer.
Further thoughts -
reorganising workshop layout for efficient throughput,
transport and product options eg. flatpacking, more beneficial products and using rail option nearby. But then this is still taking things as we find them – what of M1/M62 factory site or airlift direct to site installation?
Perhaps this is what HRH Charlie means by getting ideas above our station, but then maybe he should speak for himself.
HRH provides a fitting example of what the aforementioned Gav calls an ‘inverse reality ratio’, implied in this case that someone who is actually quite useless is valued more than the people that actually produce society’s requirements and they considered little better than serfs.
Baseline – how low can you go?
Building regulations are always changing. ‘Earth summit’ conferences at Rio, Kyoto and Johannesburg and the concentration on climate change have led, amongst other things, to the implementation of Part L regulations. Part L, for us, concerns insulation.
The base is the first part of the building unit. Part L resulted in a laboriously manufactured subframe to carry an extra layer of mineral fibre, very much an afterthought and difficult to do to a decent standard (largely due to irregular spacing of components as per company drawings).
In practice certain sizes led to a more efficient use of materials and an easier job. A rough sketch and some basic maths led to 5 or 6 examples being manufactured and proved a better design. Calculation was reduced and standardised as were components.
Noticing insulated panels quickly led to even greater simplification, then further refined by a member of the drawing office. In total, wastages of materials, time and labour were substantially reduced and a better product is the result.
When the idea was presented to the Technical Director the question was raised, hypothetically, about time saved going towards reducing the working week. His reply was that the benefit would be an increase in the bonus payout. Mais non! – not the bonus that is manipulated at the whim of management and found to be faulty and readjusted every 2 years?
Assurances given by said Director that this wouldn’t be the case have since proven baseless.
None of this is rocket science and not particularly original - a similar method has been seen employed on a competitor’s product, built and installed before ‘our’ product got off the ground.
On the level.
The workshop floor is very uneven so the laying of the base prior to the next step in manufacture required the use of a laser level and packing. Again, a repeat task, remedied by making removable and numbered blocks corresponding to positions on the floor. Simple and saves half an hour per job.
Grant, a previous employee, had a hand in this. He has since been sacked ostensibly for his attitude relating to his colourful use of language against an asian supervisor.
This is management at their most innovative. Grant’s attitude is what led him to introduce something new in the first place and the spat between him and the supervisor arose partly because supervisors don’t like to be outshone.
In the main though, the origins lay in Grant being the unofficial mouthpiece for the nightshift against the recent bonus recalculation.
True, he did make things awkward for himself and others by going down the race route but the spat was largely seen as half a dozen of one and 6 of the other, pantomime and posturing rather than anything as gross as was made out.
A Few good men* * * * * *Informal breaks (a.k.a. stealing from the company).
Generally, people accept that conditions aren’t ideal and strive to make their working environment as conducive as possible to a 40 hours+ slog. Manual work can be a pretty dirty business and one doesn’t expect to be pampered.
The first 10-15 mins. on the job are usually spent getting ‘dialled in’ – doing paperwork, checking the drawing, setting out personal tools and equipment and checking the job over. This before work begins proper.
When the cats are away the mice prefer to do this with a fag, a coffee and discussion with our partner. Everything sorted and we’re off.
The informal break arises for all manner of reasons –
When waiting for the next component or major plant to be available.
After completing a particularly arduous part of the job (usually ‘raced’ to get it out of the way.)
When problems arise and one needs to pause and come back with a fresh approach.
Whatever the reason it is rarely a dragged out affair.
Adam, a hardworking youth, fell foul of this though. Kept waiting for his pay review and miffed that he had to train up an agency worker on some £2.50 an hour more than him, he decided to ‘kick ass’. So much that between them they managed to get the bulk of the work done in half the time normally expected. A moment arose when they were waiting so they nipped off for a quick smoke only to be spotted by an upstart manager.
Adam lost his bonus for the month and the agency worker lost the chance to enjoy our company.
A workshop in full effect is a delight - ‘an effing ballet’ as was overheard in conversation with a suitably safety bespecced H+S officer. It’s a pity that a minority always spoil it.
Good workers are treat little better than schoolkids, driven nearly mad with petty regulation, become frustrated, or operate below capacity
Further notes.
On the one hand, the workforce apply themselves well and are initially promised much in reward for their endeavour yet this is always subject to the delaying tactic, daylight robbery of bonus payments or accrued holiday pay when one leaves in some cases. The result turns good men into cynics and in some cases worse. Every day seemingly Groundhog Day. The clock-in machine displays ‘hello’ – it may as well laugh in our faces.
Management’s specialty lies in being petty, awkward and spiteful which goes quite some way to undermining their own interests by making life difficult for the workers and the attitude in response becomes a muttered ‘fuck ‘em’ (shopfloor parlance - excuse the french), a semi-detachment to our work or cringing deference.
Of course one can climb the greasy pole and seek personal advancement into the higher ranks through competence, attitude and one or two other ingredients. It may initially leave a bad taste in the mouth but it seems to be an acquired one.
Of course our grievances can be addressed through company procedure but given that the company instigates the grievance, provides judge, jury, executioner and author of the rules then it is little wonder that our noble and civilised directors can claim that it is a tried and tested method that always works – for them.
Rules and procedure are for proving one’s innocence when usually the result is a foregone conclusion. If you have the right attitude – ie a suck-up - then the procedure is more for show and gathering information.
Meekly conforming to increasing regulation, complacent or uncertain about the future and keeping our heads down, arses up and the blinkers on. Don’t step out of line, do as you’re told because management know best. Maybe we could accept our station in life if they did.
There are elements within management that are creative and hardworking and even have some positive contribution to make. Though their main claims to innovation rest on sleight of hand, doublespeak, purloining and rehashing the ideas of others and a flexible interpretation of their own rules.
#4 Excuses and cop outs for which we should make none - cracking under pressure – extra time and penalties but we were well ahead at work and desiring to partake in life’s pleasure’s shouldn’t have guilt attachment.
#9 It is hoped to establish a firm connection between productive work and design for liberalising both. The commonsense environment that is the shop-floor is capable of throwing up evermore. However again this has a limited nature in the here and now due to the isolated nature of the individual worker whose actions are gelled with others through the company structure and what camaraderie after or at odds with that.
#6 FLEXIBLE – factory and society - integrated c/w well rewarded with time off
~ training up apprentices, the willing.
. MULTISKILLED and job demarcation, a desire to get the job done well, perhaps develop more of an interest in the product and its application
#10 WORKFORCE needs to acknowledge its progressive role and not rely on the token or joke effort – good for the morale it may be, but it tends to make us into clowns. #Like a quarrelling couple . . . manifestations of tension expose themselves in usually trivial ways.
#Reappraisal of our efforts as easy route is anything but.
Whatever the figures – production, wages, holidays we all pay too high a price for our livelihood and liberties although some more than others.
As for development we still have one foot in the primordial mire.
The doers and nurses, tinkers and sailors, clerks, teachers and sweeper uppers – the people that produce and service whatever society requires. Ordinary intelligent people consigned to repetition and low horizons, frustrated by petty regulation and kept waiting. The first to bear the brunt of any shortfall yet often the people that put ideas into action. Our humour and morals perhaps coarse but worth paying money for and more honest in our dealings than any christian, reborn or otherwise.
#3 BRANDING ’Make it as if it is for yourself ‘ – expresses an element of pride in one’s work but also an unconscious desire that someone else has lavished care on products that we purchase ie. the labours of others. This is debateable . . .
Unofficial company mottoes are (that we make) ‘silk purses out of sows’ ears’ and ‘shithouses for building sites’. The norms of capitalism rarely allow for the Marks and Spencer food counter conditions despite what we may be led to believe in our youth or what the brochure says.
Some examples:
Counterfeit goods – Levi’s – even better than the real thing. (Designer jeans.)
Badge engineering – Ford Maverick + Nissan . . . . . . erm?
Atlas copco and Milwaukee power tools (buyout?)
Hershey’s and wholesale move to Mexico
Primark and Next jackets - identical except for logo and price
Lyons bakery - M+S + market stalls, same process and largely similar ingredients.
sophisticated eqpt. Steve, a service engineer for a German co. offered the tale of tapping around a sophisticated panel of electronic gear with the butt of a screwdriver as opposed to waiting all day on the off chance that a fault would show.
Doctors performing a hip operation using lump hammer and shiny chisel.
Isn’t it written somewhere that without vision the people perish?
The contemporary view that the planet is doomed – pchoh! Then more not less human activity is a requirement. Surely if things are that bad then we should be putting things right – sink or swim?
-NB.- The dominant view (in mainstream and chattering classes) denies human agency as a force for good and, worse still, would have us cower before nature – as though nature is a coherent force. When not feeling guilty for past sins, mainly consuming too much . . .
So, what Planet are We on?
Whilst looking for a half remembered quote (some media jock wanting a ‘big step for mankind’ when asking an astronaut what goes through his mind at take-off and getting ‘ this rocket was built by the cheapest tender’) I came across C.P. Snow –
‘The only weapon we have to oppose the effects of technology is technology itself. There is no other. We can’t retreat into a non-technological Eden that never existed. It is only by the rational use of technology to control and guide that we can keep any hopes of a social life which is not appalling to imagine’.
***
(1) Nathan Watts MX4171
HMP Highpoint
South 4, G-spur/43
Stradishall
Suffolk
CB9 9YG.
Nathan, something of a fallen angel (think of Brad Pitt character in Snatch and you're not far wrong. (Also see/hear Shania twain), has embarked upon a creative writing course. Although the material can be a bit dark he's worth corresponding with.
This piece is a ramble through 'my own backyard', a shameless adventure of sorts.
