An analysis of clerical work standards for control of office costs in a large organization. - Page 107 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 107 of 120 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
99
! C ertain firms, however, have made ex c ellen t pro-
I
gress in th is regard and others are following s u i t . Case '
h is to r ie s of the P rudential Insurance Company, West Penn j
i
Power Company, Aldens, In c ., Bassick, Standard Oil of Ohio,j
General Tire and Rubber, Owens-Illinois Glass, and American
A irlin e s , profess to the recognition being given work
measurement using some type of standard. The government,
often c r i t ic i z e d for not employing business methods, has
, made an ex cellen t s t a r t in the Adjutant General*s Office,
I !
in sp ite of a le g is la tiv e p ro h ib itio n on time study.
These programs had as t h e i r o b jectiv es the measurement and j
j
j control of c l e r ic a l costs and t h e i r h is to ry , biased or not,'
!|
demonstrated the d e f in ite p r a c tic a b ility of such i n s t a l l a -
! i
tio n s .
I I . CONCLUSIONS
| How f a r can we go with standards? I t must be ad-
| mitted th a t standards do have t h e i r lim ita tio n s . They a re ,
j in the f in a l a n a ly sis, merely p a rt of a t o t a l control pro-
! gram. Such a control program can include organization
i|
study, procedural a n a ly sis, forms study, layout review, j
I work sim p lific a tio n , and the establishment of budgets; j
' i
| y e t, good standards can be a cornerstone to measure and j
i evaluate the other elements.
!I
Early standards were e ith e r subjective guesses or
i
I simple r a tio s of t o ta l time to t o t a l production.
Object Description
Description
| Title | An analysis of clerical work standards for control of office costs in a large organization. - Page 107 |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 99 ! C ertain firms, however, have made ex c ellen t pro- I gress in th is regard and others are following s u i t . Case ' h is to r ie s of the P rudential Insurance Company, West Penn j i Power Company, Aldens, In c ., Bassick, Standard Oil of Ohio,j General Tire and Rubber, Owens-Illinois Glass, and American A irlin e s , profess to the recognition being given work measurement using some type of standard. The government, often c r i t ic i z e d for not employing business methods, has , made an ex cellen t s t a r t in the Adjutant General*s Office, I ! in sp ite of a le g is la tiv e p ro h ib itio n on time study. These programs had as t h e i r o b jectiv es the measurement and j j j control of c l e r ic a l costs and t h e i r h is to ry , biased or not,' !| demonstrated the d e f in ite p r a c tic a b ility of such i n s t a l l a - ! i tio n s . I I . CONCLUSIONS | How f a r can we go with standards? I t must be ad- | mitted th a t standards do have t h e i r lim ita tio n s . They a re , j in the f in a l a n a ly sis, merely p a rt of a t o t a l control pro- ! gram. Such a control program can include organization i| study, procedural a n a ly sis, forms study, layout review, j I work sim p lific a tio n , and the establishment of budgets; j ' i | y e t, good standards can be a cornerstone to measure and j i evaluate the other elements. !I Early standards were e ith e r subjective guesses or i I simple r a tio s of t o ta l time to t o t a l production. |
