BENEFITS OF ELIMINATING “DECISION OF CHOICE.”—­There is always time lost by “decision of choice.”  The elimination of this is well illustrated by the bricks that are piled on the packet, which decides for the bricklayer which brick is next, making an obvious sequence, hence the saving of time of decision regarding motions, also the saving coming from the play for position.  Oftentimes a handicap of slow mental action can be compensated for, in a measure, by planning ahead in great detail.  In this way, if the plan is made sufficiently in detail, there is absolutely no time possible left to be wasted in “decision of choice.”  The worker goes from one step to another, and as these steps are arranged logically, his mind does not tend to wander away, but to keep on in an uninterrupted sequence to the goal.

STANDARD EQUIPMENT IMPORTANT.—­As for equipment, the phenomena of habit are among the most important features of the psychology of management and the possibilities of the elimination of unnecessary waste resulting from taking advantage of this feature is possible only when the equipment, surroundings and methods of the worker are standardized.  Therefore the insistence upon standardization, even down to the smallest things, is vital for achieving the greatest output.

For example,—­suppose the keys of the monotype machine, piano or typewriter were not located permanently in the same relative position.  Consider the loss of time in not being able to use habits in finding each key.  Such an arrangement sounds ridiculous on the face of it, yet it is a common practice for many operators, especially of monotype machines, to make a complete mental decision as to the muscles and fingers with which they will strike the desired key.

Imagine the records of output of a typist who was using a different keyboard every day, if there were that many kinds of keyboards.  It is easy for anyone to conceive the great advantages of standard keyboards for such machines, but only those who have made a study of output of all kinds of workers can fully realize that similar differences in sizes of output are being produced by the workers of the country for lack of similar standardization of working conditions and equipment.

UTMOST STANDARDIZATION DOES NOT MAKE “MACHINES” OF THE WORKERS OPERATING UNDER IT.—­The attention of those who believe that standardization makes machines out of the workers themselves, is called to the absence of such effect upon the typist as compared with the scribe, the monotype and linotype operator as compared with the compositor, and the mechanical computing machine operator as compared with the arithmetician.