"You gentlemen may laugh, but that is true, all right; it sounds ridiculous, I know, but it is fact. Now if the problem were put up to any of you man to develop science of shoveling as it was put up to us, that is, to a group of men who had deliberately set out to develop the science of all kinds of all laboring work, where do you think you would begin? When you started to study the science of shoveling I make the assertion that you would be within two days – just as we were in two days –well on the way toward development of the science of shoveling. At least you would outlined in your minds those elements which required careful, scientific study in order to understand science of shoveling. I do not want to go into all of the details of shoveling, but I will give you some of the elements, one or two of the most important elements of the science of shoveling; that is, the elements that reach further and have more serious consequences than any other. Probably the most important element in the science of shoveling is this: There must be some shovel load at which a first-class shoveler will do his biggest day’s work. What is that load? To illustrate: when we went to the Bethlehem Steel Works and observed the shoveler in the yard of that company, we found that each of the good shovelers in that yard owned his own shovel; they preferred to buy their own shovels rather than to have the company furnish them. There was a larger tonnage of ore shoveled in that woks than of any other material and rice coal came next in tonnage. We would see a first-class shoveler go from shoveling rice coal with a load of 3.5 ponds to the shovel to handling ore from the Massaba Range, with 38 pounds to the shove Now, is 3.5 pounds the proper shovel load or is the 38 pounds the proper load? They cannot both be right. Under scientific management the answer to this question is not a matter of anyone’s opinion; it is a question for accurate, careful, scientific investigation."
More by Frederick Winslow Taylor
See allResonant Thoughts
"If we never were structuralists, we can now explain why: why we seemed to be, even though we were not, why there came about this strange misunderstanding on the basis of which books were written. We w…"
Explore Further
Related Quotes
"The hardest lesson for humans to learn: that organic complexity will entail organic time."
— Kevin Kelly (editor)"This reaction of man upon himself, is one of his noblest attributes; it offers, indeed, the finest field fo…"
— Adolphe Quetelet"I don't understand a thing about this world: about people, and why they do the things they do. The more I f…"
— Craig Silvey"The Definition in the Elements, according to Clavius, is this: Magnitudes are said to be in the same Reason…"
— Isaac Barrow"As a pioneer swimmer, you've got to be willing to fail and try again. The point isn’t to learn to fail, the…"
— Lewis Pugh"At this late stage in the history of American capitalism I'm not sure I know how much testimony still needs…"
— Lewis H. Lapham
Related Thinkers
Related Topics
Deep Dives
- N. R. Narayana Murthy on knowledge
- Bran Ferren on knowledge
- Jim Lovell on knowledge
- Larry Wall on knowledge
- Linus Torvalds on knowledge
- Vitruvius on knowledge
- Erik Naggum on knowledge
- N. R. Narayana Murthy on leadership
- N. R. Narayana Murthy on books
- N. R. Narayana Murthy on creativity
- justice & Beauty
- justice & Change

