Be it the likes of David Montgomery or Harry Braverman, Taylorism has been central to how an earlier generation of labor historians examined corporate management techniques in Progressive Era America. While building on these important historiographical traditions, this panel seeks to push the conversation beyond Taylorism by adding more sociological, psychological, racial, cultural, gendered and comparative angles to the study of bureaucratic forms of personnel management and labor control. While these previous histories have focused mostly on mechanical deskilling,individualized productivity surveillance and piece-rate incentives as the central mechanisms of control, this panel delves into some underappreciated forms of personnel management and labor discipline - be they five-point rating scales, eugenic-inspired phrenology, IQ tests or capital accounting. What is more, all three papers expand on the professionals involved in modern management, moving past the typical Taylorist efficiency experts and scientific managers to examine engineers, accountants and industrial psychologists.
Eli Cook’s paper will examine how industrial psychologist Walter Dill Scott designed a novel five-point rating system in an attempt to discipline and motivate white-collar salesperson’s whose labor could not be controlled using the same Taylorist techniques as manual or machine workers. Karen Mahar’s paper examines how scientific racism and eugenics came to play a central role in the construction of racial hierarchies within the American workplace by focusing on how physical traits of the human body became a key criteria when selecting men for executive positions in American businesses. Comparing business bureaucracies in the UK and US, Rudi Batzell’s paper argues that due to different class dynamics, while British businesses and their workers came to be controlled mostly by accountants, in the United States it was the engineers who gained the upper hand.