men to do work, there was little or no attempt to study the
individuals who applied for work. The matter of selection was more
of a process of "guess work" than of exact measurement, and the
highest form of test was considered to be that of having the man
actually tried out by being given a chance at the work itself. There
was not only a great waste of time on the work, because men unfitted
to it could not turn it out so successfully, but there also was a
waste of the worker, and many times a positive injury to the worker,
by his being put at work which he was unfitted either to perform, to
work at continuously, or both.

In the most progressive type of Traditional Management there was
usually a feeling, however, that if the labor market offered even
temporarily a greater supply than the work in hand demanded, it was
wise to choose those men to do the work who were best fitted for it,
or who were willing to work for less wages. It is surprising to find
in the traditional type, even up to the present day, how often men
were selected for their strength and physique, rather than for any
special capabilities fitting them for working in, or at, the
particular line of work to be done.

OUTPUT SELDOM SEPARATED UNDER TRADITIONAL MANAGEMENT.--Under
Traditional Management especially on day work the output of the men
was not usually separated, nor was the output recorded separately,
as can be done even with the work of gangs.

FEW INDIVIDUAL TASKS UNDER TRADITIONAL MANAGEMENT.--Seldom, if
ever, was an individual task set for a worker on day work, or piece
work, and even if one were set, it was not scientifically
determined. The men were simply set to work alone or in gangs, _as