one another. One of these men had risen to the top of his works through
the office at the commercial end, and the other had come up from a
workman in the factory. Each one was sure that the other was a fool, if
not worse. When they were finally combined it was found that each was
right in his judgment of the other in a certain way. A comparison of
their books showed that the manufacturer was producing his chemicals
more than forty per cent cheaper than his rival, while the business man
made up the difference by insisting on maintaining the highest quality,
and by his superiority in selling, buying, and the management of the
commercial side of the business. A combination of the two, however,
finally resulted in mutual respect, and saving the forty per cent
formerly lost by each man.

The second fact that has struck the writer as most noteworthy is that
there is no apparent relation in many, if not most cases, between good
shop management and the success or failure of the company, many
unsuccessful companies having good shop management while the reverse is
true of many which pay large dividends.

We, however, who are primarily interested in the shop, are apt to forget
that success, instead of hinging upon shop management, depends in many
cases mainly upon other elements, namely,--the location of the
company, its financial strength and ability, the efficiency of its
business and sales departments, its engineering ability, the superiority
of its plant and equipment, or the protection afforded either by
patents, combination, location or other partial monopoly.

And even in those cases in which the efficiency of shop management might
play an important part it must be remembered that for success no company
need be better organized than its competitors.