1954 – Packard Speeches

Box 2, Folder 26 – General Speeches – includes correspondence related to speeches

 

April 6, 1954, Electrical Engineering as a Career, Remarks at “Career Day,” Palo Alto High School, Palo Alto, California

 

4/6/54, Typewritten notes titled , “Electrical Engineering as a Career”, with handwritten notations by Packard.

Covers branches of electrical engineering, growth of need for EEs, compensation, qualifications, requirements, how to start.

4/1/54, Letter from Thad Brinkley to Packard thanking him for accepting an assignment as a speaker during Career Day.

4/2/54, Letter to Packard from Barbara Kielsmeier, Student Chairman, giving details on Career Day.

4/6/54 Suggested Guide for Speakers

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 27 – General Speeches

 

November 23, 1954, Electronics and the West, SRI, San Francisco

11/23/54 Typewritten text of speech

Packard points out that it is appropriate to talk about electronics at SRI because the field is highly dependent on research.

 

Packard talks about recent publicity concerning the electronic industry: radar, proximity fuse, electricity from sunshine. “Even the politicians are using electronic computers to predict the outcome of the elections.. “; although he points out that in the last election votes had to be counted the old fashioned way.

 

Approaching what he says appears to be a rather complex industry, Packard divides it into four divisions: household market, government market, commercial and industrial, and the fourth as the component market. “Today”, he says, “the military market accounts for nearly 60% of the total output of the industry….30% of the product is still going to the household market and about 10% is going to all other markets.”  Growth is in the direction of  the commercial and industrial market., he says.

 

Saying that the Bay Area is the very birth place of the electronic industry in the U.S., Packard traces technological developments indicating that it is possible to transmit energy through space. Some of the names mentioned by Packard include Maxwell, Marconi, Elwell, Poulson, and then Lee DeForest who invented the vacuum tube in Palo alto in 1907. He says the vacuum tube determined the beginning of the industry. The first radio broadcast was at the Pan Pacific Exposition in 1915. Other influences which tended to stimulate western electronic activity included the talking motion pictures. ..”the Hollywood area developed a number of small electronic firms related directly to the requirements of the motion picture industry.”

“In 1940″, Packard says, ” the household market accounted for about half of the entire electronic industry market.” Packard raises the question of industry in California to serve this market. He says “there were a few firms established to produce radio receivers….who operated with moderate success before 1930….but generally they had difficulty in supplying the large eastern market and consequently, the big electronic industry became centered in the eastern part of the country.”

 

” And so it was the importance of the household market to the electronic industry which caused the great concentration of electronic manufacturers in the east. “…”WW II augmented this trend…” “Most of the important government laboratories were located on the East Coast. The great consumer goods industries in the electronic field were converted to military production and during WWII hardly 1% of the electronic industry in the country remained on the West Coast.”  Packard continues saying that “a few people (in the west) were still very optimistic”, and  toward the end of the war “they organized the West Coast Electronic Manufacturers Association and attempted to expound the virtues of the West Coast electronic industry to governmental buyers…”

 

“We were sure”, Packard says, “that this trend (to the east) would be reversed after the war and so we attempted to encourage this with an electronic trade show in Los Angeles in 1946. At that show there were  25 exhibitors, almost entirely West Coast firms, and a few hundred people attended. If ever the West Coast electronic industry was whistling in the dark that was the time.”

 

Then Packard asks those present to look at what has happened since., He starts by comparing the 1946 trade show to the corresponding show held in Los Angeles in 1954. “This year (1954) , the electronic show in Los Angeles attracted 440 exhibitors, including every important name in the business, and it was attended by over 23,000 people.”

 

“By 1953 the West Coast electronic industry had grown until it accounted for more than 10% of the national electronic production.”

 

Packard examines the factors that have brought the West Coast electronic industry into its own. “The aircraft industry has been long centered on the West Coast and it has grown tremendously, and aircraft today require more electronic devices.”

 

“We have guided missile research centered in the West because space is available. And the guided missile program is highly dependent on electronics.”

 

Packard cites the growth of the industry on the West Coast: Varian Associates, Sylvania Electric, GE for example, and says that “These people have come to Palo Alto for one reason and one reason only. They want to be close to Stanford University because Stanford University is a great source of ideas for the electronic industry and a source of well-trained engineers.” He sees both Stanford and the California Institute of Technology as having been a  “substantial factor in the new westward movement in electronics”  Packard says that now 75% of the industry is on the West Coast.

Packard tells of the Institute of Radio Engineers, an organization to which virtually all electronic engineers in the country belong. “Annually they select two or three of their members who have made outstanding contributions to the field of electronic engineering and they elect these people to the grade of Fellow.” “Only two states, New York and New Jersey,” Packard says, lead California in the number of fellows. Furthermore, only three states in the entire country have more Fellows than the San Francisco Bay Area.”

 

“Even the Government has recognized the leadership of the west in electronic research and engineering.” And he cites the Navy electronics lab moving to San Diego, the Navy Post Graduate School in engineering in Monterey, the radio division of the National Bureau of Standards moving to Boulder, and the Signal Corps establishing a new lab at Fort Huachuca.

 

Packard concludes, saying that it has been exciting to see the electronics industry come into its own here on the West Coast and to see the role Stanford has played in this development. He adds that “We are proud to see that the Stanford Research Institute is taking the lead in industrial research which will help make the accomplishments in electronics available to you people in other industries and businesses.”

No date, One page with notations, handwritten by Packard,  citing various statistics concerning the electronics industry.

No date, Two typewritten pages titled “Radio on the West Coast” giving dates of events marking development of electronics. It is transmitted with a note from “Cy” to Dave.

10/21/54 and various dates, an exchange of letters from SRI and Packard’s office concerning logistics for the above luncheon, program for the day, letters of congratulations.

8/24/54, Printed program of WESCON convention

11/5/54, Letter to Bill Hewlett from J. E. Hobson, Director of SRI, inviting him to the Associates day program and November 23.

11/15/54, Pages 85/86 from Steel publication containing an article on growth of  the electronics industry.

1955 – Packard Speeches

Box 2, Folder 27 – General Speeches

.4/19/55,  Copy of typewritten letter from Mickie Ayres (Packard’s Secretary) to Captain E. S. Jernigan, Air Force, giving him the sources for some statistics Packard quoted in his speech to SRI.

5/3/55, Letter from Capt. Jernigan to Mickie Ayres thanking her for the information.

 

.

 

Box 2, Folder 28 – General Speeches

 

January 24, 1955, What Should the Chief Executive do Today to Assure the Company’s Tomorrow, AMA Conference, Los Angeles, CA

 

1/24/55, Typewritten speech by Packard.

Packard says he is going to discuss the subject in terms of what they are doing at HP to assure HP’s tomorrow. He starts by giving the audience a brief summary of  what is made at HP (Test and measuring instruments), and the manufacturing process that they have to make these units.

 

Looking at some of  the things that they do in an attempt to assure a tomorrow for HP, Packard says “I think perhaps the keystone in your entire program can be summarized in the statement that we believe tomorrow’s success is based on today’s performance.”  He admits that this may be an obvious statement,  “…but we often see many other firms who are so busy worrying about tomorrow that they never quite seem to have today’s program under control.” He says they try to do otherwise at HP, “and the first order of business is almost always to make sure the current operations are on a sound and profitable basis.” He admits that the desire to avoid over commitments may somewhat limit their rate of progress, “but on the other hand we find that when we have our current situation well in hand all of our key people seem to have a little more time to look constructively toward the future.”

 

Packard says he thinks the most important consideration for the chief executive “is to look carefully at the requirements his own business. In some cases sales is the most important field. In some cases it is production. But I believe we all have a real interest in research.” –applied research, not pure research, he explains, which few small companies can afford.

 

Packard says HP’s research program is directed at developing new products and to build inexpensive quality into instruments produced. He says “The demand for a continual stream of new products is not always present; the demand for inexpensive quality will always be with us whether we supply a product or a service.”

 

Talking about HP’s new product program Packard says that while it is usual to measure this in terms of the amount of dollars spent as a percentage of total sales. However, at HP they believe it is impossible to measure the efficiency of a research and development program in terms of the number of dollars being spent. As a result  “…we work hard toward the control of our new product work. And he explains that  “Perhaps the first and most important element of control is in the selection of men, because new products are developed not by dollars but by men, and it requires well trained engineers with vision and energy to do a good job in this field.”  Since good people are hard to find “…our expansion in the engineering department is determined not by the number of dollars we have to spend, but by the rate at which we are able to locate the kind of people we want.”

 

Moving from the selection of people Packard goes to the subject of selection of projects. He says they have a large number of suitable projects from which to select. “We coordinate this selection closely with the sales program; we do a certain amount of market research; and we are careful to select projects which fit into our present line and which are as general purpose as possible so they will meet the needs of many customers.”  He adds that “…we attempt never to undertake a new product unless we feel we can make some important contribution to the art.”

 

Packard refers to his previous statement that they always have more potential products on the list than they have been able to undertake at any given time. He anticipates the question, “Why don’t we simply expand the engineering program and undertake all of the projects which we have available?” One reason, he explains, is as he has already indicated, “We try and limit our engineering department expansion in terms of the rate at which we can get food men rather than the rate at which we can get average men. The second requirement we place on our development program is that it must be supported out of current income. This again places some limit on our rate of growth, but by careful advance filtering of the development projects and by careful selection of people we believe we have been able to maintain a development program which, although limited in magnitude is quite efficient in performance.”

 

Saying that it is almost obvious that if we have a development program which is continually generating new products, we must have a production and sales program which is geared to this continual stream of new developments. Looking first at production, Packard says they have a three-fold program.  “First, we are continually working on production methods which will achieve cost reduction and quality improvement, methods which will help maintain our goal of inexpensive quality. Second, we must have in our production organization an efficient and effective means for transferring the new product from the laboratory to the production bench.”  To this end, Packard explains, “…we bring the two groups together toward the end of a development program with the first objective to educate the production department in the idiosyncrasies of this new product, and second to acquaint the development engineer with the simple proposition that his new product must be producible if it is going to be worth anything.”

 

And thirdly, Packard says, “…as we add more and more products to our line our production program becomes more and more complicated. We therefore are continually asking our production people ….to do parts standardization, basketing of production quantities, etc.” As to the sales area, Packard says “Our sales people must be trained to know more and more about a larger number of instruments…”

 

“There are of course other problems about which the chief executive must always worry. Even for a young company such as ours, time does not wait, and so it is important to continually feed top caliber men in at the lower levels so that strength and depth is generated for all important executive functions.. Again, I find I am mentioning people as the key to the future, and this simply re-emphasizes that the future for all of us is determined more by what our people do than by how many dollars we spend. We try to carry that philosophy throughout our entire company because we feel that personnel problems are among the most important in building toward the future. We have a strong personnel program but no personnel department because we feel that personnel problems are the prime concern of all executive levels and we attempt to keep all of our people looking ahead in this area.”

 

Packard urges chief executives to look beyond their own companies saying, “I think, therefore, that we have a responsibility to the future to step outside of our office as frequently as we can to study and help guide some of those forces which are carrying us ahead at such a rapid rate.” And he cites a couple of areas: “Some recent surveys among high school youngsters indicated that in certain areas as many as 75% of the young students did not understand the principles of, or the value to be gained from, the free enterprise system and thought rather that it was something which should be corrected or even possibly done away with.”

 

Calling attention to the financial difficulties of  “…the great universities throughout the country which have generated and maintained the ideals on which our free enterprise system is founded are finding it increasingly hard to live on their endowments, to attract capable men to their teaching platforms, and this situation is becoming worse rather than better. And so to those of you who are here today, who think for the afternoon about the things you can do to insure a tomorrow for your company, I suggest that in addition to the things inside your organization you also look at ways in which you can bring the strength of your company to the assistance of your local community or the nation as a whole by a specific and direct contribution to one or more of these all-important problems, for unless the environment for hour company remains healthy all efforts to maintain a good internal program will alone not insure a tomorrow for your company.”

 

11/19/54, Letter to David Packard from Frederic E. Pamp Jr. of AMA, welcoming Packard as a participant on their Presidents_ panel at their General Management conference.

12/9/54, Copy of a memorandum from Frederic E. Pamp Jr. to panel members giving background on the upcoming conference.

12/14/54, Letter from Mr. Pamp to David Packard sending a copy of the final program for the conference.

1/24/55, AMA publication, “Assuring the Company’s Future Today”, containing text of talks given during the General Management Series, including David Packard’s.

1956 – Packard Speeches

Box 1, Folder 1 – Stanford

 

April 24, 1956, Land Development Program, Stanford Club, Los Angeles

 

4/24/56 Typewritten speech, with notations, given at Stanford Club in Los Angeles.

 

As a preface to the main subject of Stanford’s land development program, Packard first describes some current projects, such as new dormitories. Regarding space for academic functions Packard says, “There has been great improvement in the housing for the academic functions. Some of the areas in the old quadrangle have been rehabilitated, new buildings have been added or plans are in progress for the electrical engineering department, for the physics department; a new building for chemistry, a new building for the mineral sciences, just to name a few. Plans are now completed and work will soon begin on a beautiful facility for the music department, a memorial to Mrs. Dinkelspiel, and work is progressing on the plans for the Tressidor student center in the area around the Union. Work is progressing on plans for additional faculty housing, and last and certainly not least, we expect to let the contract this year to begin the Medical School facilities on the Stanford campus.”

Moving to the main topic Packard quotes Senator Stanford at the first meeting of the Board of Trustees on November 14, 1885: “The endowment of lands is made because they are in themselves of great value and their proper management will insure to the University an income much greater than would be realized were their value to be invested in any reliable interest bearing securities. Again, they can never be alienated and will therefore be an unfailing support to the institution which they are designed to benefit.” Packard says “(the Stanfords) expected these lands to yield an income to the university from some kind of agricultural operations. Packard points out that “much of the land is useful only for grazing and it has almost  continually been rented out for grazing purposes.”  He says, agricultural uses have provided the university a net income “in the neighborhood of about 10 to 15 thousand dollars per year.”

“These thousands of acres of rolling foothill land around the campus have been maintained relatively unspoiled by this limited agricultural usage. They have the land.  And so it is not strange when the Board of  Trustees embarked upon a land development program which would convert some of these beautiful lands into industrial tracts residential areas, which would place Veterans Hospitals and shopping centers upon part of them that the             local     residents accused Stanford of wantonly spoiling the land simply because the             Trustees hate land and love money”

Packard points out that “The compelling reason for the land development program is simply to make possible some of the things which I have described to you. It has to do with the vision held by the Board of Trustees and the President that Stanford is destined to maintain its leadership as a cornerstone for freedom in higher education. It is the belief that Stanford can and must set the pace in the fields of science and engineering — in the fields of medical education and medical research — to provide leadership in education, and perhaps above all to provide leadership in the great field of humanities and human relations where we are engaged in a life and death struggle with our Russian adversaries for the control of men’s minds.” So “bold and aggressive measures are called for” and “it seems obvious that certainly here is a great resource which should be made more useful to the university”

Packard describes some of the considerations before the Board of Trustees: “First, could we spare some of the land for commercial development or should it all be reserved for future campus and academic use? Second, is it possible to develop land which cannot be sold, and how do you do it? Third, if the land can be spared and if a practical plan for development is possible, is this the proper time to go ahead with the development?”

Packard says the Board approached the question of how much land could be spared for commercial development “with great caution because it has been the experience of nearly every university which has sold or otherwise committed some of its land to commercial development that it has found itself severely limited for academic expansion some years later” Based “largely on the recommendation of the Presidents office and the faculty advisers…the Board of Trustees have set aside 3800 of the 8800 acres as a campus reserve untouchable in the land development program.”

Packard goes on to the second question about how it might be possible to develop lands that cannot be alienated. Having little experience in this area “they ventured upon some limited programs to explore the possibilities. They found it would be possible, for example, to develop a shopping center on leased land, and after rather lengthy negotiations they were able to conclude the first industrial lease with Varian Associates on land to the south of the campus….it seems clear now that the university will be able to obtain as much or sometimes even more for a 99-year lease than other people can obtain from the outright sale of comparable land. Also, some exploratory development of the residential areas have gone ahead. these also demonstrate clearly that land for residential use can be developed on a 99-year lease, and it too will be worth as much to the university as though it were sold outright. It seems, then, that the second question has been clearly answered. These lands can be developed without violating the restrictions of the founding grant.”

Regarding considerations of timing for a land program Packard says, “Here, studies of population trends, real estate values, and I might add much soul searching by the Trustees, have lead to the conclusion that this is a good time to move.

Regarding implementation of the program Packard says “There are three separate areas in the Land Development Program and each of them requires a different treatment. the area bounded by the campus on one side and Menlo Park on the other side along El Camino is being developed into a Shopping and Professional area.”  “The area bounded by the campus on one side and Barron Park on the other side, that is the area on the opposite side of the campus from the Shopping Center, is being developed for industrial use.” “The rest of the land, that back toward the hills both behind Menlo and in the direction of Los Altos, is to be developed for residential use. We have already demonstrated to our satisfaction that the residential area can be developed on a 99-year lease basis. A great amount of work is going into this part of the development because we are anxious that the residential development be in keeping with the spirit of the University. “And so we are undertaking this land development program primarily because it is an important supporting element for Stanford’s march to leadership. But, in closing I would like to make it clear to you, and especially to you who have been so generous in your help with our fund-raising activities, that the land development program will in no way eliminate the need for additional finds for current use. At the present time we receive only about two million dollars from our total endowment income against a current budget of twelve million dollars. And so even though this land development program will provide a substantial increment to the endowment income, the potential yield from this program is nowhere near as great as the potential yield from our fund-raising program, and we hope that while the Trustees are actively going ahead with the land development program and all of the other work that is being done to build a great University that we can continue to count on The loyal support of the Stanford Club of Los Angeles to keep Stanford on the march.”

 

4/24/56, Typewritten copy of above speech. Appears to be an earlier draft.

 

2/15/56 – 4/26/56 Letters between Alfred B. Post, Chairman of Program Committee , Stanford Club of Los Angeles, about scheduling Packard talk to the club on the subject of land development at Stanford.

2/21/56 Memorandum to Mr. Packard, Dr. Sterling, and Mr. Brandin from Richard F. O’Brien, Stanford Associates, confirming topics and time schedule agreed upon for the dinner Friday evening, February 24. He says the topic is to be broken down something like this:

1. Mr. Packard – “Why we are doing it” – a historical description of the problems faced by the University and why (the trustees) made the decision to go ahead at this time.

2. Mr. Brandin. “What we are doing” – what is going on at the shopping center, light industrial, and residential.
Box 1, Folder 35D – HP Management

April, 1956, A typewritten text titled: HP Philosophy. This discusses, organization (three divisions), instrument development policy, company growth, sales philosophy, and government contract policy. Packard mentions the “some 800 people in the plant.”

1957 – Packard Speeches

Box 2, Folder 29 – General Speeches

 

April 24, 1957, Growth from Performance, IRE, San Diego

4/24/57 Printed copy of  David Packard’s speech “Growth from Performance” .

Packard starts by reviewing the strong growth of the electronic industry since the Korean war. Firms “have found it necessary to run just as fast as possible simply to keep up with the industry.” And in the case of HP, he explains, “our company has grown twelve times in seven years.”

 

He says they have encountered many difficult problems handling this growth, but have been fairly successful in surmounting them because “we have guided our program with some rather specific objectives …”;  and he says he will share these with the audience.

 

“First”, Packard says, “we have directed all of our efforts toward the field of electronic instrumentation.” And he explains the benefit of being able to focus their R&D effort, their production capabilities and the efforts of the sales organization.

 

The second objective, Packard says, “has been to do only those things in which we could make some contribution to the progress of the electronic industry.” He gives some examples and points particularly to their effort to make contributions in the area of manufacturing techniques. He says, “I think the measure of this contribution is best indicated by the fact that very few of or prices have increased during this period even though there have been substantial increases in the cost of our labor and material.”

 

“As a third objective”, Packard continues, “we have attempted to meet our responsibility in providing security and opportunity for our employees.” And he points out they have avoided large contracts involving the employment of a large workforce, and the likelihood of having to let them go at the end of the contract.

 

“As a fourth objective”, he says, “we have kept in mind that we have a responsibility to the community in which our business exists. We have encouraged our people to participate in community activities. We have given substantial financial support to educational and other institutions in our community.” And he goes on the give specific examples of HP employees who are or have been members of civic, industrial or educational organizations.

 

Since they are talking about growth tonight Packard says “…I want to include our objective as to growth. It has been and is our basic policy to grow as rapidly as possible in fulfilling the other objectives which I mentioned, but to keep this growth at a rate which can be financed from our own profits on a pay-as-you-go basis.” And this brings up the final objective.

 

In presenting this objective to HP people Packard says he always puts it first. “It is to attempt to make a profit of at least 10% on every sales dollar every month and every year.” Packard says this objective is very important for two reasons: “First, it makes it possible for us to achieve all of the other objectives which we have set for ourselves, and second, especially because it is the final and absolute measure as to whether we do or do not make a contribution to the industry.” “When we can no longer make a contribution to you we cannot expect you to make one to us.”

 

Packard reviews HP’s growth since 1950 from 2.3 million of sales to 28 million in 1957, and he says, “and we have accomplished this growth without any outside capital.” “The formula for growth from earnings is very simple. It is as follows: The percentage increase in sales which you can finance each year is equal to your percentage of profit after taxes times your capital turnover. Capital turnover is defined as the number of dollars in sales you can produce per year for each dollar of capital you have invested in your business.”

 

Packard proceeds to look at this formula in more detail. “The percentage of profit which you produce on your sales dollar is a pretty obvious thing and needs little explanation except to emphasize that your rate of growth is directly proportional to your percentage of profit, other things being equal.” …”For our business we think a figure in the neighborhood of 10% is about right. ”

 

“The second factor, capital turnover, is not always as well understood. Your capital includes working capital (that is the money you use to buy inventory, to finance your accounts receivable, to provide some working cask, etc.) and fixed capital would be the amount of money you have spent to buy facilities, tools and equipment. If most of your money is in working capital you can increase your turnover by keeping your inventory low, by keeping your receivables low, and by always keeping exactly the right amount of cash on hand to just barely be able to pay your bills the day before they are due.” You can almost always make your turnover better by having all your money in working capital and none of it is fixed capital. But, by having the proper tools, facilities and equipment you can usually produce a better product, keep your costs down and, therefore, you profit up. So, here again there  is an inter-related balance involved in adding to your machinery and equipment at a rate which will not unduly reduce your capital turnover, yet which will give you the things necessary to do a good job.”

Packard points out that control of all these factors is not as easy as it may sound. ” “Your production people want lots of money tied up in inventory.” “Your sales people would like to extend unlimited credit to all your customers.” He proceeds to look at how these factors have applied to HP during the last seven years.

 

He says that during this time HP growth has averaged 42% per year, profit after taxes has averaged 10% per year, and capital turnover about 4 1/2 times per year. “Thus, using the formula, percentage of growth equals percentage of profit times capital turnover, we should have been able to finance a growth of 45% per year. . Since our growth was slightly less than this we have come through this period of growth with improved capital strength.”

 

Packard discusses stock issues and points out that …”you can sell electronic stocks often at 30 to 40 times earnings.”…. Often, however, people forget that this multiplying factor can properly be used only once and that sooner or later profits will have to be increased to the point where the stock is supported on the bases of 10 or 15 times earnings, and when that point is reached your growth will be determined fundamentally by how rapidly you can increase your profits year-by-year.” Packard says he may have spent a lot of time on the financial aspects of growth, “…but, I felt since the trend seems to be otherwise that many of you would be interested in knowing that relatively rapid growth is possible without public stock issues and without merger or acquisition techniques.”

 

Packard says that the conservative formula HP uses is  “most effective when you obtain a high level of performance from all of your people. He adds that although HP uses most of most of the scientific management procedures “I think we get the best performance by giving our people as much freedom and as much incentive as possible to work together as a team toward the achievements of our objectives. We try to give them this freedom by maintaining flexible organizational methods. We try to give them incentive by a very specific device which we call our Group incentive Plan.” And he goes on to discuss the profit sharing plan in effect at the time.

 

Packard closes saying, “And so in selecting the title “Growth From Performance” I really had in mind that we have been able to achieve a fairly substantial rate of growth first by setting and adhering to some rather specific objectives, second by demanding a high level of performance from our management group, from our engineers and in fact from all of our employees. I see great opportunity for us ahead to grow with you people in the electronic industry as long as we can continue the high standards of performance which our people have achieved in the past seven years.”

 

4/24/57, Printed program of the 7th Region IRE Conference.

4/24/57, Printed pamphlet containing a short biography of each of the speakers at the conference and a summary of their comments.

4/24/57, Printed pamphlet listing exhibitors and events at the conference.

4/24/57, Copy of a speech at the IRE conference titled “Motivating Engineers in a Balanced Military-Commercial Industry”, given by Dr. Robert S. Bell, President, Packard Bell electronics Corporation, Los Angeles.

4/24/57, Typewritten copy of a speech titled “The Balanced Management Concept”, given at the conference by Charles B. Thornton, President and Chairman of the Board, Litton Industries, Beverly Hills.

11/16/56, Letter to David Packard from Donald G. Burgere, Chairman, Professional Management Session, Seventh Region IRE Convention Soliciting Mr. Packard’s participation as a speaker at the Convention.

11/27/56, Letter from R. T. Silberman, of Kay Lab, urging Packard to participate in the convention.

2/6/57, Letter from Ronald K. Jurgen, Editor of  “Electronic Equipment” asking for an advance copy of  Packard’s speech for review.

2/13/57, Copy of a typewritten letter form Packard to Ronald K. Jurgen say he does not plan to release an advance copy of his speech.

3/19/57, Letter to Packard from D. G. Burger, Chairman, Professional Management Session of IRE giving details of the forthcoming conference.

4/57, Copy of publication, “San Diego Bulletin” and IRE publication, including biographies of the speakers at the forthcoming conference.

4/16/57,  Letter from B. F. Coggan, Vice President and Division Manager, Convair-A Division of General Dynamics Corporation, inviting Packard to attend a breakfast, sponsored by the San Diego Chamber of Commerce, on 4/25/57.

4/17/57, Copy of typewritten note to B, F. Coggan  from Packard accepting his invitation for the breakfast.

4/24/57, Letter to Packard from T. T. Patterson, Chairman, Publication Committee IRE-PGEM, requesting a copy of Packard’s speech at the IRE conference.

4/27/57, Letter from Samuel Freedman, General Manager, Chemalloy Electronics, requesting a copy of Packard’s speech at the IRE conference.

4/29/57, Clip of article from the Electronic News, about the speech at the IRE conference.

4/29/57, Typewritten note to Packard from Lee Hackler, Fairchild Publications, enclosing the article from Electronic News on the conference.

4/30/57, Handwritten note from Packard to (presumably) his secretary, asking that she send copies of his speech at the IRE conference to Charles Blyth, Frank Walker and Al Schwabacher.

4/30/57, Copies of letters to the above gentlemen sending copies of the speech.

5/3/58, Letter to HP Company from R. H. Rupkey, Foreman  Cycle, Test & Repair, requesting a copy of Packard_s speech at the IRE Conference.

5/7/57, Letter to Packard from Karl Freund, President, Photo Research Corp. requesting a copy of Packard’s speech at the IRE conference.

5/8/57, Copy of typewritten letter from Packard to R. H. Rupkey, sending a copy of Packard_s speech at the IRE conference.

5/8/57, Copy of typewritten letter to Samuel Freedman sending a copy of Packard_s speech at the IRE conference.

5/10/57, Form postcard to Packard from Stephen W, Miller of SRI, requesting a copy of Packard_s speech at the IRE conference.

5/14/57, Copy of letter from Packard to Stephen W. Miller of SRI sending a copy of Packard_s IRE speech.

5/14/57, Copy of typewritten letter from Packard to T. T. Patterson sending a copy of Packard_s speech at the IRE conference.

5/14/57, Copy of typewritten letter from Packard to Karl Freund sending a copy of Packard_s speech at the IRE conference.

5/27/57,  Letter from James W. Shoemaker of Schwabacher & Co. saying he and Al Schwabacher appreciate having received a copy of Packard_s IRE speech.

6/4/57, Letter from R. T, Silberman of Kintel, Cohu Electronics forwarding three pictures of Packard and others at the IRE conference.

6/4/57, Copy of typewritten letter from Packard to all employees of HP sending them a copy of Packard_s speech at the IRE conference. He compliments them on their past performance and adds that “We are sure, too, that we can count on your continued enthusiastic support in the future – as we have had it in the past.”

6/28/57, Letter to Packard from Stephen W. Miller, SRI, saying the first copy of Packard_s speech at the IRE conference which he received disappeared and he requests another.

7/5/57, Copy of letter from Packard to Stephen Miller sending another copy of Packard_s speech to the IRE conference.

10/9/57, Typewritten postcard to Packard from Prof. Donald S. Gates. Albright College, requesting two copies of Packard_s speech at the IRE conference.

10/14/57, Copy of a letter from Mickie Ayers (Packard_s secretary), to Prof. Donald S. Gates sending two copies of Packard’s speech at the IRE conference.

11/12/57, Letter to Packard from Harold W. Pope, Vice President for Operations, Sanders Associates, requesting a copy of Packard_s speech to the IRE conference, and saying he intended to send a copy to all of  their employees much as Packard had done.

11/27/57, Copy of a letter from Packard to Harold W. Pope sending a copy of the IRE speech and saying he had no objection to their reproducing it for distribution to others.

Box 1, Folder 9 – HP Management

 

January 11-13, 1957, Executive Conference, HP Managers, Sonoma Mission Inn

1/11/57 – Typewritten text of Packard’s remarks at the Friday night dinner starting the conference. He spoke of the Corporate Objectives. [See also speeches dated 1/31/58, 1/29/60, 1/12/68, and 3/17, 75]

 

Packard says that there are “…many reasons why a business is founded and why a business continues to exist….It is desirable to clarify the objectives of a business and to state them from time to time so that all of the people in the organization will have a better understanding of the business and direct their efforts toward the common goal.”

 

He says “some” objectives for the Hewlett-Packard Company have been stated “a number of times in the past….Others may not have been specifically stated, but become apparent from an examination of what the company has done and how it has gone about it. It seems to me that it is more important than ever to make an attempt at clarifying and restating the objectives of the company. I believe such a restatement will help you to have a better basis for making your decisions. I think a restatement of the objectives will help some of the younger people in the organization have a better understanding of what is going on. In attempting to restate the objectives of the Hewlett-Packard company I do so with the knowledge that I am interpreting them as they seem to me. My statement of our objectives may not be strictly accurate and furthermore there may be some reason why the objectives as they have existed in the past or as I am stating them now should be modified for the future benefit of the company. Furthermore, I want all of you to understand as nearly as you can the reasons why these are or should be our objectives so that you will be able to accept them as being the kind of objectives you would choose were the choice your own. For this reason I would like to have you study these carefully, think about them, and be in a position to discuss them critically both for evaluation and for better understanding.

 

“It is difficult to decide which is the most important objective of the company, and in placing the one I have chosen first I do so with the specific emphasis that I consider it to be the most important objective to guide your day-to-day thinking. It is the objective which makes all of the other objectives possible, but it alone is not a sufficient objective. It is as follows:

 

“I.   TO OPERATE OUR BUSINESS SO THAT YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT WE OBTIN A PROFIT OF ABOUT 20% OF SALES BEFORE TAXES.”

 

Packard stresses that this objectives is the “keystone on which all of the other achievements of the Hewlett-Packard Company are based.” And he mentions such achievements as the “ability to offer good employment opportunities to our people, our ability to spend money on forward looking developments without assurance of return, our ability to obtain outstanding tools and equipment and facilities….”

 

“The more I have considered the matter, the more important I feel this objective to be, and I would venture to put it so strongly as to say that anyone who cannot accept this objective as one of the most important of all has no place either now or in the future on the management team of this company.”

 

Making a contribution to the field has been stated as another objective Packard says. “…but, in considering the matter it seemed to me that it needed a more specific definition. We need to think about what kind of a contribution we mean and what field we mean….In an attempt to clarify this objective a little better, I choose to state it in this way:

 

“II.   TO DESIGN AND DEVELOP ELECTRONIC MEASURING INSTRUMENTS AND TECHNIQUES THAT WILL CONTRIBUTE TO THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE SCIENCE AND PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF ELECTRONICS AND ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING.”

 

“This points up the fact that we have had our success in the field of instruments. It should be our objective to stay in that field almost to the exclusion of anything else. I say ‘almost to the exclusion’ because I think all of our objectives should be somewhat flexible and in case there came to our attention the opportunity to do something important outside the field of measuring instruments and techniques we should not automatically forego that opportunity, but rather we should concentrate our main efforts as we have in the past and consider outside activities only when and if they offer unusual potential.”

 

“One of the characteristics of HP instruments through the years has been their simplicity of design and relative low cost. We can certainly meet Objective II…in a number of ways. We can build instruments which are very expensive, very carefully done and yet meet the objectives of the above statement in every respect. Early in the business we felt it was possible to design and manufacture good instruments at a lower cost than those which were available. Historically we have done this. We have kept out the frills and held to the important aspects of the job. In the past I have described this as ‘inexpensive quality’ and for want of a better expression I will use this term in stating Objective III

 

 

“III   TO MAKE AVAILABLE TO INDUSTRY INSTRUMENTS WHICH HAVE INEXPENSIVE QUALITY.”

 

“The inexpensive quality can come from engineering design, from clever and advanced production techniques and methods, or from better methods of sales and distribution. Realistically we should attempt to provide the inexpensive quality for our customers by our work in all three of these major areas.”

 

“We have been generally proud of our employment policy, or rather the result of that policy, in terms of the kind of people we have in our organization and their attitude toward their job and toward the company. In the field of personnel it is my opinion that the general policies and the attitude of management people toward the employee are more important than specific details of the personnel program. Personnel relations will be good if the people have faith in the motives and integrity of the company. Personnel relations will be poor of they do not, regardless of all of the frills that we have. I think a statement of our personnel policy belongs in the list of the objectives of the business, and it is as follows:

 

“IV.   TO PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT OFFORTUNITIES FOR HP PEOPLE THAT INCLUDE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE IN THE COMPANY’S SUCCESS WHICH THEY HELP MAKE POSSIBLE; TO PROVIDE FOR THEM JOB SECURITY BASED ON THEIR PERFORMANCE; AND TO PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR PERSONAL SATISFACTION THAT .COMES FROM A SENSE OF ACCOMPLISHMENT IN THEIR WORK.”

 

Packard says “…we have not felt committed to accept anything like an absolute tenure status nor do we feel that this policy implies that we must recognize seniority except in cases where other factors are reasonably favorable.”

 

“Although I have stated the profit motive as our number one objective, it has been increasingly apparent in the past few years that business institutions have a responsibility to the society in which they exist to do something more than simply make a profit. We have freedom of action which is the direct result of the American type of government. Many of the things which we are now using in our day to day work have come about because the frontiers of knowledge have been pushed forward by our universities. A large part of the training which our people are using in their everyday work has come from universities. Our churches and schools play a large part in the intellectual and moral training which we rely on every day without giving the matter a second thought. This points up the fact that the Hewlett-Packard company as a business should be included as one of its objectives a recognition of these facts.

 

“V.   TO MEET THE OBLIGATIONS OF GOOD CITIZENSHIP BY MAKING CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE COMMUNITY AND TO THE INSTITUTIONS IN OUR SOCIETY WHICH GENERATE THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH WE OPERATE.”

 

“This objective includes an obligation to make some contribution to the defense effort in times of peace as well as in times of war.”

 

Packard says they have speculated on what is the optimum size for a company…..There is a saying that ‘A business must grow or die,’ but I am inclined to think this is more of a cliché than a fact. However, over the period of years we have developed a fairly well defined objective as far as growth for the Hewlett-Packard company is concerned, and it is as follows:

 

“VI.   TO LET OUR COMPANY GROWTH BE DETERMINED PRIMARILY BY THE PERFFORMANCE, LIMITED ON THE ONE HAND BY THE RATE OF GROWTH WHICH WE CAN FINANCE FROM OUR CURRENT PROFITS AND ON THE OTHER HAND BY THE RATE AT WHICH WE CAN BUILD UP OUR PRODUCT LINE AND OUR MARKET THROUGH CUSTOMER ACCEPTANCE IN ACCORDANCE WITH OUR OTHER OBJECTIVES.”

 

“Finally, I want to state an objective which I think is important to all of you, and although it may not appear to be so, it is also very important to Bill and me. That objective is to build sufficient strength into our organization so that the future of the Hewlett-Packard Company is not dependent upon any one or any two or three people, including Bill and myself. Many of you, in fact I hope all of you, have staked your future in Hewlett-Packard Company. Many of you will have in the future spent the greater portion of your productive lives with us. It should be of the utmost importance to you that the company be in a position to carry on regardless of what happens to any of us. This is also important to Bill and me.”

 

“I want to assure you all that I feel we have made some real progress toward this final objective and certainly at such time as we might look toward a diversification of stock holdings for whatever reason, we would hope to include HP people in the plan. Should that happen you would have even more reason to put emphasis on this last and final objective.

 

“In conclusion, I want to emphasize that we expect all of you to guide the execution of your individual assignments toward the common goal in accordance with these objectives. It serves no useful purpose to build strength in one area at the expense of another. Furthermore, we have no place in the company for half-hearted effort. I am sure the reports on our past progress which we will discuss during this meeting will emphasize the progress that comes from enthusiastic work toward a common goal. I hope every one of you will leave this meeting with added enthusiasm for and added understanding of the opportunity we have ahead.”

 

 

1/11/57,List of attendees, schedule of topics, charts of operating data

Conference agenda with attached charts and financial spreadsheets.

Photocopy of handwritten note by Packard listing points he wanted to make:

1. We want you to succeed, to help you do a good job and advance in                     your career. Success of Co. needs good men

2. Make good impression

3. Continue to study

4. No 8 hour job

5.  Take [illegible]

6. Keep on details

 

Conference agenda:

Statement of Corporate Objectives – Packard

Responsibility of Sales Department

Responsibilities of General Administrative Department

Responsibilities of Production Department

Responsibilities of Research and Development Department

 

 

 

Public Relations

The decision seems to be in favor of a conservatively controlled publicity   program to disseminate real news in a non-blatant manner as contrasted with ordinary business publicity”

Reasons for publicity program:

1. Employee satisfaction and pride of achievement

2. Get correct information to public before various news agencies                            disseminate a lot of misinformation

Dynac, Inc.

Dynac should start hiring their own engineers and production employees.

Dynac should become independent as soon as possible

Dynac should start acquiring their own machinery and equipment,                          engraving machine etc.

Clarification of Responsibilities of Cavier as CFO, mission,                                     purpose, charter

                        Hewlett-Packard Company Sales Department

Several page discussion with organization charts

 

 

Box 1, Folder 10 –HP Management

 

January 21-22, 1957, Management Conference, HP Managers and Sales Reps

 

1/21/57 Agenda for this two day conference on sales topics.

Subjects to be covered included: forecasting, Sales Department organization,           selling methods, hiring methods, doing business in foreign states, commissions

 

 

Box 1, Folder 11 – HP Management

 

June 14, 1957,  Management Conference, HP Managers, Palo Alto

1/14/57 Spiral bound notebook containing papers for this conference with Dave Packard’s            name on the front cover. Items on the agenda include:

Theme and Corporate Review – Packard

Financial Department Report – Frank Cavier

                        Sales Department Report – Noel Eldred

Current Development Projects – Barney Oliver

Production Organization – Ed Porter

Future Personnel Functions – Ray Wilbur

Discussion Period – Bill Hewlett

Corporate Importance of  New Product Development

Speaker – Dr. C.W. Randle, Director of Research, Booz, Allen & Hamilton

Application Seminar – Panel

Summary – Packard

The booklet also contains:

charts and graphs

Description of responsibilities of each department

Draft of Corporate Objectives

Common Responsibilities of Management Positions

1. Develop and Maintain a Sound Plan of Organization

2. Select and Train Subordinates for a Fully Qualified Staff

3. Help Develop fully-qualified Persons for Key Positions and Train a                               Suitable Successor for Yourself

4. Work Effectively Through Others

5. Be a Good Representative of the Company within it and to the                                       Community

Booklet titled Management of New Products from Booz, Allen & Hamilton

2/23/57 Spiral bound booklet from HP titled Production Management Seminar

 

 

Box 1, Folder 12 – HP Management

 

July 15, 1957, Summer Sales Seminar, HP Managers and Sales Reps, Palo Alto

7/15/57 Agenda and exercises to be accomplished

 

 

Box 1, Folder 13 – HP Management

 

November 16, 1957, New Product Conference, HP Managers

11/16/57 Typewritten pages of describing action to be taken on many instruments

1958 – Packard Speeches

Box 2, Folder 29 – General Speeches

5/1/58, Letter from James W. Shoemaker of Schwacher & Co. saying he had given a speech at UCLA and had quoted from Packard_s speech at the IRE conference. He enclosed his own speech to show Packard the context.

 

Box 2, Folder 30 – General Speeches

 

January 24, 1958, A Management Code of Ethics, AMA, San Francisco

 

1/24/58, Typewritten copy of speech by Packard titled  “A Management Code of Ethics”

Packard tells of attending a conference 10 years earlier where the majority of people  in attendance felt their only  responsibility was to produce profit for their stockholders; any responsibility to employees, customers or the public was present only insofar as it helped them make a better profit. He sees change since then, giving as an example the section on Company Creed in the AMA Management Course, plus statements from AMA president Larry Appley.

 

Packard feels “…we are well on our way toward the development of a code of ethics or management.” He says , “Today I want to explore with you a few ideas about ethics in a broader sense and attempt to demonstrate why we must move ahead on this job, if we expect to preserve our free enterprise system in this country.”

 

Packard talks of the Judaic-Christian Code and says “The great accomplishments of the free world come from its broad acceptance. And he compares this with Communistic ethic which , he says, “…contains the two essential elements, a high selfless goal and the common acceptance of this goal by great numbers of people.” Packard says we rely on the armed forces to deter them from starting a war, and defeat them if they do so, “Yet we fail to see that the final decision will be made in our favor only if the vast majority of their people come to accept our ethic as preferable to theirs.”

 

Packard points to smaller units in society – Rotarians, Kiwanians, Boy Scouts who have grown around their code of ethics, based on the Judiac – Christian Code. He says “It seems strange then, indeed, that the great fraternity of business management as a whole has not, up to this time, developed a code of ethics of more common acceptance. It is not only strange but it is unfortunate because no other group in the country with a common interest has so much influence over so many people.”

 

Acknowledging that most management people have a personal code of ethics adequate for the job he asks “…can we continue to depend on simply the translation of our own personal codes of ethics into our management jobs?” “Wouldn’t it be better if we could develop a clear-cut management code of ethics which could stand on its own, and which could be accepted on a broad basis by all business people.”

 

Managers have much power and freedom, limited largely by good business judgment. However, he says, “There have been serious limitations imposed on our freedom of management, by government and by unions, and this gets to the heart of the problem. Can these inroads on our liberty as managers, be brought to a halt?” And don’t forget for a moment that there are many thinking people standing on the sidelines who at this time think these inroads on our liberty as business managers should not be brought to a halt.”

 

“Let us then look at this matter of power and freedom in a broader sense. Let us see if a look at the historical relation between power and freedom gives us a clue as to the proper course. With the holding of power, comes the responsibility for its proper use, A study of the history of Western Civilization shows us there are three ways by which people are prevented from abusing power.”

 

First he lists higher authority and he recites some of the many ways the government restricts managerial authority: how employees are paid, how companies advertise, how to set prices, how to hire. “We take great pleasure in attributing these restrictions to the perversity of government, but if we are honest with ourselves, these restrictions all stem from the abuse of management power in the past.”

 

“The second way power, and with it freedom, becomes limited when it is abused, is by the growth of opposing power.  And he gives the example of the Church and the State in European history, each limiting the power and freedom of the other. Another example is the three branches of our federal government. And he points out that “We often fail to realize this is what happened to business management with the growth of the unions. The strong opposing power of unions has developed because management failed to use its power wisely, in relation to its employees, through the early decades of this century. This has brought about the strange phenomenon of labor taking the leadership in many areas which properly belong to management. I need spend little time reminding you how much freedom of action you have lost in the process.”

 

And moving to the third way power is kept from abuse, Packard says it “…is by the operation of a code of ethics – a code of self-discipline which assures that the power is being wisely used and in the best interests of all those who are affected. this is the only liberty can be preserved by those who hold power.” …..”We must continue to do everything possible to oppose further encroachment on our management freedom by Unions and by Government.” …”A strong code of ethics widely accepted by business management is the only sure course.”

 

Packard suggest a few tenets for such a code.: first, “…manage our business enterprises first and foremost so we make a contribution to society.”  He gives some quotes from managers:. “we are in business to provide the public with the best possible service” –  to “serve the public” – to “make better products at less cost to the customer. Packard says he thinks “most management people accept this tenet when they really think about it.

 

“Another tenet”, says Packard, “should be to recognize the dignity and personal worth of every person we employ – to include the opportunity for employees to share in the company’s success, which hey make possible. To provide for them job security based on their performance and to recognize their need for personal satisfaction that comes from a sense of accomplishment.” …”This ethic, however we choose to express it, must be based solidly on the proposition that labor is not a commodity to be bought and sold in the market place.”

 

Going on, Packard says “The third tenet has to do with our responsibility to society at large. Our freedom of action is possible because of our system of government. Many of the things we use in our day-to-day work have come about because the frontiers of knowledge have been pushed back by our great universities. Our churches and schools play a great part in the intellectual and moral training, on which we rely every day, and never give the matter a second thought We must support these great institutions in our free society with all the strength at our command, if we wish to preserve our free enterprise system for our business.”

 

“The fourth tenet in our code should be directed toward a better understanding of the nature of profit. Profit is the monetary measure of our contribution to society. It is the difference between the value of the goods and services e give to society, and the value we take from it. Profit is not the proper end and aim of management – it is what makes all of the proper ends and aims possible. Profit is the insurance we have that our business will continue to grow and flourish.”

 

And Packard ends with these thoughts: “As we work together in the American Management Association in the years ahead, I hope we can continue to put more effort on the WHY of business, work to develop a well defined code of ethics for management.”

 

And this: “Gentlemen, the Russians have demonstrated they can produce Sputniks without profits and without liberty – we are on trial before the world to prove we can produce Sputniks and all of the goods and services for a better life as well – with profits and with liberty”

 

1/28/58, Letter from Hugh C. Jackson to Packard complimenting him on the AMA speech on ethics.

1/29/58, copy of a letter from Packard to Hugh C. Jackson expressing appreciation for his             letter above. Packard also says, “It is encouraging to know there is a growing          sympathy for some of the broader aspects of our management problem.”

2/14/58, Letter to Packard from David J. Secunda of AMA expressing appreciation for      Packard’s words on the subject of ethics, and the time and effort Packard took to      make this contribution.

2/20/58, Letter from Elinor Twohy, Secretary to John Beckman, President of Beckman &             Hartley requesting a copy of the AMA speech on ethics.

10/15/58, Letter to Packard from Richard T. Gay expressing appreciation for the thoughts in Packard’s speech on ethics at AMA.

3/25/59, Letter to Packard from Richard L. Kaiser, consulting Psychologist, referred to the AMA speech on ethics and offers to meet and explore the subject further.

Box 2, Folder 31 – General Speeches

 

February 13, 1958, Electronics, Glamour or Substance, Purchasing Agents Association

 

2/13/58, Typewritten copy of speech by David Packard titled, “Electronics – Glamour or Substance

 

Packard starts out by telling of his recent trip to the Strategic Air Command Headquarters in Omaha. He describes the elaborate communications system they have, enabling them to maintain immediate contact with their people all over the world. He tells of the atomic bombs they carry and the communications and navigational systems they have to protect the fate of the US.

 

Flying home  in the Air Force General’s airplane, Packard visits the flight deck and chats with the engineer and the navigator each having an array of instruments to monitor the engines or the flight direction. He looks at the radar system and how it can show the land below so they could accurately tell where they were.

 

He says to his audience that “I tell you these things this evening, partly because I thought you might be interested in hearing my impressions after a visit to DAC. But more specifically, to give you some examples of what is the electronic industry, although military and commercial airlines have much the same gear.”

 

Packard says the electronics industry ranks with the major industries in the country. People understand that automobiles companies make automobiles,  for example. But electronics companies do not make electrons. Packard gives his audience a basic primer on electricity – electrons flowing in a conductor. Change the rate of flow rapidly and you create a field – a radio wave, which will go around the world.

 

Packard talks about the very slow development of the electronic industry. Before 1940 it consisted of radio. He names a few people in the Bay Area working on developments: the Varian brothers working over at Stanford, Eitel and McCullough making vacuum tubes. He estimates there were less than 2000 engineers in the industry in 1939. He says it was the World War II which started the electronics industry on its way to growth.

 

Packard says he wants to talk a bit about computers and how they can calculate rapidly – three million times faster than the human mind. “Whether we like it or not, this computer business is growing into a billion dollar segment of the electronics industry and may in a few years dominate it entirely.”

 

“Military spending will still continue to be the most important factor in the electronic industry Packard says, now about 60 % of the total outside of the entertainment business. Radio, TV and entertainment will still be important.

 

“The electronic industry is characterized by the fact that it requires a relatively small investment in capital per dollar of sales. The most important factor of success in electronics is people. One fellow with a bright idea and a lot of enthusiasm can be successful in electronics, even if he does not have very much money.”

 

“On the other hand, the electronic industry has not shown an especially high profit as a per cent of sales. this has averaged in the neighborhood of 6-7%.”  Packard says about 20% of the 500,000 engineers in the US are engaged in electronics.

 

 

Packard says the San Francisco area “…has been an important center of electronic activity from the very beginning. deForrest did his monumental work on the vacuum tube, the very heart of the electronic industry, while he was working at the Federal Telegraph Laboratory in Palo Alto.” He mentions the Varian Bros. developed  the klystron tube. Electronics made the addition of sound to movies possible. The oil industry in the Los Angeles used electronics in their geophysical work prospecting for oil.

 

Packard notes  that “…the West Coast attraction has been characterized by emphasis on the technical and scientific aspects of the business. When it came to the large volume production of radio receivers, television receivers, and other devices, this tended to be centered in the East.”

 

However, “In the early 1950s, a substantial change became evident. the aircraft industry which was centered on the West Coast from the beginning, began to need more and more electronic devices…..”So the aircraft industries built up large staffs of electronics engineers.”…”So at the present time something like 15% of the electronic engineers in the country are in California.”

 

“The Bay Area electronic industry has some very special characteristics. In the first place, it is even more engineering oriented that the industry average. Most of the firms in this area are here because they can do a special technical job better than anyone else. This, of course, gets back to the thing I have mentioned several times before — so much of the progress in electronics is dependent upon the special talent of the people — they are the ring masters in making these electrons perform. You can have all the facilities in the world, ass the money in the world, but without the right people — you just cannot have a good electronic business.”

 

As to the future, Packard sees the Bay Area will continue to be oriented toward the technical aspects of the business. He points to Stanford and EC Berkeley as strong in training young men for this industry. He sees a larger portion of military spending going into electronics, but he believes the West Coast electronics industry is a little more involved with military contracts than is desirable. He puts HP in the middle on this.

 

Packard feels “There will be plenty of glamour, but it will also grow more mature and contribute to the industrial and social growth of the Bay Area.”

Box 2, Folder 32 – General Speeches

 

May 19, 1958, Management of Research and Development Programs, National Federation of Financial Analysts, Los Angeles, CA

5/19/58, Typewritten draft of this speech with handwritten notes by Dave Packard.

Packard opens saying that the subject of Research and Development has received increasing attention from security analysts – and not without reason since experience shows a reasonable correlation between the amount of money spent on research and development and company growth particularly in certain industries.

He points to companies engaged in fields of chemicals, drugs, electrical machinery as having spent a relatively large proportion of their sales dollar on research and developments…”… “…we can point out  that R&D by the railroad companies has been rather small and whether or not this bears on their problem I will leave to your judgment.”

 

Packard says research is usually thought of as scientific research, but he views research in marketing as equally important. He says, “…research is done to assure continuing and growing profits. It is not done just for the sake of growth or diversification or some of the other reasons we commonly hear.” He sees R&D as having played a “tremendous” part in the expansion of the electronic industry during and since WW II.  He says “…most research done by industry is applied research, the application of already known principles to new products.” He says that ,with few exceptions, most of the things done today could have been done twenty years ago – and he gives radar as an example.

 

Packard says “…there is not much uniformity in accounting for research on the profit and loss statement. Most of the work is, and should be, new product development. Sometimes routine engineering is included. Often, however, market research and other research which the Co. may be doing outside the technical field is not included. ”

 

Packard gives some more considerations which he says may help the analysts evaluate R & D programs. “I think it is important for the R & D expenditures to be compared with the profits of a company because if the company has been unable to convert its R & D expenditures into profit in a reasonable short time, it indicates an important failure of management.”

 

Packard says “There two basically different approaches to R & D in the field of instruments and systems. Some people sell their R & D work either to the Government or to industry. Some people support their own R & D and sell the resulting products.”…”Those people who sell their R & D efforts are usually involved in Government work and are able to realize a profit seldom as much as 10% of the research dollar expended. In our case we are using our R & D effort to generate new proprietary products and historically we have been able to obtain about $5.00 in profit for each dollar expended in R & D.”

 

Packard says the R & D program cannot be allocated to a department and left alone; it must be a total company concept. He suggests a look at HP’s approach:

“First, we must search for ideas on which our new product efforts are to be expended and these ideas have two dimensions – a technical dimension and a marketing dimension. All good new product work must be closely controlled as to its technical feasibility and its market potential. And where do these ideas come from? One source is of course the company research effort itself, especially if, as is usually the case, some portion, whether large or small, is directed toward basic research. The research carried on by the great universities throughout the country is an unusually good source of ideas in the electronic field. ”

 

“…many ideas are available from foreign countries and most of us in this business try and keep close touch with what is going on in Europe and other industrial areas throughout the world.”

 

“Most of us have available through these various sources more ideas for new product development than we can use, and so it becomes necessary to carefully evaluate each idea and select only those with the greatest potential. We first like to be sure that the idea has a broad market potential. Second, that it fits in with our own marketing ability. Third, that it is technically feasible and finally, we like to be sure that the new idea has a large measure of novelty.”

 

Packard says, “If the collection of ideas and the evaluation of them has been well done, then the chances of a good new product are high and the activation of a specific development program can be done with considerable assurance of success.

The detail management of this phase is not important except for one thing, it is necessary to achieve and maintain a high level of enthusiasm among your technical people. After all, these people are undertaking to do things which have not been done before. They must have tremendous optimism and great enthusiasm or they will not accomplish their purpose.” …”This is, of course, a fundamental problem of management in all industry, how to give adequate recognition to the technical man without promoting him into administrative work where he may be both inefficient and unhappy.”

 

In closing, Packard says “Electronic instruments replace or expand the human senses. These instruments make it possible for us to know a great deal more about the physical environment. Systems in a very real sense expand the human intellect. They increase our ability to calculate, to remember, and in many areas they may provide, if not judgment itself, at least a better basis for judgment.”

 

5/19/58, Program for the Eleventh Annual Convention of the National Federation of Financial Analysts Societies.

Program indicates Packard’s participation in the Electronics Forum.

5/20/58, Handwritten note to Packard from Fred N Roberts a director of Atlas E-E. Note encloses a brief description of their products.

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 33 – General Speeches

 

November 4, 1958, Financing Higher Education, Harvard Club, San Francisco,

11/4/58 Typewritten speech, “Financing Higher Education” given By David Packard.

Contains some handwritten notes by Packard.

Packard notes that the subject of education has received a great deal of attention in recent years.  Problems are being attacked at all levels from grade schools to universities. He summarizes by saying, “We all agree that we need more and better education — whatever that may be.”

 

Packard says that success of the Communist Ideology throughout the world has added significance to the problem of education in the US He says, “We turn then to our universities and colleges in the hope we can strengthen them to continue their role as one of the greatest bulwarks of freedom in this country — indeed throughout the world.”

Packard looks at the private universities and colleges, saying “We support them because they have a great tradition of academic freedom.  “…freedom in our institutions of higher education is a prerequisite to freedom in our society.”

 

“Not that academic freedom is limited in the publicly supported schools but they are certainly more subject to political influence and — rightly or wrongly — there is broad agreement that strong private schools must continue to set the standards.”

 

Packard describes the change in financial resources available to private universities and colleges. He gives the example of Stanford where, at the turn of the century, had an endowment which was adequate to cover all operating expenses — no tuition was required. ” Many other private colleges and universities had adequate means to be truly independent.” “But today”, endowment income at Stanford provides only about 15% of the annual operating budget.” Packard says he understands Harvard gets a higher percent of operating expenses from its endowment – “even though your endowment has grown to an impressive $400,000,000 or so.”

 

Tuition has, therefore, become  “the major source of income for the independent university and tuition in the range of $1000 per year is well accepted.” However, “In general, tuition covers only about half of the actual cost at most universities. The remainder of the cost of education is provided by endowment income, private gifts, grants from foundations and even government support.”

 

Packard says that faculty salaries have not risen as much as in other groups and, he points out, “…the university professor has lost ground in the last decade or two and in terms of relative purchasing power…” resulting in a lower standard of living. “It is s frightening situation that the university professor – on whom we place the responsibility to instill the virtues of freedom in our young men and young women — that these very professors have faired so poorly in our free enterprise society.”

 

Packard looks at a few proposals to remedy this situation. First, charge students the full cost of their education as tuition. Packard says “no businessman would hesitate for a moment raising prices as costs go up — this is the first requisite for survival. The financial problem of the private university has been generated partly because business has done precisely this – while universities and colleges have not.”

 

However, “The argument against raising the price to cover the cost is simply that it would reduce the educational opportunity for the young man with ability – but without means.” But, particularly in the East, “…the response to requests for support in the form of scholarships has been substantial…and it may be the most successful approach of all”

 

Packard does not feel this avenue (true tuition plus scholarships) would work well in the West because of the very low tuition in state supported schools such as Berkeley where the tuition is only $100 per year.

 

Considering other methods of support Packard says, “The most obvious method of support is the support of specific research at a university in a field of direct interest to the corporation. This kind of support is easily justified by management. This kind of support is useful to universities – particularly at the graduate level and to the professional schools.”

 

“Another kind of support from corporations is in the nature of scholarships and fellowships granted to students in a field of interest to the corporation.” He says both ways are well accepted and of value to the schools which receive them.

 

Another method of corporate support used recently has been “…aid in the form of matching grants, contributions from the corporation to match contributions from employees to their schools.”

 

“But these forms of air – valuable as they are fail in important respects. They tend to limit the freedom of the institution. They tend to limit the freedom of the institution. they tend to encourage growth in special areas at the expense of others. And – often they do not have continuity.”

 

Packard says, “More emphasis has been placed in recent years – on the unrestricted grant. This is the ideal kind of support that a corporation can give a university — especially when given on a continuing basis. The university then has complete freedom to develop its own programs. This is the kind of support which makes the university truly independent.”

 

Packard tells of the activities of a number of prominent alumni of independent universities who are concerned with the problems of higher education. Packard says these men “are convinced that a limited number of private universities deserve special consideration. These great private universities give much of the leadership to higher education…. Wouldn’t it be proper then – to ask the great corporations which are also national in their scope – to support a number of the great private universities…”

 

“The Committee recommended help only for the privately supported schools – twenty-three in number. They feel it is important not to rule out others which might properly be the special concern of a particular corporation – because of geographical or other considerations.”

 

“The Committee has prepared a statement stating the basis on which they are asking for support. Briefly — they are asking for support because the universities:

 

1. Provide National Leadership

2. Are pace setters for all higher education

3. Are centers for advancement of knowledge

4. Are chief suppliers of teachers

5. Offer advanced training for Public Affairs

6. They provide most advanced training in the professions.

7. They are outgrowing their sources of support.

8. They are national in their influence and therefore of special                                  concern to national corporations.

 

Packard concludes with “And so while the problem of financing the great private universities remains a formidable one — it is encouraging to know that it is being attacked with vigor by these men of leadership in business. Those of us who are giving our time in the support of a higher education – are encouraged by the strength in our ranks. I hope you who are graduates of one of the greatest of the great independent universities will continue to give your whole-hearted support — not only to your own Alma Mater — but also to the cause of independent higher education in all of its important aspects.”

 

9/13/58, Reprint of article in Business Week magazine describing the activities of 20 business leaders (including David Packard) who have formed a committee to consider ways to help support private universities and colleges.

Box 1, Folder 3 – Stanford

 

July 23, 1958, Top Management Talent, Stanford Business School, Palo Alto

Packard’s speech on this subject was given during a four day conference at Stanford the subject of which was “Growing Dimensions of Management.”  On the third day Packard served on a panel moderated by Ernest C. Arbuckle, Dean, Graduate School of Business. Other panel members were S. Clark Beise, President Bank of America; A. B. Layton, President Crown Zellerback Corp.; F. B. Whitman, President, Western Pacific Railroad Co.

7/23/58 – Typewritten speech, with notations, given at the above conference.

 

Saying it is difficult to describe top management talent, Packard suggests “The problem is greatly simplified if we accept Dr. Friedman’s position you heard Monday — Just look for the man who can make a profit.”  Packard goes on to say that while making a profit is a necessary requirement he would  “certainly consider it far from sufficient.”

“Before we consider where we find it and what we do with top management talent (in HP)”,  Packard says he would like to define some of the things we look for. He says “We want a man who has–

– The ability to decide what to do.

– The ability to get it done.”

“In a larger organization, top management might place much more emphases on the ability to decide what to do, but I want to say a word about the ability to get things done. “In its broadest definition”, he says, “management is the profession of getting things done through people. But the military approach – authority because you have rank has no place in modern business. If a man cannot command adequate authority by his own performance in lower level management assignments, either work with him until he develops this ability, or cross him off as a candidate for top management.”

 

Packard says that being able to decide what to do “increases in importance as (the manager) moves to higher levels. Policies and actions have more effect on the success of the company…affect the lives of many people, the community around your companies, and often the nation as well.”

 

Regarding  the power of top management Packard says “…with power goes responsibility for its proper use.”  Going on he emphasizes that “We need to find and develop top management talent with an understanding of the broad social implications of their actions. This is the most important requirement of top management, present and future, if we hope to preserve the opportunity for individual initiative in a free enterprise system.”

 

Packard continues saying managers must have:

– Imagination

– Judgment

– Drive

Packard says a previous speaker, “outlined one of the reasons top management talent must have imagination — to keep up with the fast pace of change set up by the vastly increased research and development activity. We need men who will be able to chart new and untried courses in management.”

 

Packard says that “The need for judgment is so obvious that no further comment is necessary.

 

As to drive says he would not look for “that kind of drive that strives to be one of the conformers – one of the organization men, but a kind of inner directed drive that Professor David Riesmann describes in his recent study called the “Lonely Crowd”.

 

Moving on to how one finds top management,  Packard says “you cannot afford to wait until you need a new top manager before you start to look for one. “On the other hand,” he continues, “its impossible to keep a supply of top level talent on hand, standing around for the day you may need it.” Packard says that at HP “we have made a great effort to hire the best possible people into the organization at the lower levels and depend on this to supply, on the average, material for replacement or expansion.”

 

Packard advises keeping an eye on “a few potential candidatures on the outside and keep these in mind. They can be evaluated, you can get to know them and you have a good chance of getting them to come with you when the opportunity shows.”

 

On developing management talent Packard says HP’s executive development program has had three main elements:

“1. A planned rotation of assignments moving from assistants to senior executive on toward operating assignments in various departments ”

“2. “Encouraged attendance at outside management conferences.”

“3. In company seminars we have addressed ourselves to the solution of our own management problems.”

On using top level talent Packard says “We have had no trouble finding important lower level jobs for the most capable people. The opportunity for the use of considerable talent has been enhanced by a program of decentralization.”

 

Packard says “We encourage our people to take part in outside activities. community government, local school activities, clubs, etc. This too, can be an important element of a management development program. These activities  provide opportunity for development of talents from public speaking to budgeting and help develop skills in working with people.”

 

In closing Packard offers a word about managing scientific people. “Our experience leads us to believe that research and development programs need to be carefully managed and closely controlled. This is contrary to the concept sometimes held that scientific work is most efficient when not closely controlled. In general, scientists are poor managers for one simple reason — they tend to become engrossed in an interesting problem and forget everything else for the next three days.” “The sooner we recognize the fact that an outstanding scientific person is not likely to make a good manager, and find other ways to give him recognition and stature, the better off we will be. He closes by asking that anyone who finds a good solution to this problem to let him know.

In a couple of handwritten notations Packard adds, “Community service gets some (people in top positions) out of the way so younger people can have a chance to learn;”; and another, “If your potential manager needs an incentive program to motivate him you have the wrong guy. Incentive plans have one objective – to keep the other fellow from stealing your good boys.”

7/21/24, 1958 Program for the conference titled “Growing Dimensions of Management”

Box 1, Folder 7Stanford

7/17/58 Statement made to the Board of Trustees by, University President J.E. Wallace    Sterling. Mr. Sterling describes the context, as he sees it, in which Stanford will     operate over the next five years. He covers such areas as, population projections, costs, competition for top faculty, the undergraduate and graduate programs, and     administrative activities.

Box 1, Folder 14 – HP Management

 

January 31, 1958, Second Annual Management Conference, Sonoma

Handwritten notes in Packard’s handwriting:

                        Meeting at Sonoma

Financial Reports

How we stand in market

Future growth

Clarify responsibilities

Special interest to employees

Importance of human factor

Think first of the other fellow

How to encourage creativeness – not from suggestion system

Development of people – training and educational opportunities

We all came back  – resolved to do better job – don’t expect miracles, but some                               improvement

Conference for 1958

Two page typewritten speech. Speaker not identified, but no doubt it was Packard. He says at last year’s conference we discussed HP objectives and responsibilities of various departments. We now have organization charts and job descriptions. This year “we want to spend a good deal of our time in more informal discussions as to how we can each do our job better.”

 

“I personally think it is preferable to continue to develop our managerial responsibility around the concept of management by objectives rather than management by control. By this I mean that we can do a better management job if we have a large measure of freedom in each assignment so that each person to a large degree develops his own area of responsibility and carries forward the details of his job on the basis of his own initiative guided by his own common sense rather than by a rigid set of job descriptions and control

from higher authority.

 

“In order to do this properly, it is necessary for everyone in the organization to have a pretty good idea of what we are trying to achieve and understanding of some of the overall company problems, so that he can see how his job fits into the total picture and so that each person can develop his job so it contributes to the total picture.”

 

Packard reviews some of the upcoming agenda topic and concludes with “The rest of the time, we are going to discuss how we can do our individual jobs better.”

 

The balance of the folder contains various handouts on developing people, sales, production and financial data creativity. Two handouts (author not indicated, but would appear to be Packard, particularly the first) are of particular interest:

 

“Eleven Simple Rules”

 

1. THINK FIRST OF THE OTHER FELLOW. This is THE foundation — the first requisite — for getting along with others. And it is the one truly difficult accomplishment you must make. Gaining this, the rest will be “a breeze.”

 

2. BUILD UP THE OTHER PERSON’S SENSE OF IMPORTANCE.  When we make the other person seem less important we frustrate one of his deepest urges. Allow him to feel equality or superiority, and we can easily get along with him.

 

3. RESPECT THE OTHER MAN’S PERSONALITY RIGHTS. Respect as something sacred the other fellow’s right to be different from you. No two personalities are ever molded by precisely the same forces.

 

4. GIVE SINCERE APPRECIATION. If we think someone has done a thing well, we should never hesitate to let him know it. WARNING: This does not mean promiscuous use of obvious flattery. Flattery with most intelligent people gets exactly the reaction it deserves — contempt for the egotistical “phony” who stoops to it.

 

5. ELIMINATE THE NEGATIVE. Criticism seldom does what its user intends, for it invariably causes resentment. the tiniest bit of disapproval can sometimes cause a resentment which will rankle — to your disadvantage — for years.

 

6. AVOID OPENLY TRYING TO REFORM PEOPLE. Every man knows he is imperfect, but he doesn’t want someone else trying to correct his faults.

 

If you want to improve a person, help him to embrace a higher working goal — a standard — an ideal — and he will do his own “making over” far more effectively than you can do it for him.

 

7. TRY TO UNDERSTAND THE OTHER PERSON. How would you react to similar circumstances? when you begin to see the “whys” of him you can’t help but get along better with him.

 

8. CHECK FIRST IMPRESSIONS. We are especially prone to dislike some people on first sight because of some vague resemblance (of which we are usually unaware) to someone else whom we have had reason to dislike. Follow Abraham Lincoln’s famous self-instruction: “I do not like that man; therefore I shall get to know him better.

 

9. TAKE CARE WITH THE LITTLE DETAILS. Watch your smile, your tone of voice, how you use your eyes, the way you greet people, the use of nicknames and remembering faces, names and dates. Little things add polish to your skill in dealing with people, constantly, deliberating think of them until they become a natural part of your personality.

 

10. DEVELOP GENUINE INTEREST IN PEOPLE. You cannot successfully apply the foregoing suggestions unless you have a sincere desire to like, respect, and be helpful to others. Conversely, you cannot build genuine interest in people until you have experienced the pleasure, of working with them in an atmosphere characterized by mutual liking and respect.

 

11. KEEP IT UP. That’s all — just keep it up!

 

And the second handout:

 

SELF-DEVELOPMENT

 

Top management has reached the conclusion that there is a shortage of capable executives and that the growth of our economy will cause this shortage to be more acute. Such a situation offers an unlimited future to those who open the door to opportunity’s knock.

 

This is the time for each of us to take the initiative and start our own Executive Development Program to supplement any formal training our companies offer.

 

If we are fortunate enough to be working where there is a formal employee appraisal plan in effect, our work will be analyzed objectively and we should be receiving guidance in our self-development efforts.

 

For those without the assistance of a formal appraisal program, the following questions may by of some assistance in highlighting possible areas of development.

 

I  In Becoming a “Top Notch” employee, to What Degree

 

Am I growing in emotional maturity and stability?

Am I sensitive to the feelings of others?

Do I show work interest? Drive? Staying power?

Does my work show initiative, resourcefulness, inventiveness,                    originality, innovation, imagination?

Do I seek to improve my technical competence?

Do I set high standards of work performance for myself?

Do I take active measures to profit by my mistakes?

 

II  In Striving to Become a good Leader, to What Degree do I

 

Set the example of an out standing job performance on my present              job?

Inspire confidence, loyalty, and acceptance in others?

Teach, coach, and guide the development of my people?

Organize, build, and maintain an effective group activity?

Become a “rallying point” in times of stress and crises?

Motivate and stimulate men to do their best?

 

III  In Learning to Become a Good Manager, to What Extent Can I be                      Counted on to

 

Set and reach objectives and goals through other people?

Plan and organize my work and that of my group?

Integrate the activities, personalities, and resources of my group                  into a dynamic, unified, productive team?

Measure and evaluate results?

IV  In Applying the Knowledge and skills of Management, to what Extent             do I

Have a growing understanding of the business of the Company in                            relation to the industry and the economy as a whole?

Have a broad working knowledge of the company’s objectives,                                policies, systems, management tools, and programs?

Have the habit of striving for continuing growth, reaching for and                            utilizing available Company resources for self development?

As each of us looks at himself in terms of these abilities, qualities and skills, it is a “sight setting” and stimulating experience which can be of great value in planning and working toward our continuing growth.

These questions cannot only be a guide to self appraisal and self development but they can also be used to find, select, and promote men who have earned the right for these considerations.

1959 – Packard Speeches

Box 2, Folder 34 – General Speeches

 

October 5, 1959, Education in Russia, Palo Alto High School, Palo Alto

 

10/5/59, Typewritten “summary” of Packard’s speech at the High School describing his    trip to Russia with a group of businessmen to talk about improving trade relations.         This summary was evidently prepared by the High School staff and copies            provided to Packard’s office.

 

Packard says it was somewhat difficult to obtain a comprehensive view of Russian education  during their two week visit. They saw the usual sights he explains, as well as four factories and seeing manufacturing techniques.

He describes a visit to a secondary school in Leningrad which was attended by children from about 7 to 17 years old. They saw nurseries for pre-school children in every factory and housing development. Graduates of secondary schools have these choices:

1. Go on to a university.

2. Go to a Teacher’s school which is general-none of the teachers came                   from a university.

3. Go to a Medical School.

4. Go to a vocational school

In the secondary school children wear uniforms and buy their own books.

Packard went on to describe the curriculum which contains much arithmetic, science and foreign languages. Science labs were adequate.

 

The main measure of grading is given at two points: A comprehensive examination at the end of the seventh year when compulsory education ends. At the end of the tenth year competitive examinations last for about a week and determine which students may go on to university, to professional training and to work.

 

Many teachers work at a regular job too since they are usually finished teaching by noon. Teachers teach 24 hours per six day week.

 

There are 39 universities in Russia – first class institutions. The university of Moscow has the most expensive buildings in the country. The dormitories have 15-20 rooms, a kitchen and a nice recreation room. There is no tuition and students receive an allowance of 300 to 450 rubles a month. University professors are among the highest paid people in the country.

 

Some impressions Packard gives:

1. A tremendous emphasis on education, best buildings, excellent pay for               professors.

2. Emphasis of science, engineering and foreign language.

3. Tremendous competition in their educational system.

Some additional personal observations from Packard:

1. A country of unbelievable contrasts, poor construction of buildings and              roads, contrasted with excellent educational facilities.

2. People work very hard, dedicated to their system.

 

Packard answered questions from his audience in Palo Alto. The last was “Because of the every strong competition between Russia and us, are there ideas or suggestions whereby we can improve our system to meet their challenge?

 

Packard’s answer: “continue to support the school district and help in every way you can. This applies to both public schools and universities. There is not anything in our schools that some time, effort and money will not correct.”

 

Undated, A note to Mrs. Saxon (Packard’s secretary) form Janet Mitchell to the High School sending two copies of their summary of Packard’s talk on Russia, with the promise of sending 50 more.

Undated and unsigned, a note to Mrs. Mitchell thanking her for the 50 copies.

 

 

Box 2, Folder 35 – General Speeches

 

October 8, 1959, Personnel, The Heart of Management, Public Personnel Association Conference. San Francisco.

 

10/8/59,  Copy typewritten speech by Packard: Personnel, The Heart of  Management, with a few handwritten notes by Packard.

Packard says he is going to discuss the broader aspects of management for “I believe it is of great importance for any manager to have and understand the broad underlying objectives of his job.” He goes on to say that he subscribes to the management approach “which I call “Management of Objective” as opposed to “Management by Control”.  He contrasts this freedom to work “without rigid and extensive direction and control from the  TOP” to the “system of management of the military type where each person is assigned – and expected to do – a specific job, precisely as he is told and without the need to know much or anything about the overall objective of the organization”

 

Packard says Management by Objective “is the very essence of free enterprise. It is what causes small business units to be inherently more efficient than large business units, when they are under managers of equal ability in each case.” He sees many large organizations moving in that direction  “in an attempt to recapture the efficiency of a small business.”

 

Packard says he is aware that there are many special problems in public administration not present in private business administration. The legislative system builds safeguards which provide controls which seem frustrating to a person in a private enterprise. “I am aware too that many people are working for more centralization, for more policies and more details as well, to be decided at the highest level – preferably by Washington.” …”Unfortunately, many yield to these pressures under the false impression that concentration of administrative power in higher authority will also make administration more efficient.”

 

“One cannot dispute the fact that the number of people under public administration is increasing and increasing rapidly in many areas. For those of us who believe that the government – at all levels – should do only those things which clearly cannot be done by private enterprise – this trend is disturbing.”

 

In spite of these trends, Packard sees the people in public administration doing a very important job. “Your job is increasing in importance and we should therefore place great emphasis on how public administration can best be accomplished.” He sees it as possible and desirable to apply the principles of management by objectives to public administration.

 

Packard says he recently returned from a trip to Russia and many in this country are thinking more about their system and trying to learn more about it. H takes a few minutes to draw some comparisons between their management techniques and ours.. “First. they have moved a long way from the basic philosophy of communism – if indeed they ever had it. there is no application of the principle expressed as “from each according to his ability – to each according to his need”. The people do not own anything – it is all owned by the State.”

 

“They have the most highly centralized system imaginable. the government bureaus control everything – they set wages, working hours, rent, prices, work quotas for factories.” However, Packard says they have adopted some techniques from the capitalist system in order to make their administration more efficient.”  – Pay ranges for some jobs to encourage and reward performance and their ranges are broader than is usual here.

 

“The administrator of a Russian factory has the responsibility of providing nurseries for the children of working mothers. Housing, mass apartment housing, for the workers is also his responsibility and he can use this authority to distribute apartments to individuals and this encourage and reward performance where it will improve the efficiency of his administrative unit”

 

Russia also has a system of group incentives. “If  the factory”, Packard observes, exceeds its quota – the employees receive a bonus which may be as much as 100% of base salary and seemed to average at least 30% in most of the cases I encountered.” Public recognition is another incentive they use.

 

“It is the observation  of almost everyone who visits Russia that the people there work hard and have a religious devotion to their cause. In other words, a brad well accepted common objective – which is to work for a better life for their government as well as for the people.”

 

In spite of that Packard sees much evidence of great inefficiency. “People waiting around for someone else to make a decision. Two people doing the job of one – outdated tools and methods on many jobs. ….Finally, you sense that although they have the most highly organized and most highly centralized and controlled system of management that can be conceived, although they have used nearly every technique in our book – they have failed completely to use the most important of all – that of recognizing the individual as a person important for his own sake.”

 

“This now”, Packard says, “brings us to the very heart of the problem. What is the real purpose of an organization of people. Is the purpose of the private enterprise factory simply to make a profit for its owners – is the only purpose of a highway department to build and maintain highways – the fire department to be the most efficient organization of highly disciplined and highly trained people ready to put out the fir at the sound of the gong? Certainly, one of the proper objectives of management is to develop an organization to do these specific tasks for which it is designated. It is the function of the personnel man to obtain the people – and to assist management in their development, growth and direction – to help in every way in the overall objectives of the organization.”

 

“In other words, – we can say that an important purpose of an organization is to serve society. But if we stop here – there is no way in the world to detect such an organization in America from an organization in communist Russia. The organizations are manned with highly trained people. their managers are capable. they use techniques which appear to be as good as our best. they are dedicated to serve society – which they call the people.”

 

“But there is a difference – a difference so important that it is unbelievable we overlook it so often. the difference is that in America – each individual is a person of infinite worth. He is no different during the eight hours a day he is working in your organization than he is in his home – or in his church…..So ladies and gentlemen — as you go home from this conference to put into effect the things you have learned here to make your organization more efficient – remember that we are engaged in a struggle to the death with this malignant social disease called communism. Remind yourself of the nature of the struggle. the struggle is not just capitalism vs. dictatorship as a political system – it is something far more important – as important as such considerations may be.

 

“The real question is the person vs. the people. Remind yourself that the leaders of Communism have never hesitated to strike down the individual ruthlessly – when he stood in the way of alleged progress of the people. When the Hungarians were so bold as to express themselves, they were ruthlessly shot down. Even the leader who shows sign of deviation – deviation from blind support of the Communist State is either shot or sent to Siberia. Every person knows he is under continual surveillance of the police watching him to make sure he shows no expression of individuality. As you travel in Russia – you can sense this very strongly. The people are friendly but they are afraid.

 

….So the real question involved is this – are we, in our management philosophy and in our personnel administration — going to work to preserve the concept that the individual in our organization is a person of infinite worth. That the organization exists to serve the individual as well as to serve society. To the extent you are able to keep this as one of your basic objectives – you will insure for your organization that efficiency which comes only from enthusiastic people using their energy and their imagination in an atmosphere of freedom – working for a common objective.

 

….This course provides greater incentives for people at all levels, it will attract more capable people to your ranks. Most important of all – you will do much to strengthen the cause of personal freedom throughout the world – if you make sure it is encouraged within your own organization.”

Box 1, Folder 4 – Stanford

 

March 7/8, 1959,  Stanford in the Space Age, Stanford Conferences, Seattle/Portland

3/8/59, Copy of typewritten speech.

 

Packard starts out saying he would like to “give his personal impressions of Stanford today and how it seems to compare with 25 years ago”. He adds that if his impressions differ from that of a previous speaker, he asks his audience to remember that his perceptions dim with age.

 

Packard says “My first impression…is that the students are very young.” However, he views them as a “very mature, serious, hard-working group of boys           and girls.” He says there are about 8400 of them and “they are more interested in politics — they are more interested in international affairs and they are more religious — evidenced by their attendance at chapel and community churches…”

 

“A much larger portion of the boys and girls are working for degrees in science and Engineering. Foreign languages have taken a great upsurge.  Packard sees            juniors and seniors taking courses that were available only to graduate students 20 years previous. He says romance is taken more seriously  “as evidenced by the fact that we(Stanford) is spending this year $3 million to build apartments to ones renovated on the inside. New dormitories, libraries and music rooms — all far better than 20-25 years ago.

 

Packard describes some of the “exciting” things going on inside the buildings such as in electronics, physics, geology.  In Germany, 60 Stanford students have been transplanted for two quarters to facilitate their learning the language. “Every where you turn you see a great sense of urgency and enthusiasm. Searching for new answers — seeking new knowledge and seeking to understand it.” Packard feels the quality of Stanford’s educational program and its reputation among scholars has grown tremendously.

 

Packard continues , saying” “In the field of electrical engineering, Stanford easily ranks as on of the top two or three universities in the country…in several special areas …clearly first”. Stanford is among the best 5 or 6 in the country in physics according to Packard, and medicine provides “one of the outstanding activities in the country”. “The great heart of Stanford is its program in humanities, … we are working hard to develop additional strength and eminence in this important program.”

 

Summing up, Packard says “If we look at the breadth of the program at Stanford and at the kind of job being done there, we can say without qualification that Stanford ranks far and away as the greatest privately supported university in the western two-thirds of the United States,…and would easily rank as one of the ten greatest universities in the United States”

 

Leaving his description of academic activities at Stanford Packard turns to fundraising and “where we get the money to do all of these things” He says that when he started at Stanford in 1930 “the tuition was reasonable and everyone knew that Stanford had such a large endowment that it would never have any financial worries.”  Stanford, indeed, “did have the largest endowment of any university in the country when it was founded.:, he states. But, “by 1930 it was no longer the first and the endowment was nowhere near adequate to operate the university even then.”

 

Packard says the endowment now provides only 15% of the money needed to meet the annual budget and “To stretch our resources to provide even 15% of our budget has required a very important program of self-help, that is our :and Land Development Program..”(See also folder April 24, 1956 Land Development Program ) “Land which, in the opinion of the Board, is not needed for academic use is being leased, generally for a 99-year term..” Packard explains that .some  of the land s leases to industrial concerns, …some for a shopping center,… and some for residential purposes. “The university has received $5,800,000 for the land leases, exclusive of the shopping center. these funds provided income at the current investment rate of about $227,000 per year.” He adds that “the shopping provides an annual income net of expenses of about $550,000 per year”  In total, ” the Land Development Program is providing the University with a total income of about $600,000 a year.”  He says “the can express the value of the shopping Center to the University as being equivalent to $14 million added to the University endowment.”  While “the Land Development Program has been tremendously important to Stanford….it provides less than $600,000 per year against a $19 million budget.” “In other words,….only about 3% of our annual requirement to operate Stanford”

 

Packard discusses tuition at some length. “This year we will receive a little over $8 million for more than 40% of our budget requirements, from tuition and fees.” He points out that “This year tuition has gone up to a little over $1000 per year…compared to $336 twenty years ago…or about 3:1.” Packard provides some figures on the growth of discretionary income  in the preceding twenty years,  also about 3:1, and concludes that, “We should be able to conclude, then, that it is just as easy for the average person to pay tuition today at the present level as it was for him to pay the lower tuition in 1939.”

 

Packard says he has discussed only part of Stanford’s annual income. “The most important change in the last 20 years is the money we receive to support research activities.. In this year’s budge there is about $61/2 million — mostly from the government.” Such support provides “over 30% of the annual budget so…between tuition, research money from the government, and endowment income — we can account for about 90% we can account for about 90% of our annual budget” Packard says the other 10% “comes from gifts — gifts from alumni, gifts from parents, and gifts from friends, which is available to spend during the year to help pay our operating costs.” He says the “total gift support has gone from $7 million in 1956 to $22 million in 1957 — when we had the big drive for the medical school — to $11 million in 1958.” Packard talks about the Medical School as an example of the importance of gift support, and stresses that, “Despite the terrific magnitude of the financial problem – we at Stanford are not willing to allow this nor any other responsibility which has been traditionally shared by the privately supported and independent universities be turned over completely to the government.”

 

…”both research and education will become more expensive,… especially if we accept the challenge that Stanford must maintain and strengthen its position of leadership. We don’t like to increase tuition. We don’t propose to become dependent on government support. ” “Increased gift support for current requirements seems to be the only available way to minimize further tuition increases. Corporation support for private education is increasing. Business is permitted by law to contribute 5% of profit before taxes to education. The average contribution is much less than 1%. “Packard says if “business and industry would contribute just 1%  of their profit before taxes…the financial problem of private and independent higher education in this country would largely be solved.”

 

Packard points to the tremendous scientific progress which as been made throughout the world, such as sputnik, and says ” “…these events have brought into closer focus the importance of higher education in our country.. Our system of freedom and democracy depends on an alert, intelligent group of individuals working in an atmosphere of freedom, with a common purpose as opposed to the communistic philosophy involving highly trained people, completely subservient to a central controlling authority.”    we have learned that the communistic Russian system is not to be under-rated either in purpose or in capability. For our democratic free enterprise to successfully compete — and successfully compete it must in order to survive — requires the greatest possible effort in the education of our people. Education not only so they will have the skills and ability necessary to perform their jobs well — but also the broadest kind of education in order to strengthen the common purpose freely and logically developed from our Western heritage. This, then, is the challenge and purpose of higher education in the Space Age.

 

“In the past 20 yeas Stanford has risen to a position of national leadership among the institutions of higher learning in this country.” “this achievement …has been great to a large degree because it has been supported by an enthusiastic and loyal group of alumni.”

 

Packard ends saying “I hope also that you will leave this conference today with increased pride in your university and with the resolution to continue to work with us to help Stanford fulfill its important and proper destiny in the SPACE  AGE.”

 

Several drafts evidently prepared in preparation for the above speech

 

1/28/59 Memo from Mary Beech, Activities Secretary of the Stanford alumni Association to all participants in the 1959 Stanford Conference Program. Location and speech titles are given. Packard is listed for

Sacramento, February 15, “Reflections on the Space Age”

Seattle, March 7, “Stanford in the Space Age”

Portland, March 8, “Stanford in the Space Age”

3/3/59 Letter from Peter C. Allen to Thomas P. Pike with a cc. to Packard. Letter refers to enclosed text of Packard’s forthcoming speech at Seattle and copies of Stanford Today which are not attached to this copy. An index of press releases is attached.

3/8/59 Program for the Stanford Conference at  Portland.

Undated summary of endowment Monies for years 1947, 1952, and 1956.

 

 

 

Undated note listing tuition for various schools at Stanford for year 1938-39:

Business School          $130.00/qtr.

Medical School           $115.00/qtr.

All other schools         $100.00/qtr.

            Plus approx. $35.00/year additional expenses

 

3 quarter = 1 year

Thus $335 to $390 approximately, compared to $1005 now.

 

Box 1, Folder 7 – Stanford

1/14/59 Speech by Packard, given in Los Angeles apparently to an audience of  local company executives. Packard says that the Stanford Board of Trustees held its first meeting in southern California that day saying that holding the meeting here “was           an expression that Stanford University shares with its great sister institutions the responsibility to provide the best that higher education has to offer for your children and your community.” Packard introduces honored guests which include several Presidents of  universities in southern California.

 

Packard goes on to talk about the symbiotic relationship between Stanford and southern California.  He says one third of Stanford’s alumni reside in the south, and that Stanford students who came from the south are 44 % of the students from the state. “Sending your finest boys and girls to the Stanford campus…is a challenging responsibility  for us to meet.” Packard goes on to describe the General Studies program at Stanford and he says that “At Stanford we have graduate schools to train men and women in the professions, in Law, in Medicine, in engineering, in Education, in Business and in other fields as well.” He points out that “Many of the leaders in these professions in your community received their training in the graduate schools at Stanford.”

 

Packard talks of research activities at Stanford and points out that these have “greatly contributed to the progress of California. Hundreds of millions of dollars come into Southern California every year through your great aircraft and electronic companies to manufacture devices totally dependent on the Klystron tube developed in the department of Physics laboratories at Stanford a few years ago.” He points out that the Distant Early Warning (DEW) line built across the Arctic frontier to warn us in the event of an air attack “is possible because of a by-product of the Linear Accelerator research at Stanford.” Packard goes on with other examples of how southern California has benefited from activities at Stanford.

 

Packard then introduces Stanford President Dr. Wallace Sterling, who gives a speech. (Not attached)  In conclusion, Packard points out that “Our country – and our way of life – are engaged in a deadly serious conflict with countries and people under Communist philosophy. Our universities have in the past, and will continue in the future, to be the main source of new scientific knowledge on which all of our technological progress depends, not only for the weapons for our protection but for all of the other material advances which do so much to demonstrate to the world the superiority of the American way of life.”

 

2/12/59 Typewritten speech by Dr. J. E. Wallace Sterling, President of Stanford University, on occasion of award to him of Distinguished Citizen Award of the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce.

 

Dr. Sterling provides a “brief and uneven reminiscence of developments and forces that were being unleashed in the world three score and fourteen years ago, (Since 1885 when Stanford was founded), and turns to the local scene as it was then. There was “no town of Palo Alto, and there were no University buildings.” Sterling describes how Senator Stanford became concerned as to where students and faculty coming to the new school might find accommodations. He thought, “The little town of Mayfield might serve as a university town. But he imposed the condition that it should be dry.” This condition “would have involved the closing of a dozen or so Mayfield saloons. The residents of  Mayfield found this condition uncongenial, so refused it.”          Sterling goes on to describe how Senator Stanford managed to get alternate property in the area, which involved the communities of College Terrace, University Park, and  which all ultimately became Palo Alto.

 

Dr. Sterling follows the development of both the university and the town and        concludes with the thought he believes “…in these past three score and fourteen years, ways have been found to build on the foundations and hopes that were laid             when Palo alto was a tiny hamlet and the University was untried and untested.”

 

5/11/59 Typed letter to Dave Packard from Professor Wallace Stegner, Department of English. The letter is quoted in its entirety:

“Dear Mr. Packard:

“I listened to your talk before the local chapter of the AAUP last Thursday evening with great interest, and many things that you said I was very pleased to hear. I share your optimism about Stanford’s future and at least some of your satisfaction with Stanford’s present. I do believe that this university is just getting the vision of greatness, thanks in considerable part to the present board and the present administration, and that it faces an incomparable opportunity for service to the community, to the nation, and to human learning. In particular, I was pleased to hear you say that the plans for development of the Sand Hill road area of Stanford land have been suspended for further study: quite seriously, many of us would give up other benefits, if necessary, to see Stanford preserve that land open and unmutilated in the midst of the ringworm suburbs. It is perhaps un-American to think that a four-lane highway is not necessarily better than a two-lane one, or that a population of four thousand per square mile is not necessarily better than half that. So be it. If it can preserve some of the character of the local landscape and the openness and expansiveness of what has hitherto been the Stanford community, I should say Stanford has the opportunity to be un-American in the very best sense of the term. Beauty does not ordinarily win out in a competition with the chance for dollars; it takes an institution of both integrity and vision to resist the short-term good for the long-term, and I am sure you will have the enthusiastic support of a very large portion of the faculty in your effort to save that hill land from what they call Progress.

 

Some other aspects of your talk on Thursday left me somewhat uneasy. To bring them up then would have extended the discussion long past its proper time, and so I venture to write you of them now. In discussing the purposes and opportunities of the university you were emphatic on its obligation to turn out scientists and engineers who would be useful in the weapons race; and linguists and diplomats capable of holding their own in the cold war, and capable of taking a persuasive part in cultural exchanges aimed at solidifying international friendships and humanists who could, as you said, collaborate with psychologists and others as communications experts; and so on. Perhaps I misinterpreted you, and perhaps you were taking for granted much of what is now on my mind, but I did understand you to look upon the university’s purposes with a highly practical eye, and judge its performance by purely practical criteria. We seemed, from your words, to be an institution dedicated to the production of technicians, scientists, experts, leaders — a sort of “human accelerator” as Arthur Wright put it, shooting out its business end experts and specialists with half their electrons missing and with their nuclei knocked whobberjawed. We seemed, as you described us, to be something like the Stanford Research Institute, subsisting on government research contracts and bending all our efforts toward the production of limited experts and the application of science and other knowledge to practical ends. Perhaps you did not mean to give this impression, but I think you did, especially in your commentary on the debate between generalists and specialists, where you clearly chose the side of specialization. Now I don’t quarrel with specialists, but I do think the other side needs stating more than you stated it. I suspect that what we most need is neither generalists nor specialists, but specialists who can generalize and generalists with a specialty. And I further suspect that we do not attract, develop, or hold this kind of faculty and train this kind of student unless we concentrate on being something that you did not mention at all: a community of minds, a fellowship of people who know something, are willing to communicate it, and are always wanting to know more. What makes a university, for me, is the climate of absolutely free intellectual inquiry, the pursuit of knowledge wherever it leads us, the almost anarchic emancipation from all applied or practical ends, from government preoccupation, from cold war needs, even from such common pedagogical intentions as the training of “leaders” or “citizens”. Obviously, Stanford and all other universities must depend to some considerable extent on government research contracts and to some lesser expert on private or industrial research contracts. But these activities are not the university. If, as I think you did, you intimated that the professional and research facilities were the most important part of the university, I must disagree, for it seems to me that the core of this university and any other university is the college or school of humanities and sciences, in which knowledge is not applied but “pure”, to be studied for its own sake. Keep that part of the university in health, and the production of experts and leaders (and specialists who can generalize and generalists with specialties) will follow automatically. Try self-consciously to produce specialists and leaders in that pre-professional college, and you will, I am convinced, produce half-men, limited men, men with imperfect vision and low horizons. And I would call to your attention, in connection with your general satisfaction with the undergraduate program at Stanford, that the School of Humanities and Sciences which does two thirds of all the teaching done by the university gets a whole lot less than 66% of the budget. I would have been better assured that Stanford is going to realize its potential as a university if in your talk before the AAUP you had given more stress to that indispensable core of humanities and sciences: the best that has been thought and said in the world on the one hand, and the purest and most adventurous pursuit of new knowledge on the other.

 

“This letter has gone on so long that you can see why I did not raise these questions and this apparent difference of opinion the other evening. I do agree with you that Stanford, which has always been a good university, is trembling on the brink of becoming one of the small number of great ones. At such a time, especially, the question of direction and goals is vital. I respectfully submit that our goal ought to be the goal of becoming the finest center of learning, the finest community of scholars, scientists, teachers, and students, that we can become; and that the short-term goal of producing practical troubleshooters and specialists will, if it is pursued too far, and by forcing us to abdicate our strongest position as a university.”

 

“Sincerely yours,

Wallace Stegner ”

Undated. Packard’s typewritten draft, with notations, of a response to the above letter from Professor Stegner. It has a note at the top, in perhaps his secretary’s handwriting, saying the draft was never completed.

 

“Dear Professor Stegner:

“In answer to your letter of May 11th I am sorry you did not raise the question which concerned you and apparently others about my talk, in the discussion period which followed. I think I might have been able to arrest some of your uneasiness as well as to receive some useful guidance from you and your colleagues.

 

“What I attempted to say was that the pressures for the production of technicians, scientists, experts, leaders, all the other tremendous people have been tremendous in the past and have tended to lead the University in a direction which was not necessarily proper in relation to its larger responsibilities to our society. Also, I attempted to outline conditions which I thought would continue to generate these pressures in the future and that it would be very difficult for us to avoid continued progress or shall we say -motion – in that same direction. I apparently did not state it in specific terms the other evening. I think I agree with you and probably most of the rest of the faculty, in saying that I think the core of humanities and sciences is in truth the most important part of the University. We must find ways to develop monetary support for these and other scholarly areas which are independent of the pressures which come from government contract money, from gifts, business and alumni support. What I intended to say is that we should divert our efforts away from the concept of simply building to strength. I think we have done too much of that in the past few years.

 

“I am sure this will be difficult and cannot be done all at once but I am convinced we can make more progress in what I believe you would consider to be the right direction in the future than we have in the past.

 

“I agree with you completely in your statement that the question of direction and goals is vital, even more vital in a period of rapid growth than any other time. Questions relating to the direction and the goals must of course be established by the faculty and the president of the University. It is vital however, that the direction and goals which you people establish be understood and accepted by the trustees, for only in this way can we work together to achieve what I am sure is really our common objective.

 

“I hope you will convey to your colleagues that I always welcome their suggestions and criticism. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss these and other important questions relating to the University in detail with you at any time. I have only one reason for spending my time in the service of the University and that is to work with all of you to help achieve even greater distinction in the future than it has enjoyed in the past ”

 

10/10/59 Typewritten address by Professor F. E. Terman on “Stanford’s Academic Goals and Academic Needs”

Professor Terman describes the growing prestige and visibility of Stanford, but says it “cannot stand still”. The goal is to be  “one of the small group of  leading universities in the country….and as the prestige institution in the west…..In order for Stanford to develop further its position as an institution of truly national stature it is necessary that we have:

1. A progressive strengthening of the salary structure

2. A healthy and steady growth of the faculty

3. Very substantial plant additions and rehabilitations

4. Improved housing for graduate students and junior staff, and completion of the undergraduate housing program.”

 

He addresses himself to the first two, salary structure and faculty.

 

As to salaries, Professor Terman says Stanford’s “scale has improved greatly in recent years…although still a little on the low side as compared with the best schools.” He goes on to describe troubles in attracting strong new faculty members. “It is clear,” he concludes,” that if Stanford is to achieve a top position in the nation, it must gradually but steadily strengthen the present salary structure…”

 

As to faculty,  Professor Terman says that “Selective growth in the size of the Stanford faculty is required if Stanford is to maintain its present momentum and to achieve the position of leadership in the nation which is within our grasp.” He gives several examples of areas where this is particularly important.

 

Box 1, Folder 15 – HP Management

 

January 16, 1959, Third Annual Management Conference, Sonoma

 

1/16/59 Bound conference package containing agenda supporting material and handouts. This was Packard’s copy and has some handwritten notes by him.

Summary of Sonoma Conference. Written by Tom Christiansen, this is a                summary of each managers talk.

9/25/58 Bound papers covering Engineering Management conference with agenda   organization charts, and review of technical projects.

 

 

Box 1, Folder 16 – HP Management

 

July 12, 1959, Sales Seminar, Sales Representatives

5/22/59 Letter from Cort Van Rensselaer to Bill Hewlett confirming schedule of forthcoming seminar on July 12-15.

1958, Booklet from RCA on “Transistor Fundamentals & Applications”

 

 

Box 1, Folder 17 – HP Management

 

July 18, 1959, Production Department Seminar, Felton Recreation Area

7/18/59 Bound booklet containing letter from Dave Packard to attendees, plus number of organization charts of the Production Department. The letter from Packard says he is sorry he cannot attend and wishes them well.

Packard points out that the “majority of employees in the organization are directed by your efforts and about 64 cents out of every sales dollar we receive is spent under your responsibility.” Thus, Packard says, “to a large measure the success of the company is dependent upon your performance.”

 

Packard goes on to say that “…our prime management objective is to make a profit of about 20% on the sales dollar before allowances for profit sharing and tax. This year we achieved only 16.27% for the year to date…”.

 

He describes ways in which profits can be improved:

“Make sure people get started in their work on time and utilize their time effectively. Your planning must be done in advance and moreover you have to provide the spirit of leadership that keeps things going in a high pitch. Little details like the use of telephones for personal business during working hours. The amount of coffee we use – incidentally – coffee adds up to nearly $50,000 per year and there is a great tendency to let this run too free.”

Changing the subject, Packard  talks about “spoilage.” He says “I am appalled to go around the plant and see barrels of parts, and even some completed sub-assemblies, thrown out after considerable time and money has been spent because of some stupid error. These are the things which you must work on to eliminate.”

 

Handling people, Packard says, is ” one of your most important jobs as managers.” Packard says that “your most important relationships with your people come about in your daily activities._ He urges the managers to “work closely with your subordinates in order to guide them and train them for more responsible positions…”

 

Packard thanks the managers for the fine progress they have seen in the past few years, “…but success like this, unfortunately, only serves to increase your responsibilities, for good work demands still more good work.”

1960 – Packard Speeches

Box 2, Folder 36 – General Speeches

 

February 15, 1960, Future of Industry in Palo Alto, Rotary Club, Palo Alto, CA

 

2/15/60, Typewritten copy of speech on the Future of Industry in Palo Alto.

Packard’s first point is that industry is creative and must have creative people to succeed. And creative people must have an attractive environment to attract them to come and stay. Packard names several companies that have attractive facilities.

Packard points to the environment of the Stanford Industrial park as an important factor in attracting industry like Lockheed, Varian and HP.

 

Packard talks of the importance of research to industry. “Industry is spending nearly ten times as much on research and development as it was fifteen years ago. And he points to the proximity of Stanford nearby as a special benefit for local industries. “And so, for industry in general, the presence of a good environment for creative people – and special opportunity to enhance a research and development program – are both strong attractions. The Palo Alto-Stanford area has both and therefore has a unique capability of attracting and developing the best in industry.

 

Packard asks “Why should Palo alto want industry?” One reason is they pay taxes,  he says. “Were it not for the industrial and commercial developments on the Stanford lands – the Palo Alto schools would be in serious financial trouble today.” Packard says he cannot refrain from citing some figures for HP: “We are paying over a quarter of a million dollars a year in taxes, most of which goes to the schools. We are also paying our employees twelve million dollars a year in wages and salaries and they pay taxes, too, and patronize your merchants, etc….” And, Packard adds,  “Our company in the last three years has contributed one and one half times as many dollars to local charities as it has paid in taxes to Palo Alto.”

Packard feels “the companies in the Stanford-Palo Alto area have set an outstanding example in being good community citizens.” And he asks “What, then, is the major attraction for industry in the Palo alto Area? For if we conclude that companies have contributed to the community and in fact should be classed among your best citizens, how do you attract more such good citizens.?”

 

Packard feels “It is easy to demonstrate that Stanford University is far and away the most important factor in attracting industry to Palo alto.” and he names several companies which were all founded by Stanford graduates. “They have been successful largely because of the ideas which came and continue to come directly from the University.” And he says “These industries are of great value to Stanford as well, the rent they pay for their leases being in many ways the least important factor. The presence of these industries has attracted a number of distinguished men to the faculty in recent years – it has provided a convenient association for student and faculty alike with the practical engineering problems of industry to round out their academic work at Stanford.”

 

Packard tell more of how industry-university relationships work. One way is the honors-cooperative program whereby students can work and also get time off to pursue graduate degrees. And professors work at HP as consultants and also have time to teach. Also,” many people on our staff (at HP) give lectures at Stanford and provide the students with the benefit of practical experience in their field.”

 

Packard tells of the “grants to the University made by industry in recognition of the help they have rendered. These grants are not always in the quid pro quo class. Many – an increasing number – are unrestricted on the theory that the programs at Stanford in the humanities and other areas may in the long run be as important as those in the physical sciences.” Packard tell of the growing industry-university association in the area of chemistry, biology and medicine., and predicts an association in these areas similar to that of electronics.

 

Packard says the Board of Trustees sees further expansion of the Industrial Park. “The attractive environment of the Stanford lands combined with the close association with Stanford University makes the Stanford Industrial Park the most interesting opportunity in the United States for the kind of industry Palo Alto should have…. This makes a pattern which clearly meets the test of good government – the most food for the largest number of people.”

 

2/15/60, Several sheets of supporting figures on industry contributions, taxes, employment etc.

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 37 – General Speeches

 

February 25, 1960, Management Looks at the Accountant, National Association of Accountants, No place given.

 

2/25/60, Two pages of handwritten notes by Packard, rather cryptic, on the subject           “Management Looks at the Accountant”

“Management

Make Plan of Action

Implement Plan

Evaluate performance

Historical role of Accounting  is (   ?    ) Purpose has been

to evaluate performance.

Balance Sheet

P & L Statement

Absolute measure – comparative measure”…

“Accountant need to think how best to present data so Manager can really understand what is going on.

 

More need for imagination. Growth potential – % Annual Growth = % profit X turnover.

 

The Accuracy dilemma – Bookkeeping – auditing function has need for accuracy.

 

The decision making problem in management.

 

We evaluate so we can see how good are the decisions we have made and so we can continually modify these decisions to improve performance. We need data fast and complete but not to (sic) high accuracy.

 

The planning function of management – statistical extrapolation. – Analysis New techniques – computer – mathematical forms. Centralized data processing”

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 38 – General Speeches

 

March 2, 1960, Engineering Scholarship Fund, Hertz FoundationNo place given

3/2/60, Typewritten speech by David Packard, for Hertz Foundation

Packard speaks first of his pleasure in welcoming Mr. Hertz and being able to express “appreciation to him and his foundation for establishing this pilot plan of his engineering scholarship fund in the Bay Area.”

 

Packard tells of his early decision in high school to pursue a career in engineering, and tells Mr. Hertz  “that you are doing a great service for the young men who will be supported by your scholarship program in encouraging them to make an early decision on an engineering career.”

 

Packard feels this program will also be an important contribution to our nation, and he tells of his recent trip to Russia. He tells of the strong curriculum there where the youngsters study years of English, math, physics, chemistry. However, he says “I can assure you that our good high schools are better than their good secondary schools. I believe that they are better for a very important reason. In our schools capable teachers and administrators work in an atmosphere of freedom, and under our system they do a better job in education than do the teachers and administrators under the tight bureaucratic control of the Soviet Government.

Packard says “while we have been falling behind terms of engineers produced I am confident that our free, private enterprise system is already responding to the challenge and we will succeed in this task.”

 

“I do not wish to imply that the job is yet done. We do need many more engineers in our schools. In this regard I would like to say a word or two about the importance of engineering to our national defense effort…..Engineering may very well be the most important profession of all in determining the survival of our country. For the decision is going to be made in the final analysis on the technical competence of America in relation to the technical competence of Russia. We need skilled diplomats, we need leaders with the broadest and finest training that can be had–But unless we have the engineers who are able to translate our scientific advances into items of hardware with greater proficiency than our Soviet adversaries, and unless they can do this over the long term, sooner or later our diplomats, our leaders, our entire country will be dealing from a position of weakness which is utterly hopeless and we will have lost the battle.”

Packard speaks about the engineering as a personal career. “Engineering provides great opportunity for individual initiative and individual contribution. It provides opportunities for constructive teamwork as well, for those who prefer it. the history of our country from the beginning to the twentieth century was the story of the individual man and woman, the pioneers, and their conflict in extending and developing the great land frontiers of the nation. The history of America in the twentieth century is being written. Its greatest chapters will be the story of the engineers and their efforts to conquer and exploit the frontiers of science and technology.”

 

He closes with “Mr. Hertz you are doing our country a great service in establishing this Engineering Scholarship foundation. I feel confident that the young men and young women whom you will reward and encourage through your efforts will fully justify your great love of our country.”

 

Box 2, Folder 39 – General Speeches

 

March 8, 1960, Supervisory Development Program, HP, Palo Alto

3/8/60, Copy of Typewritten speech by Packard to group of supervisors in training.

Packard’s opening statement sets the tone for his talk: “I’m glad to have this opportunity to get together with you and discuss how each of us can do our job more efficiently, because as the company grows I think this is going to become crucial in determining whether we are able to continue to grow and keep an efficient organization and maintain the character of our company which we think is important.”

 

Packard says he wants to “discuss why a company exists in the first place.” “I think many people assume, wrongly, that a company exists simply to make money. While this is an important result of a company’s existence, we have to go deeper and find the real reasons for our being. As we investigate this, we inevitably come to the conclusion that a group of people get together and exist as an institution that we call a company so they are able to accomplish something collectively which they could not accomplish separately. They are able to do something worthwhile – they make a contribution to society (a phrase which sounds trite but is fundamental). ….You can look around and still see people who are interested in money and nothing else, but the underlying drives come largely from a desire to do something else – to make a product – to give a service – generally to do something which is of value.”

 

Progressing to the question as to why HP exists Packard says, “I think it is obvious that we started this company because bill and I, …felt that we were able to design and make instruments which were not as yet available. …Our contribution is really measured by the instruments each of you has helped to make – the new instruments engineering has designed to help people make measurements more efficiently, more accurately, more conveniently, less expensively than could have been done otherwise. So, in the last analysis, the reason for our existence and the measure of our success is how well we are able to make our product.”

 

Packard tells the group that management has made some studies on how well HP is doing in the marketplace and concluded that “where we are making instruments, we are supplying about 1/3 of the country’s total requirements….Packard tells of visits to customer plants find “our instruments are being used in very important work; the advancement of science, defense of our country and many other areas.”

 

“How does the individual person fit into this picture? We have looked at the company and found it exists to make a contribution – not just to make money. I think we can say the same about the people in the company. The individual words, partly to make money, of course, but we should also realize that the individual who is doing a worthwhile job is working  because he feels he is accomplishing something worthwhile….I want to emphasize then that people work to make a contribution and they do this best when they have a real objective when they know what they are trying to achieve and are able to use their own capabilities to the greatest extent. This is a basic philosophy which we have discussed before – Management by Objective as compared to Management by Control.”

 

Looking at specific objectives Packard says, “The first objective is to continue in the field of electronic instruments. We don’t plan to go into other areas, at least in the foreseeable future. …So our instruments are used in three general areas; R&D, Production and field Maintenance.”

 

“The other objective which is complementary to this and equally important is to try to make everything we do worthwhile. We want to do our best when we take on a job. He gives some examples of creative instruments over the last year. “They give people who buy them methods of making measurements they could not make before those instruments were available.”

 

Turning to another objective Packard says that “creative design alone is not enough and never will be. In order to make these into useful devices, there must by meticulous attention to detail. …Attention to detail is as important in manufacturing as it is in engineering.”

 

“Selling can be analyzed the same way. We are anxious to find new approaches to selling, but again – detail is important. We certainly are not anxious to sell a customer something he does not want, nor need. …Also, we ant to be sure that when the instrument is delivered, it performs the function the customer wanted.”

 

Financial responsibility is equally important, however different in nature. It is essentially a service function to see we generate the resources which make it possible for us all to do our job.”

 

Packard continues with another area objective: “Now Bill and I feel that our company has a responsibility to our employees. We are not interested only in making a better product. We feel that in asking you people to work for us, we in turn have an obligation. This is an important point and one which we ask each of you to relay to all the employees. Our first obligation, which is self-evident from my previous remarks, is to let people know they are doing something worthwhile. We must provide a means of letting our employees know they have done a good job. You as supervisors must convey this to your groups. don’t just give orders. Provide the opportunity for your people to do something important. Encourage them”

 

“Over the years we have developed the policy that it is important for the supervisor to thoroughly know and understand the work of his group….I don’t see how a person can even understand what proper standards are and what performance is required unless he does understand in some detail the very specific nature of the work he is trying to supervise….I want  emphasized you can supervise best when you know a great deal about the work you are supervising and when you know the techniques of supervision as well.”

 

Looking at other aspects of supervisory work Packard says, “As supervisors you will be expected to set high standards of behavior. …Tolerance is tremendously significant….You must have understanding – understanding of the little things that affect people. You must have a sense of fairness, and you must know what it is reasonable to expect of your people. You have a good set of standards for your group but you must maintain these standards with fairness and understanding.”

 

On job continuity Packard says, “We have always considered that we have a responsibility to our employees to plan our work so we can assure job continuity. We do not intend to have a “Hire _’em and fire _’em” operation. Bill and I do not feel this is the best way for a company like ours to operate. We have very rigid requirements of technical competence to maintain and rigid requirements in the quality of our equipment. This requires that we have and keep good people at all times. So we feel it is our responsibility to provide opportunity and job security to the best of our ability.”

 

Looking beyond the immediate company Packard looks at HP’s responsibility to the community at large. Those things which the institutions in our community provide, the general sense of moral values, the general character of the people that come from the schools, the churches and other institutions; these are things which we accept and are extremely important in the operation of an organization like this. …If we consider these matters more seriously, we realize that if these things did not exist, it would have a serious effect on our ability to do a job. So it follows that we do have a responsibility as a company, and as individuals, to help support these activities. You all know that Hewlett-Packard contributes as a company to many of these institutions and we encourage our people to take part – without defining who should do what – but leaving this to free choice.”

 

“Last of all, I want to say that I have mentioned our primary objectives but none of these can be accomplished unless the company makes a profit. Profit is the measure of our contribution to our customers – it is a measure of what our customers are willing to pay us over and above the actual cost of an instrument. …So profit is the measure of how well we work together. It is really the final measure because, if we cannot do these things so the customer will pay us, our work is futile.”

 

“In addition, the margin we have – what is left over after paying for the material, labor, overhead and so on – is the source of our capital for growth. New buildings and facilities and better equipment generally strengthen our position to do a better job.”

 

Our objectives are tremendously vital and, it is your job to help us translate them to all of our employees.”

 

Box 2, Folder 40 – General Speeches

 

March 19, 1960, HP’s Business Outlook for the Next Ten Years, Sales Meeting , New York

 

3/19/60, Typewritten (with some handwritten notes by Packard) outline of a talk by Dave Packard looking at prospects for HP over the next ten years.

 

Packard tell his audience the purpose of the talk is to review “some of the long-range planning done by HP about a month ago to try to define how our company might grow over the next decade.” He starts by reviewing 1959 operations.

 

Packard says 1959 was an “excellent ” year, both from the stanPackardoint of sales as well as for new products introduced. He shows a slide which indicated the “Largest increase in sales of any year”, and the “Largest new product increment of any year.” From this data Packard concludes “…we are not at our opportunity ceiling”.

 

Another slide is titled “HP and Subsidiaries Map” Packard says this slide shows the “major changes in organization during 1959 have added a whole new dimension to problems that rapid growth creates. And he adds that, as a result, HP top management met to see “how we can move to meet the challenges of this growth.”

 

Packard reviews the topics discussed at this meeting – the first being the economic outlook for 1960. He says data from the National Planning Association shows GNP to be up 60% by 1970, population up by 21%, and per capita disposable income up by 39%.

 

Forecasts of total market growth are up 2.1 times with a trend toward less dependence on defense and government spending. With the favorable market outlook, Packard looks at HP’s market position by product group:

 

Packard says the total market for instruments in 1959 was $300M and that HP competed in one half of this; and that HP has about 38% of the business where they compete. He concludes that “we have lots of “product room ” to grow.”

 

Packard looks next at the demands this sales growth will place on the factory organization. He sees a tremendous demand for people but “more particularly, for engineers and supervisors – just the kind of population studies show to be in critical supply…” He sees this as “the most significant problem in future.”

 

Packard turns next to a plant forecast. He sees a need for “12 new plants of about 100K square feet each over the next ten years.” The total capital cost may be $50M, with inventory and A/R adding another $40M. “Yet total profits over period, if we continue to do our job, will more than adequately cover this ambitious program.”

 

Packard summarizes the conclusion of top management on opportunities for growth over the next ten years:

 

1. “Markets are promising

 

2. Financing can be generated internally

 

3. Room for new ideas and products in their market area

 

4. People are the key to continued growth

 

5. Future looks bright but to a large extent our degree of success will be                   up to you.”

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 41 – General Speeches

 

April 26, 1960, Planning in Defense Industries, AMA, San Francisco, CA

 

4/26/1960, Handwritten notes  by David Packard for speech.

 

Packard first  speaks of the “special conditions of defense industries.” He says that long range planning very important – war plans “have seldom been realistic, but there has been time to reorganize in the past.” Packard says the next war will be won by the side with the best long range planning.

“Above all long range planning must be closely related to the basic company objectives – You must know where you want to go before you can orderly plan how to get there. ….Long range planning should have as its objective the development of your company to do a better job in the future than you are doing today – not just to get business – not just to stay alive.”

 

Packard looks at the problem of knowing what the military market will be.

“a. Look at overall data – GNP, military spending estimates…..

b. Trends in overall marketing directions….

c. Detail trends in your special field…. ”

 

“”For long range planning value data must be collected & organized – and made available to people at various levels”

 

Looking at the unique problems of long range planning in defense industries Packard discusses:

 

a. The difficulty of  evaluating long range trends in military techniques

b. Rapid technological changes because of heavy R & D expenditures.

c. Weapons systems are large and complex.

d. Often no prior experience to rely on

e. It is difficult for one company to evaluate its position in the market.

Some of the problems in making long range forecasts:

“1. Technological change

2. Changing climate of defense and war.

3. Utilization of military goods or know how from military work for civilian products….”

Packard says the “Most important question regarding long range planning in defense industries is will there be total disarmament in the foreseeable future. If the answer is “yes” then little to do except to convert to civilian markets. If answer no then plan for continued defense business.”

 

4/26/60, Earlier draft of above talk, in Packard’s handwriting.

Box 2, Folder 42 – General Speeches

June 7, 1960, The Responsibility of Business to Society, AMA, New York

 

6/7/1960, Typewritten speech on above subject given by Dave Packard in an AMA management course.

 

Packard opens the discussion on the subject by suggesting that many in the audience may wonder why we should spend time talking about it at all, and he invites them to take a “little time on the general problem.”

 

Packard raises the proposition that  “As one moves along to responsibility for the management of larger nits it becomes more evident that the management profession includes more than the summation of the individual management skills, that management involves the entire sphere of influence of the business.”

 

He describes the importance that employees attach to their jobs: “These people spend more of their waking hours in their job than in any other single activity. How they think, how they vote, what they tell their friends, their social attitude in every detail is influenced by what goes on at the job. Packard feels management has failed to understand this and , as a result, “employee attitudes have been influenced far too much by unions and by other groups of  people in the community.”

 

Business  institutions…are among the most important institutions or groupings of people in the nation. They produce much of the basic wealth, provide income for a majority of the people; they are the source of our military strength and in many ways our nation is strong and healthy when the business organizations are strong and healthy.”

 

Packard points out that the environment in which business exists, have a large influence on the success of a business.  “This environment is continually changing under pressure from many sources, pressures generated by the people, pressures of other organizations and groups of people. Management is incredibly irresponsible to assume a hands-off attitude and hope that these molding forces of a changing society will somehow automatically develop a better environment for his business. I think management has been incredibly irresponsible in the past to refuse to accept its proper responsibility to society at large. As a result, Union power has grown and has in many ways generated an environment hostile no only to healthy development of business but also inimical to the welfare of the country as a whole. Government control of business has grown and again it has generated an environment often hostile to business management.”

 

Packard feels that “…these trends are not the result of the perversity of Union officials or of Government people….We are simply experiencing the result of management’s failure in the past to recognize this responsibility to use its power wisely. the hour is late but I believe we are becoming aware of the situation in time.”

 

Packard quotes some enlightened managers or observers of business: “Ralph Cordiner of General Electric expects his management people to “manage their business in the best interests of all concerned.. Meaning customers, shareholders, employees, suppliers, retailers and others. Another is Peter Drucker, the author, who proposed that management is a “central social function in society and economy”.  And Drucker again: “No policy is likely to benefit business itself unless it also benefits society”.

 

Packard moves from these concepts to specific steps management can take if it wants to act on “the proposition that business is responsible to society at large.” “It seems to me one of the important actions which can be taken by management to assure that day-to-day decisions and actions will reflect these social responsibilities is to state some of them in the company creed or company objectives. I advocate strongly the basic philosophy of Management by Objective for I believe if the management team has generally accepted common objectives each member of the team can be left to solve his own problems with assurance his solution will be positive and implement the progress of the entire company.”

 

Packard suggests four objectives:

 

1.”Our company is in business to make a contribution to society.

2. “It is our responsibility to recognize the dignity and personal worth of every person we employ–and that we have the responsibility to include opportunities for our employees to share in the company’s success which they help make possible.

3. “The success of our company is to a large degree the result of the environment in which we operate. such freedom as we have comes from our system of government. Many of the ideas we use in our day-to-day work have come about because the frontiers of knowledge have been pushed back by our great universities. Our families, our churches and our schools provide the intellectual and moral training on which we rely every day and never five the matter a second thought. We must support these great institutions in jour free society with all the strength at our command if we wish to preserve a favorable environment for our management work

 

4. “Profit is the proper measure of the contribution we have made to society. To produce a profit is not an end and aim in itself but to produce a profit provides the means by which we can accomplish all our other objectives. Profit is the proper measure of the value our company has added in designing and making its products.”

 

Packard goes on to explain how, at HP, they have encouraged management people to take an active part in community affairs; from Boy Scouts, Jr. Chamber of Commerce and school committees, to Mayor of the city, President of the School Board, Chairman of the Hospital Board, Head of the Community Chest, and others.

 

Financial contributions is a problem businesses face. “I would start with the position that a company has the responsibility to support a number of charitable institutions and in general the support should be to those activities and institutions which have a significant effect on the environment in which the company operates. To put it in plain English you are on safe ground if you ask yourself is this contribution for something that is really important for my company.”

 

It should be obvious to all that publicly supported education deserves and needs no charitable support from business. I would make this one exception–Contributions of equipment or special help in special areas to public schools and state supported colleges and universities may be justified but generally only on a basis of very special interest.”

 

“Business managers , however, should take an active interest in legislation, local and state, establishing levels of tax support for publicly supported education. Your company has to help pay the bill. Your company has a real interest in the quality of education in the community or at the colleges and universities from which it may draw its people.”

 

“Private business has a very special reason to be interested in privately supported and independent colleges and universities. these institutions are a part of our free enterprise system, they provide much of the leadership for all education–They can survive and maintain their positions of leadership only with the support of all segments of the society in which they exist.” And Packard suggests such specific support as, R & D, scholarships/fellowships, direct grants.

 

Packard goes to the sometimes vexing question of managerial participation in politics. “The practice in the past has been in general to refrain from political participation on the theory that a manager’s job was to run his business and what does politics have to do with this. The fact that Union Political activity has grown in scope and magnitude with leaps and bounds and the fact that there has been a trend of anti-business legislation, or at least legislation not especially favorable to business, has caused many management people to reconsider this whole problem.”

 

It seems to me that it is becoming more generally accepted that management should take a more active part in politics and there are a few ground rules we might consider.

 

“1. Our democracy is predicated on an educated  public. Voters who understand the issues they are voting on. Here management people can make an important contribution to help keep their employees informed and interested on the vital issues in the political area which affect the business climate.

 

“2. Management can encourage employees to take an active part in local, state and national politics–encourage this by indicating to employees this is a desirable thing to do and by allowing people some support in time allowances, etc.

 

“3. Except on issues which clearly and precisely affect the business environment of the company, as a company should not take a partisan position on issues nor should the company as a company take a position on a candidate.

 

“4. To have any effect the interest of management in politics should be a continuing year-round effort. Not much is likely to be accomplished by an effort for a few weeks before an election now and then.”

 

Packard names some  “other areas where management can and should participate in recognition of its responsibility to society. One of these is participation in some of the activities which are directed toward common planning for the long range national interest. If it is important for us to have in this country a “National Policy of Economic Growth” this must be an effort of private businessmen.”

 

“It seems to me then that managers should recognize that business does have a very large responsibility to society. I think by recognizing this fact, placing it squarely before your management team so it is one of their important guiding objectives, you and your management team can do a better job in guiding and developing your own business and at the same time you can make an important contribution to the preservation of and the strengthening of an entire Free enterprise System.”

 

6/7/60, Typewritten “Notes on The Responsibility of Management to Society”. A brief summary of Packard’s talk above.

6/7/60, Several 5″x8″ sheets each with a topic for discussion. Apparently made up as the course.

6/7/60, Typed outline of the AMA Management course.

 

Box 2, Folder 43 – General Speeches

 

August 24, 1960, Electronics Management’s Biggest Challenge, WEMA, Los Angeles, CA

 

8/24/60, Printed copy of David Packard’s speech.

Packard reviews the “troubled times” around the world: Russia posturing, a pro-Communist Castro in Cuba, the people of Africa straining against their traditional bonds. “These problems must be of concern to every thinking American and I know of no more capable, thinking group of Americans than can be found in the electronics industry.”

 

Reviewing some of the contributions made by the electronics industry which were crucial to winning World War II,  Packard mentions Radar, Sonar, the proximity fuse. Today, the strength of the military is aided by reliable communications, precise navigation, complex data handling and analysis and control systems. “The hope held by many individuals that our industry can and should become less dependent on military work is sheer wishful thinking that borders on irresponsibility. I will be the continuing task of the electronic industry to add to our military strength for many years ahead but I think there is more we can and should so.”

 

Helping to develop a more realistic understanding of the problems we face is one way. Packard sees wishful thinking as all too characteristic of American thinking – isolationism after World War I and II, a search for some simple formula to make problems disappear. “In these troubled times we as a nation have been fatefully unrealistic on the three most important issues..

 

“First – We have failed to understand the true nature of communism and its chief advocate, Russia. We do not properly evaluate her strengths and her weaknesses and we won’t believe her intentions.

 

“Second – We have failed to fully appreciate and take advantage of our own strengths and capabilities, both our military capability and the importance of our own traditions and ideas and the good will they generate.

 

“Third – We do not seem to understand the extent or importance of the growing tide of independence and economic development occurring among  the majority of the peoples of the world. These pressures are so great and so widespread that they are bound to influence the course of history for centuries in the future and they will not be stopped or diverted by transitory remedies nor are they likely to be much influences by other current problems. I do not know that our industry can or will have much to do with these great underlying pressures but as to our ability to meet the Russian problem and as to setting an example of true leadership for the world to see, I believe we can have a part.”

Packard takes the first issue – Russia and tells of his trip there a year previously. He talks of the lack of  highways, apartments with no outlets for electric appliances, few automobiles or trucks. He says “I did not see one single electronic device in Russia which represented an advance over what we have in this country….”He tells of visiting Russian schools and a fourth year physics class where not a single student knew Ohm’s law.

 

Packard concludes the Russians are “…masters at showmanship and facade…”

“I am sure we in this country do not yet understand the true nature of Russia and communism. We overestimate her strength and perhaps misjudge here weakness.”

 

“If we have failed to understand and have underestimated the nature of our chief adversary, I think also we have failed to understand the great strength, both physical and moral, which is America. In this regard, I think it is useful to review some of the characteristics of our own industry which have given it strength and which make it an outstanding example of the operation of our free enterprise system.”

 

Packard describes his tour through the exhibits at WESCON and notes the many new products that were developed by very small firms – an example of the dynamic free enterprise system at work. He feels that the free exchange of ideas “has been an important factor in the management success of many of the firms here this week.”

 

“Being inhabited by young, well-trained, enthusiastic and ambitious people, the electronics industry holds examples of the best thinking in professional management and evidence of the highest ethics in business practice. We not only provide employment in our industry for about two million men and women, but we provide the best of jobs and working conditions for them We understand, I think quite fully, that people are more important than money in the electronic business.”

 

Packard feels preserving these important strengths is a serious problem. He speaks of the “growing trend toward mergers and acquisitions  – spurred by the attraction of the exorbitant price-to-earnings rations which the investment community has generated out of their enthusiasm for our performance. There is no evidence …to indicate our industry is any stronger as a result of these mergers and acquisitions.”

 

Packard feels “we must as an industry resist the pressures of governmental control with all our might. He recognizes this is difficult when the industry depends on government for such a large portion of its business. “It should be abundantly clear, however, that arbitrary rules generated by governmental bureaucracy are not necessarily going to bring about better reliability in our products not progress in any other area of our affairs. If we follow the lead of those in government who say that it is more important to limit profits than it is to produce an economical product of highest quality, we will find ourselves heading straight down the socialist road to the camp of communism.”

 

Packard turns to education and states that “We must put more effort into improving the educational system in this country. …Our industry derives its great strength from the large numbers of capable, highly educated people we employ. We must give commensurate support to the source of this strength.”

 

In this election year, Packard says we should encourage people  to learn about the issues and candidates and to select people who understand that our country cannot be strengthened by spreading the wealth, but only by enabling each person to do a better and more efficient job in his own work.

 

During the two decades that the United States has held a position of leadership in the world, this leadership has come not from aggressive action, nor at the expense of people, but as a result of the basic strengths which have been generated within our unique system of freedom and democracy….In these same two decades our electronic industry has grown from a small, insignificant factor in our economy to one of the greatest industries of our nation, and we have had a very important part in helping our country achieve this world leadership.”

 

Packard asks the question “Will history record that the American dream of equality of opportunity, of justice for all and of the supreme importance of the individual has been permanently established for all future mankind”

 

And he answers it saying:  “This question must be answered in the right way by each of us as individuals. It must be the conviction of the majority of all the people. We must give the right answer–Nothing can be more important.”

 

8/1/60, Copy of  invitation to the WEMA luncheon to hear Packard’s talk.

8/24/60, Printed copy of above speech in pamphlet form.

8/24/60, Typewritten summary of this speech

Undated, typewritten letter from Ray Wilbur, Personnel Director, to all employees of HP sending them a copy of the speech.

July/August, Issue of the WEMA Westerner publication containing an article about Packard’s forthcoming talk.

August, Clipping from WESCON NEWS telling of Packard’s forthcoming talk.

8/5/60, Clipping from Los Angeles Times newspaper telling of Packard’s forthcoming speech.

8/24/60, Clipping from Palo Alto Times newspaper,  telling of  Packard’s having received the “Western Electronic Medal of Achievement”  at WEMA luncheon where he was principal speaker.

Undated, Printed note of congratulations from Manpower Inc. attaching newspaper clipping covering award presentation.

 

8/25/60, Letter to Packard from Thomas B. Drummond of  Kidder, Peabody & Company requesting a copy of the speech.

8/25/60, Newspaper clipping from Electronic News covering WEMA speech.

8/25/60, Letter to Packard from Paul E. Hoover Congratulation Packard on award.

 

8/25/60, Letter to Packard from President J. E. Wallace Sterling, of Stanford congratulations Packard on the award.

8/26/60, Letter to Packard from Tully C. Knoles of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce offering congratulations on the award.

 

8/26/60, Letter to Packard from Charles J. Marsh of Stevenson, Jordan & Harrison, Inc. offering congratulations on the award and requesting a copy of the speech.

September, 1960, Two pages from Hughes, Engineering Division publication covering

Packard’s speech.

9/7/60, Letter to Packard from S. H. Bellue of Osborne Electronic Sales Corp. saying that he is sending to radios to Packard as they discussed.

9/9/60, Letter to Packard from Ernest C. Arbuckle of Stanford, offering congratulations on award. Packard has written a note on the letter telling his secretary to send Arbuckle a copy of the talk.

10/5/60, Letter to Packard from John T. Hill of  j. t. hill company, asking for 100 reprints of Packard’s speech to distribute to his employees. A penciled note on the letter says “sent 10/7″

10/4/60, Letter to Packard from M. R. Lynn, Manager Fabrication Department, Ampex Data Products, saying he received a copy of Packard_s speech from his management. H says he is a newcomer to the electronics industry and he is proud to know that there are leaders who know the broad picture.

10/4/60, Letter to Packard from Carl W. Lawrence of  radio station KGEI in Belmont, CA. He congratulates Packard on his speech and encloses the script of a program their is beaming to Latin America discussing the threat from communism.

10/10/60, copy of letter from Packard to  Carl Lawrence saying he had read the script and that he is sure they are doing an important job with these programs.

9/27/60, Letter to Packard from R. H. Owens of Hughes Aircraft Company, congratulating Packard on the speech and enclosing a copy of a report he had sent to his management discussing the threat of communism.

10/10/60, Copy of a letter from Packard to R. H. Owens at Hughes Aircraft thanking him for his letter of September 27 and adding that he would enjoy discussing the subject further with Mr. Owens at a mutually satisfactory time.

 

10/10/60, Letter to Packard from Richard M. Leonard of the Law Offices of Leonard & Dole telling Packard he admires his “good sense and clarity of statement”.

10/20/60, Letter to Packard from Charles Davis office manager at Electro Scientific Industries Inc. enclosing an article describing a TV program sponsored by Bell and Howell.

10/11/60, Letter to Packard from James C. Skinner, President Thomas & Skinner, Inc. requesting permission to quote a statement in Packard’s speech concerning the need for companies to support private colleges and universities, and requesting additional copies of the talk.

10/24/60, Copy of letter from Packard to James C. Skinner sending additional copies of the talk and giving permission to use the quote as he requested.

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 44 – General Speeches

 

No Date 1960, The Dimensions of the Executive Job, No Place Listed

 

Outline of talk handwritten by Packard

1. The Executive – The Administrator

The Manager – Management

Management – Getting things done through people.

2. History

Management, Administrator came early – Mesopotamia, China, Rome

Highly Authoritarian

Religion

Military

Roman Guilds

3. Beginnings of Modern Management

Frederick W. Taylor

Systematic approach

Scientific Management

Organization & Control

Classifications

1. Technical – production

2. Commercial – selling

3. Financial – use of capital

4. Security – protection of assets

5. Accounting – stock taking, costing

6. Managerial – planning, organizing, control

 

These concepts are the basis for most management today.

In recent years there has been a change, a broader view of management.

 

What are the objectives of management

1. To make a profit for owners.

To meet plan and budget directed from higher authority.

2. To make the activity or organization best serve society.

1. To make a contribution as an organization.

2. To serve the balanced interest of all parties involved -Owners                              Customers, employees, and public at large

Management is becoming, and should become, a profession.

Profession

1. Practitioners who are free and responsible and who establish standards of performance through personal integrity, dedication and courage.

2. Practitioners who are primarily dedicated to serving fellow man. g                       generally requires years of learning and continual learning.

The elements of management

1. Planning

Objectives

Policies

Procedures

Schedules, budgets

2. Organizing

Grouping of work

Delegation of work

3. Coordinating

Balancing

Integrating

4. Motivating

Communication – understanding

Inspiring – generating enthusiasm

Teaching and coaching

Participation

Appraisal

5. Controlling

Setting standards of performance

Evaluation of performance

Feedback of performance to all people

 

The Concept of Responsibility and Authority

Responsibility

You have responsibility when you know what is expected of you by your                         superiors.

You delegate responsibility when your subordinates know what is expected                       of them.

Planning – What are the objectives

Communications – Does the other person really understand.

Delegation in detail

Delegation by objective

Only when everyone on the management team understands                          the basic and overall objectives of the organization can he                             fully discharge his responsibility.

Areas of responsibility are commonly defined but always overlap – Teamwork back up the line.

 

Authority

Authority by status – religion, slave, military

Authority by law or regulation

Authority by knowledge or respect

An organization is developed to its full capacity only when each member is using his full capability in cooperation with every other member toward the common objectives.

 

Some general observations

The specialist vs. the manager

When a man does a good job of management he does it only because he stops being a specialist and becomes a manager.

There is a vast body of knowledge available -attitudes, principles, skills      and tools.

There is no more reason to expect men in management to become prepared and to keep informed without organized and methodical effort than for men in       any other profession, art or service.

 

Box 1. Folder 5 – Stanford

 

February 1960, Stanford’s National Visibility, Stanford Conference, Various locations

 

2/60  Typewritten speech with notations by Packard.

 

Packard notes that 1959 marked the   tenth anniversary of Dr. Wallace Sterling’s tenure as president; “we reviewed some of the things which have been accomplished during these ten years.” This progress has continued and he wants to give a “brief report”

 

On finances – operating budget for 1959-1960 just over $23 million, up from $20 the year before. Expenditures will be covered by income. 1959  “has seen the largest program of plant additions in the history of the University — including the new $16,000,000 Stanford Medical Center — the construction of the Applied Electronics Laboratory — the Gillfillan Wing of the Electronic Research Laboratory — a project to house married students — a new book store and post office —  the renovation of Encina Hall for office and research programs — and the rehabilitation of several of the old buildings in the quad.”  Packard lists several more projects for which planning and architectural work has begun: a new Chemistry building, a new Physics building, a new housing program for undergraduate men, and “perhaps most important of all — we are working on plans for a new, very urgently needed, Undergraduate Library…”

Packard says “Gifts and grants to Stanford reached a new all-time high of $22,261,809 last year…second only to Harvard” But Packard points out that buildings and money do not make a university. “Therefore, I would like to take a few minutes to report on the sine qua non — the faculty and students. ” “Stanford in Italy” and “Stanford in France” programs have been authorized for undergraduates, along the line of the “Stanford in Germany” pattern. “It will now be possible for one-third of the students to study in Europe for two quarters some time during their four undergraduate years. “New, distinguished professors have been brought to the campus.

 

“During the year, the magnitude and scope of  Research at Stanford has continued to increase. And  he gives several examples. “So — we are looking at total research effort at the University measured by over $12,000,000 of government and foundation support.”

 

“As one reviews the progress of the past year — the increase in Stanford’s National Visibility shows up in every area. :last year Stanford ranked third in the nation as the choice of Undergraduate Scholarship Winners in the National Merit foundation program. Stanford was fourth in 1958, fifth in 1957 and eighth in 1956 (the year the program started). Stanford was second to Harvard in the General Motors National scholarship competition. The new Medical School has attracted attention throughout the country….”  “Our Physics Department was singled out by the President of the United States for possible location of a two-mile long electron accelerator to cost over $100,000,000. Our Mathematics-Statistics Laboratory is recognized as one of the two or three leading centers in the country in the field of mathematical analysis. The law School in the last ten years has had seven of its graduates selected as clerks to Supreme Court Justices.”

 

“In recent years, Stanford Faculty have received five Nobel Prizes, before WW II we never had, nor could aspire to, even one such honor. In 1939 we had three professors who were members of the National Academy of Sciences — today we have fourteen.”  Packard says “…we have raised our sights in recruiting faculty.  In the past three years — we have appointed three new faculty members who were already members of the National Academy sciences — this had never happened in the history of the University before 1957.”

 

Packard tells of Stanford having …”been selected to operate an Institute for High school Teachers of Chemistry and mathematics with a grant…from the National Science Foundation.”  He goes on to say that “Stanford is developing nationwide influence in the teaching of languages — Slavic, German, French, and Spanish.” “Two out of the nine U.S. scientists at the recent Geneva Technical talks on how to detect high altitude nuclear explosions were Stanford Professors.”

 

“There are many, many more examples to substantiate clearly and decisively the conclusion that Stanford, both at the Undergraduate and at the Graduate level, has changed from a respected but fundamentally regional University to a great national institution of rapidly growing stature.”

 

Packard points out that “…these accomplishments bring us to the realization that Stanford has become an important national asset and we as its alumnae have the responsibility to assure the nation that the capabilities of Stanford in its educational leadership, in its capacity for research, and its great wealth of accumulated knowledge are fully utilized to strengthen our country and our civilization in the troubled years which lie ahead. To discuss the future of Stanford properly we must set the stage by considering some of the things which have happened in the past and make some estimate for the decades ahead.”

 

He begins by reminding the audience of some of the things that have happened in the first half of the Twentieth Century. He speaks of the “…universal use of  the telephone since Stanford was founded,” and describes how the “transmission of thought and ideas has become almost instantaneous and certainly international.” Going on Packard says “physical mobility has increased with equal rapidity. “…the development of the jet has brought Stanford closer to London, Paris, Berlin and Rome…than it was to Chicago when I was a student. No one doubts for a minute that we will put a man in space in a year or so.”

 

“These things are but the external evidences of the tremendous accumulation of knowledge which is going on in the world. such progress is impossible until envisioned by man — until the techniques and methods are thoroughly understood. Only when we have the knowledge can it be translated by handicraft into reality.”

 

Packard tells of the thousands of professional journals, articles and scientific books issued in the preceding year. He says that “In my own field of electronic engineering — when I started at Stanford in 1930, there had hardly been a dozen books published on the subject. Today there are many thousands.”

 

Packard tells of how “…only two decades ago the United States was a country virtually isolated from world affairs — both in thought and association.  Today     we are in a position of world leadership, enmeshed in a life or death struggle with Russia. In the last three years we have certainly been rudely awakened and we clearly see it will take the maximum of our energy and ability to maintain our position of leadership and it will not be maintained through any bargain with Providence. This is the environment in which our University must take a position leadership.”

 

“Above all” Packard says, “Stanford must stand for the preservation of freedom. It is the fundamental American concept — and in fact the basic tenet of the entire Western World — that all great accomplishment in the world has been made and will continue to be made by individual men working in an atmosphere of freedom, fighting the tyranny which is continually attempting to destroy freedom and dignity for the individual person.”

 

Looking ahead Packard says “The second half of the Twentieth century may well turn out to be the most critical period in the history of the world. Certainly it is likely to be the most critical in the history of our nation and Western Civilization.

We face an explosion of population as well of knowledge….The boys and girls who choose Stanford will have the opportunity to keep up with this explosion of knowledge. They will know and work with professors exploring on the very frontiers of knowledge in many areas.”

 

Packard tells how Stanford’s influence is extending into the international area:…”We recently received $3,500,000 from the Ford Foundation to establish an International center at Stanford for educating teachers of Business Administration from foreign countries….In the past year or two, many important national corporations have come to recognize the tremendously important contribution made to all higher education by the great private universities….The Chase Manhattan Bank of New York recently awarded Stanford along with nine other first level privately supported universities — a grant of $10,000 a year for five years because Stanford is  “Widely recognized as having been outstanding over the years as a center of learning!”….As your trustees,  your administrators and your faculty attempt to guide Stanford toward its proper future destiny — there naturally will be many practical problems: admissions, social standards, athletics.”

 

Packard says he wants to say a few words about athletics, “lest you leave the room with the idea there is no place at Stanford for anything except intellectual achievement. ….”when we talk about leadership for today, we are talking about men and women with drive, energy, motivation, judgment and wisdom — in addition to intellectual capability. these qualities are developed on the athletic field as well as in all kinds of extra-curricular activities.”  “I am confident we can find enough good football players who are also good students to give our adversaries a better run for their money in the future than we have in the past.” “Last year, out of 10 Phi Beta Kappas in the Pacific Coast Conference, 6 were from Stanford.”

 

In closing Packard says he wants to remind “… you all that we have undertaken a monumental challenge, that your trustees, your president, your administrators, and your faculty are working together with full understanding of the magnitude of the job to be done. We are tremendously grateful for the devoted work of the alumnae Association, the Stanford Clubs, the Stanford Associated and all of the many individual friends and alumni who have helped to make the past progress possible.  We know we can count on all of you in the future.”

 

2/5/60 Typewritten draft of above speech with notations

2/28/60 Typewritten speech given by President Wallace Sterling, with notations

 

 

Box 1, Folder 6 – Stanford

 

April 29, 1960,  Stanford Luncheon, Waldorf Astoria Group, New York

 

4/29/60 Typewritten speech made before this group introducing Herbert Hoover and Stanford President Wallace Sterling.

Packard welcomes the attendees and expresses the hope they are there “because you share with us the belief that higher education is a very important source of strength for our nation. We who are working for Stanford believe also that the privately supported- and independent universities have a special position of leadership to fulfill for higher education. This is in no way to depreciate the crucial role of the tax supported schools and universities for, particularly in the West, they must accept the burden of accommodating the numbers.”

 

Packard goes on to say that Stanford’s “problem and objective is to provide leadership and education – in research – and in the preservation of that freedom which is the foundation of strength for our nation and our Western Civilization” In pursuit of these objectives Packard says Stanford has made great progress in the past years and he quotes one observer as saying Stanford has grown from being a respected regional university to a great national institution.

 

Such progress Stanford has made “comes from the enthusiastic help from many people – Alumni – friends – Foundations and corporations as well as from the devoted and untiring work of our Professors and administrative people.” Packard continues “We are here today to express our appreciation to you for the help you and your colleagues along the Eastern Seaboard have given us in this venture. Packard says those at Stanford are aware that this help “carries with it the obligation and opportunity for Stanford to work shoulder to shoulder with all of the other great educational institutions in our nation.”

 

Packard goes on to introduce Herbert Hoover saying that “We are delighted to have with us today one of the most distinguished citizens of our country and the most famous son of our university. Packard says this person’s “most important contribution to Stanford and perhaps to our country as well is the institution which bears his name and which is located on our campus in Palo Alto. This is the largest and most important collection of documents in the world relating to the events and developments which have influenced, in fact made, the history of the twentieth century.” Packard proceeds to introduce  Honorable Herbert Hoover.

 

None of Mr. Hoover’s comments that day are a part of this document, but apparently, following Mr. Hoover’s words,  Packard introduced the President of Stanford, Wallace Sterling, saying Stanford “is indeed fortunate to have as its President one of the great leaders of higher education…..Our faculty, our students, our Alumni, and our Trustees are indeed proud to have as our leader a man who has measured up so well.”

Box 1, Folder 7Stanford

2/?/60 Typewritten copy of speech titled “Stanford’s National Visibility” given by Dave Packard. See folder February 1960 of this title for review of talk.

 

2/11/60 Typewritten letter from Carroll E. Bradberry (of the firm Carroll  E.. Bradberry & .Associates, consulting Engineers) to David Packard saying that he is attaching “a draft of a resume of your speech which I will include in a letter to all our alumni.” He asks Packard to make any changes and return. The resume referred to is quoted below:

 

“A good number were able to turn out for the Bay Area kickoff banquet, at which David Packard’s address highlighted the future importance of the fraternity system. Mr. Packard noted the growing prestige of the university in terms of the distinction of its faculty and its popularity among National Merit scholarship winners. This increasing prestige of the university, he said, coupled with the explosion in college application statistics, gives Stanford a unique opportunity to increase the quality of its undergraduate programs. Mr. Packard stated this in terms of training the “leaders of the last two decades of the twentieth century” and noted particularly that his definition of leadership includes more than academic excellence. Furthermore, the desirable social attitudes shown in the past to be best developed in fraternities are to be continued and encouraged and he emphasized the new opportunity for leadership which the fraternities will have in the years ahead. In conclusion, the President of the Stanford Board of Trustees stressed the importance of the fraternity housing program to Stanford and urged all alumni to give it their financial support.

 

Undated typewritten speech titled “Stanford’s future Role in the West.”  The speaker is not known, but the copy contains several notations by Packard, which appear to be points he intended to bring out himself.

 

Speech by unknown speaker on above subject. This is a review of Stanford’s importance in the West and its educational competition in California, mainly the University of California system. Packard’s notes are apparently a listing of a few points he wished to bring out following the above speaker and refer to the importance of financial support.

 

8/8/60 Typewritten letter to Packard from J. F. Oliphant, President, Faculty Club, inviting Packard to speak to members of the Club on Oct. 7, 1960.

8/22/60 Copy of typewritten letter from Packard to J. F. Oliphant. Packard says he cannot make the 10/7/60 date but would be pleased to join them later in the fall.

8/30/60 Typewritten letter to Packard from J. F. Oliphant, President, Faculty Club, saying he will write Packard later to arrange a date.

11/28/60 Typewritten letter to Packard from J. F. Oliphant. confirming the date of January 6, 1961 for Packard to address the club.

12/11/60 Typewritten letter to Packard from William Bark, Professor of Medieval History.

The date on this letter is apparently in error because it refers to comments made by Packard in his speech of 1/6/61 to the Faculty Club [see above]. Professor Back responds to Packard’s comments concerning Professor Baran and gives some possible reasons why no one challenged Prof. Baran. Professor Bark refers to an attached letter [not included in this folder] concerning  Mr. Liu’s faculty appointment.

Box 1, Folder 18 – HP Management

 

January 29, 1960, Fourth Annual Management Conference, Sonoma

 

1/29/60, The major document in this folder is the usual bound binder with charts and handouts for the conference. First is a two page memorandum from Dave Packard:

Packard talks about the first management conference in February 1957 when shipments in 1956 were $20,000,000 and profits were good. Then here they are to review the year 1959 when sales are $50,000,000 and profits are good.

 

Packard  says they have implemented many things discussed in prior conferences well, but some things have not been done. He says he wants to discuss these things this year. “This weekend we are going to spend most of our time considering what the future holds for us.” He says that many thought the company would never get over $50,000,000 in sales – yet here they are in only four years. “It seems to me”, he says, “that the first order of business should be to attempt to get a better fix on the long range opportunities for us — what kind of problems these opportunities might bring; and from this base move on during the year to make the detail management decisions needed to implement our future.”

 

Packard says they will begin by “reviewing the economic environment in which we are likely to find ourselves in the next decade … [and] explore how we think HP will fit into this environment…”

 

Another document in the binder which is of particular interest is a several page listing of HP corporate objectives with preface by Packard and comments by him on the relative importance of each.

 

3/30/60 A 23 page document titled “David Packard’s Report on the 1960 Sonoma Conference to Supervisors and Management.”

 

This is an address, by Packard, a group a HP supervisors who were not at the conference. Going through a slide show Packard reviews sales growth, by product type, over several years. Following this he shows how profits per share have increased. He sees a substantial growth in the company over the past few years.

 

Packard describes the geographical growth of the company and its association with Moseley, Boonton Radio, Geneva, Boblingen. At the conference they tried to make some projections to reflect these changes. Following Ernie Arbuckle’s  projection of Gross National Product, population growth and growth of per capita income, they looked at the projected growth of the electronic business.

 

Packard then analyzes HP share of the market for various product groups. Projecting ahead they came up with estimated sales for HP in 1964 of $64,000,000. Then they moved on to project what this growth would mean in terms of people, facilities and dollars. They projected a total of 9674 people needed by 1969. As to construction, they concluded it would be better to grow in different areas than just in Palo Alto.

 

Packard discusses the deliberations at the conference on financial matters and the question as to whether the policy of financing their growth internally through profits would support the growth they had projected. They concluded it would.

 

Packard then turns to the corporate objectives  and the discussions at the conference about the ability of these to hold up to the scale of growth they foresee. They concluded that “the guides we have used through the years should continue to be our guide for the future.”

 

Regarding personnel Packard sees four things they shall have to do better than in the past: selection – get more and better people; work harder at     developing the people we have; evaluate their performance; supervisors must work hard to help their people advance and grow.

Lastly this folder contains  a handwritten outline of what may have been a talk on Foreign Markets. The writer is not indicated. It was not Packard.

 

1/13/60, Letter to Packard from James H. Healey, Director, Management and Business Services, enclosing a reproduction of the remarks made by Packard at an AMA Management Seminar. The typewritten text is titled: Toward a Common Code of Business Ethics.

 

 

In this speech Packard says American business men are “well on the way” to develop a code of ethics for business.  He sees two forces that work against manager’s ability to operate freely – one is Communism. Packard says, “At this point in history, we must face the fact that American business has somehow not measured up in the eyes of the world.”

 

Packard sees three ways by which those who hold power are prevented from abusing it: higher authority (government), an opposing power (unions), and third a self imposed code of ethics. He sees the development of a code of ethics as “the greatest challenge now confronting management.”

 

Packard describes four tenets which have been suggested by business leaders in recent years, and which “might fit into such a code:”

 

1. To manage our business enterprises with the primary objective of making a contribution to society.

 

2.  To recognize the dignity and personal worth of every employee

 

3.  To recognize our responsibility to society in general.

 

  1. To develop and encourage a better understanding of the nature of profit.

 

Box 1, Folder 35D – HP Management

Packard feels management is on trial. “It is my hope,” he says, “that American management will continue to put more emphasis on the why of business and more effort into the development of a common code of business ethics. Such a code must be based upon the attainment of a high objective—the preservation of our liberty as managers—and it must be acceptable to the vast majority of business managers if this objective is to be achieved.

 

“The Russians have demonstrated that they can produce sputniks without profits and without liberty. We stand on trial before the world to prove that we can produce sputniks and all of the goods and services necessary for a better life, as well—with profits and with liberty.”

1961 – Packard Speeches

Box 2, Folder 45 – General Speeches

 

March 19, 1961, Meeting of HP Sales people at, IRE, New York, NY

This folder has been moved to Box 1, Folder 19A, and is included in the HP Management section of speeches for the computer file.

 

Box 2, Folder 46 – General Speeches

 

April 26, 1961, The Financing, Growth and Diversification of a company, S.A.M.A., Greenbrier

4/26/61, Typewritten speech on the above subject given by David Packard at the meeting of the Scientific Apparatus Makers Association.

Packard says he was a little surprised to see that the formal program said he would talk about Diversification, as well as Financing and Growth. He says that, actually, he is “…not a strong advocate of diversification as such.” He says he considers diversification as a means to an end, rather than an end in itself. And the end may be any one of a number of things – long term stability, growth, utilization of available resources, or simply to make a better profit.  Packard says diversification is used to spread the risk, “…but I think it is important to remind ourselves whenever you spread the risk you may spread the opportunity too. He tells the old adages: the first, “don’t put all your eggs in one basket – the other, do put all your eggs in one basket, then watch the basket. “I lean toward the latter as a preference”, he says.

 

Turning to growth he says there are divergent views as to its importance. Some people says they don’t want the problems growth brings, other people  “… take the view that a business must grow or die and that you have to run pretty hard just to keep up with what’s going on. So on both of these matters we need to get at the problem in a little different way.”

 

To do that he asks what should be the objectives of business. The answer, of course, varies he says. In times past profit for stockholders was considered the objective – nothing else mattered. “But today, and I think fortunately so, many businessmen say the objective of business is not just to make a profit, but to serve society, and it is time that all of us start from this point in considering our problems.”

 

Packard tells the audience that, some time ago, the management of  HP set down a number of specific objectives to help our people work toward common goals. “One of these objectives is to direct all our efforts toward the field of electronic instrumentation.”

 

The second objective Packard says, is to “concentrate on those areas where we feel we can make an important contribution to the advancement of science and the practical application of measurement.” If  we keep those two objectives in mind, Packard says they believe they can “…let the matters of growth and diversification fall where they will.”

 

Packard says that a major factor in the tremendous rate of growth in the instrumentation field over the past decade has been due to  government procurement. In addition to government purchases, there has been more emphasis placed on research throughout the country. Beyond these two factors Packard mentions “…the tremendous emphasis in the field of automation, recorders, computers, controllers, transducers, data handling systems of all kinds…”

Packard notes there has been some concern in the country about automation, “…and it may cause featherbedding and practices by Unions on the basis that automation is making these things necessary. It is a problem with us, and I think it’s going to be a problem in the future.

 

Packard says “…everyone seems to have overlooked the fact that the country has already faced the most serious problem of unemployment resulting from automation :that can be imagined…” He is referring to the telephone business and the change automation has brought in the need for manual operators to run switchboards. Packard points out that if we had not automated this function “…we would at the present time require every woman in the country, between the ages of 20 and 60, to work ten hours a day just to handle the telephone calls being made today.”

 

In the field of measurement instrumentation, Packard gives several examples where the accuracy and speed of measurement has increased many times over the past ten years. He says it seems clear that the future will bring growing opportunities in the field of scientific instrumentation, and in other areas as well. Packard admits that some people will ask, if all this growth is to be expected, can’t they just continue to make their present product and do a good job. Probably yes, he says, but “…there are in fact many more opportunities at our doorstep, as I believe the experience of our own company will indicate.”

 

Packard give some sales figures, saying that HP sales have grown about 26 times since 1950 – from $2.3 million per year to over $60 million – about 40% per year “This has come about not because of our emphasis on growth for growth’s sake, but simply because we have been successful in adding new products which have been an important contribution to this field of electronic instrumentation. And we have concentrated on just this one job.”

Packard shows that, of the $60 million of growth in sales over the last five years, most has come substantially from products introduced since 1955. “Thus without these new products our sales would have grown less than 5% per year as compared to over 30% which we have reached because of these new products which were added to our line.”

 

Packard makes that point that he is not saying that it is better to grow at 25% than at 5 or 10%. He agrees that it does bring more problems and headaches. On the other hand, he feels a growth rate of 5 or 10% is not even keeping up with inflation plus the growth of the economy as a whole, let alone the growth rate of the field of scientific apparatus. And. if anyone does not wish to meet this challenge, Packard says,  others will do so.

 

Packard says “…it seems to me that even if the amount of scientific work is not expanding, the magnitude of the advance in technology requires that better instrumentation be continually produced; and to the extent it can be produced, there is – and I think will continue to be – an opportunity for real solid growth. If we do indeed place maximum emphasis on making important contributions in our chosen fields of interest, our efforts will most likely result in a number of good new products year after year.

 

Packard talks a little about the cycle of a new product and says that, in their experience at HP, it usually takes about two years for a new product to be accepted in the market. “The build-up starts slowly, acceptance takes hold, saturation takes place and then volume levels off to a long term stable situation.”

 

Profit opportunities are greatest during the build-up stages, he says. “After saturation, the competition tends to set in, except in cases where we have come special proprietary situation and this competition tends to put great pressure on prices and profits in this long period of stable product life.”

 

Packard says that a study of the product cycle, as well as consideration of some other aims, led HP to add to their list of objectives – one related to profit. “And, we state this generally to the effect that we consider that profit is not the end and aim in business, but it is the proper measure of the contribution we are able to make. That profit, as well, is a means whereby we are able to continue to make these contributions.”

 

Moving from profit to finance, Packard says, that “When your business expands at the rate of 25 to 30 percent per year, some attention must be given to the resources available to support such growth” He acknowledges that “…with the investment community attracted to the so-called glamour industries, financing a growth situation is nowhere near as difficult as making a good growth situation in the first place and keeping it that way.”

 

Packard says HP has “…been able to go from a level of $2,300,000 in 1950 to a level of $60,000,000 in 1960 solely with resources generated from the reinvestment of the profits of our business” This requires that profits and cash flow returns increase total invested capital at the same, or more rapid rate, than the rate of sales increase.

 

Packard then says he wants to break down and analyze two factors because they are controllable in day-to-day management. “These two factors are the profit plus cash flow viewed as a percent of the sales dollar, and your capital turnover. Capital turnover is defined simply as the total annual sales dollars divided by total invested capital at the beginning of a period. By a simple exercise in elementary algebra, one can demonstrate that the percent of annual growth, which can be financed from profit alone, is equal to the percent of retained earnings and cash flow times your capital turnover. For our own company the product of these two factors has been held historically above 30 on the average, which is in excess of the average rate of growth during the past five years when the numbers have become large. By this process we have been able to provide the resources to maintain adequate financial strength over this entire period.”

 

Packard explains that this method is not the only way to finance a growing business. Resorting to the financial market for equity capital or other sources of capital. He gives the example of utility companies where the investment in plant assets is so high that it would take years of profits just to provide the plant needed to produce the profits.

 

Packard spends some time talking about the concern in the country that the labor force seems to be growing faster than the gross national product – with increased unemployment a possibility in coming years. He explores two solutions which are being considered. One is to increase investment in productive capital equipment, the other to increase investment in research and development. Packard feels correlations on these factors are rather poor and, furthermore, if one eliminates the effect of inflation the gross national product has actually been very constant at 3 percent over the period from 1909 to 1960. He concludes that it would probably be better for each company to make their own contribution by concentrating on how to grow in their own area.

Looking at foreign markets Packard tells of  HP’s experience in moving into Europe. He describes it as having “…a very difficult problem on our hands, especially with the vastly lower labor rates, and with the nationalistic preferences together with the problems of exchange and duties. If we can find a way to make important contributions either in new products or in service or in sales methods we can, I think, increase substantially our market penetration, most particularly in Europe where the economy provides a good market for advanced kinds of instrumentation.”

 

Packard says they started out by providing better service and quicker delivery of parts. As a result they have been able to increase their market  in Europe by 60 percent per year over the past  two years – and it appears will do so in 1961 as well.

 

Packard feels the development of the common market will pose a difficult problem if internal trade barriers are removed and nationalistic feelings reduced. European competitors would have a market which is two-thirds the size of the US market. This would give them the market to support a better new product program.

 

For this reason Packard says they feel it is important to become established in Europe now. But he emphasizes that “the important aspect is not growth or diversification, but in trying to make a contribution in those fields where we have some capability. We hope to do this by a better job in development – better engineering, better manufacturing, and better sales and service. We believe by concentrating on excellence from a base in Europe we shall be able to maintain our position over the long haul. I think if these things can be accomplished, financing will be easy and diversification will not be necessary.”

 

Packard summarizes the subject of growth by reading the formal objective as to growth. “This objective is to let our company growth be determined primarily  by our performance. It is limited on the one hand by the rate of growth we can finance from our current profits, and on the other hand by the rate at which we can build our product line and our market through customer acceptance and in accordance with other objectives.” He adds that HP uses this policy in considering the possibility of mergers and acquisitions of other firms as well.

 

Looking at two additional objectives which they have and which supplement the ones already discussed, Packard turns to their employment policy. He says he thinks the attitude is more important than the detail. And he feels they have been successful since they have “not had unions to contend with…”

 

Packard says “We want to provide employment conditions for our people that include the opportunity for them to share in the company’s success which they helped make possible; to provide job security based on their performance; and to try to provide for them the opportunity for personal satisfaction that comes from the sense of accomplishment in their work.”

 

Finally, they added an objective relating to corporate citizenship. “We say that we think it is up to us to meet the obligations of good citizenship by making contributions to the community and to the institutions in our society which generate the environment in which we operate. In accordance with this principal many of our people have participated in community affairs. We have done our share in supporting schools, universities, and other institutions and activities with financial help, and with the help of our people as well.”

 

Packard takes a few minutes to discuss a more important problem than any he has discussed thus far – “…a life and death struggle with this evil ideology of communism. While it may get out of hand and develop into a nuclear war with Russia or China some time in the future, even if it does not, we must all realize that peaceful coexistence is nothing more than a hollow phrase coined by the Russians to lull us into a sense of security and inaction.”

 

“We must never forget Krushchev’s statement, We will bury you and this is exactly what will happen to us, and to everyone in our free society and to everything that our free society stands for, unless we have the resolve and we undertake seriously to attempt to bury them first. In this problem the scientific apparatus industry has a very crucial role to play. The strength of the West against communism will be determined to a major degree by the scientific progress of our country, our Western allies, and by our ability to generate new scientific knowledge and reduce it to useful results of all kinds.”

 

“This, it seems to me, is the most important reason why all of us cannot afford to be satisfied with what we have done in the past. We must devote every resource at our command to discover new ways to make better instrumentation, we must attract the best people to our ranks and provide a creative environment for them, and so demonstrate to the world that capable people working in an atmosphere of individual freedom can produce more and better progress that a regimented people under the ruthless communist yoke.”

 

To do this will require, Packard says, “…that we place emphasis on making a contribution, and while profit is important, it should be used as a proper measure of the contributions we are able to make and not as an end in itself. If each of us in our own organization throughout the country do these things well, I have no doubt as to the outcome. With this kind of approach we shall learn that finance, growth and diversification are just minor problems, all in a day’s work, and that is as it should be.”

 

4/26/61, Typewritten prior draft of above speech with notations in Packard_s handwriting.

April 1961, Preliminary program of S.A.M.A._s 43rd Annual Meeting showing Packard

as one of the speakers.

5/8/61, Letter to Packard from Kenneth Anderson of SAMA complimenting him on his talk.

5/10/61, Letter to Packard from Bernard Kearney, President of The Torsion Balance Company, thanking him for coming to their meeting and speaking.

5/25/61, Letter from Margaret Paull, Packard’s secretary, to Kenneth Anderson of SAMA, asking about receiving a copy of his talk.

5/31/61, Letter to Margaret Paull from Kenneth Anderson enclosing three copies of the talk.

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 47 – General Speeches

 

October 20, 1961, Talk at Boonton Radio Corporation New Building Dedication, Rockaway, N.J.

 

This speech moved to Box 1, Folder 19B.  It is found in computer file DPSpeechesSUHP

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 48 - General Speeches

 

November 9, 1961, The New Challenge to American Industry, Purchasing Agents Association, Los Angeles

 

11/9/61, Typewritten speech by Dave Packard

 

Packard says he approaches this problem not as an expert, “but simply as one who believes the time is late and that we must each encourage more attention to and more understanding of these most difficult problems of conflict with the Communists.” He says experienced people in the country are focusing on the problem, but “…it is important also that the average citizen have an understanding of and an opinion on these subjects before certain kinds of action can be undertaken.”

 

Packard feels people have not understood the complexities of the international problems and he makes the point that there are no simple solutions. Over the past years proposals have been made but these have been rather simple in concept – “sheer wishful thinking.” He gives a few examples : President Eisenhower seeking to achieve “an understanding with the Russians”, establishing trade and cultural exchanges. All wishful thinking.

 

Packard had visited Russia a few months prior and he tells of their representatives said trade between our two countries should be revived. But it was always on their terms, and with the expectation that we would come to learn that their way was the best way.

 

Military solutions are also proposed which Packard feels fall into the area of wishful thinking: massive retaliation, or total disarmament. He quotes Ralph Waldo Emerson who said that “Americans were characterized by a hunger for sudden performance.” Packard mentions a series of events around the world; Krushchev using the U-2 incident to destroy the Paris Summit Meeting, the wave of student demonstrations which the Communist apparatus inspired in Tokyo, preventing President Eisenhower’s trip there. These were reinforced by strife in Africa, Asia and Cuba, the Berlin wall, resumption of nuclear testing by the Russians. “This series of events should finally and completely dispel any idea that simple idealistic solutions are available to us.”

 

To Packard, it is “…surprising that this of events has come as a surprise to so many people in America and the free world….He quotes Lenin as saying “What does it matter if three-quarters of the world perish, if the remaining one-quarter is communist” And Lenin again, “We will first take Eastern Europe, then the masses of Asia. We will surround the United States which will be the last bastion of capitalism.”

 

Packard tells of Khrushchev talking to the Communist Congress on January 6, 1961 where he set the date for Communists taking over the world as somewhere in 1975, and saying they would use all forms of warfare to achieve this objective – including propaganda, infiltration, threats, and diplomatic negotiations.

 

Packard feels there some evidence “…we are finally moving away from some of these simpler concepts such as the massive retaliation theory which was the key to our military position right up to the past two or three years….I would like to point out in passing that massive retaliation has been of little vale to us in Korea, in Asia, in Berlin, and it was not effective then because we have never been willing to use the strength we have.”

 

Packard feels that the government  “is beginning to see that we must build an effective second strike capability, we must build an effective brush fire force – a force that can deal with some of these local problems with conventional forces, and further we must implement our civil defense plans – and we must do all three of these things before we can really convince the Russians that we mean business wherever they try to move – and we must do these things before we can have any assurance that the peace can be maintained.”

 

Packard feels total disarmament is just another oversimplification – another kind of wishful thinking

 

“All this means simply as I see it that we are bound to put more effort into arms in the years ahead, and the next few years will be crucial. And this can be done, I believe, with assurance that it will increase the probability of peace rather than otherwise.”

 

Packard turns to the problem of subversion and infiltration. He says there is ample evidence that this is a serious problem. “Here again I do not believe there is a simple solution available to us. A frontal attack by militant right-wing groups could easily do more damage than good. The situation is too fraught with danger to be left alone.”

 

“…But continual vigilance is necessary in our schools – in our churches – and in our companies – and all of our institutions – to see that the communists and their fellow travelers are exposed for what they are wherever they appear. If this is done I believe the people of this country are sufficiently alert to the danger so adequate opposition to the communist inspired proposals will develop where it is needed.”

Packard says that even if we resolve the military problem and are able to control the Communists in our midst, “there is still one task which remains, and this task is for American business and American industry to demonstrate to the world, that our free enterprise system can continue to be superior to the communist system of economic slavery. The leadership of the West will finally be established only if our system continues to out produce the communist system in goods and services and in producing a better standard of living for all of the people, and further only if it succeeds in producing scientific accomplishment as well.”

 

“As Professor Pickering put it recently, within ten years we are likely to be able to sit by our television sets and watch a rocket put a man on the moon – will that rocket carry the flag of American freedom, or will that rocket carry the Hammer and Cycle (sic) – the flag of communist slavery. That event will signal the eventual domination of the world by Western Freedom, or the eventual domination of the world by Eastern communism.”

 

“That frames the New Challenge to American Industry and I believe we will measure up to this task.”

 

12/1961, Publication called Pacific Purchaser containing the full text of the above speech by Packard.

4/14/61, Copy of letter to Harlan Eastman, Beckman Instruments, apparently from bob Sundberg of HP who was making the arrangements for Packard’s talk at the Purchasing Agents conference. The letter tentatively accepts the November 9, 1961 date, but suggests Mr. Eastman check with Packard in August to confirm date.

4/25/61, Letter to Packard from Harlan Eastman, Beckman Instruments, thanking him for agreeing to speak at their conference and saying he will check with Packard in August.

5/3/61, Letter to Bob Sundberg from Harlan Eastman saying their group would be willing to pay Packard_s travel and hotel expenses.

8/18/61, Letter to Packard from Harlan Eastman asking if the November 9 date is still OK.

9/23/61, Copy of a letter to Harlan Eastman from Bob Sundberg of HP confirming the November 9 date.

9/25/61, Letter to Packard from Harlan Eastman confirming details for conference.

9/27/61, Copy of letter to Harlan Eastman from Margaret Paull, Packard_s secretary, saying Packard is away and as soon as he gets back she will tell him of Mr. Eastman need for publicity information soon.

10/31/61, Printed flyer announcing conference and Packard_s talk.

11/1/61, Letter to Packard from Harlan Eastman, sending the dinner program.

11/10/61, Letter to Packard from Harlan Eastman, thanking him for joining them and giving his talk.

11/13/61, Letter to Packard from W. O. Hokanson expressing appreciation for Packard_s talk.

Box 1, Folder 7Stanford

 

January 6, 1961, Faculty Club, Stanford

1/6/61, Handwritten speech by Packard to Faculty Club.

Packard describes the Board of Trustees  and their responsibilities. He lists “Educate for useful pursuit in life”; and “Prohibit sectarian instruction, but to have taught the existence of an all wise and benevolent creator.” The Trustees give the President power to: “a. Prescribe duties of faculty, and b. Generally control education part of University.”

 

Packard says trustees are all busy successful men, “dedicated to Stanford.” Says they have asked the President to “sharpen up objectives for future,” saying that education “has been given a critical new role in society.”

 

He describes the growth seen ahead, and asks “Where are we going to get this kind of money?” Packard reviews grants, building plans, gifts, saying “Will have to find 20-30 million in gifts of 10,000 or more.” He speaks of the need to “hold very tight control until we see where we are going. No new projects until we begin to evaluate chances of success.”

 

Packard asks if Stanford will live up to challenges ahead -graduate programs, professional schools, undergraduate college, the “Freshmen problem”? ”

 

Packard says “From what I hear about Freshmen program students can easily go through entire Freshmen year and half of the second without ever meeting a Professor. Might be more realistic to get a few more Professors in classes and leave the students to their own devices in their residences  instead of vice versa.” He refers to the idea of using Faculty Masters in Residence Halls as “Harvarditus – a disease Stanford has become susceptible to recently.” Packard goes on to talk of the Structure of Administration of Undergraduate Program. He lists the several Deans and expresses the “Hope some of you people get your heads together and do something – no a trustee problem.”

 

“Admissions closely related subjects.”  “Intellectual capability is important, — scholars interested only in intellectual development” “No better contribution to future of world to try and select boys and girls who because of personality, energy, and their intellectual capability are likely to be future leaders and expose them to the intellectual atmosphere of a great University, grades and aptitude tests alone won’t do.”

 

On athletes: “If we stay in intercollegiate athletics in a serious way we must be more realistic on admissions, financial support, schedules. If we can’t be more realistic we ought to get out & face music now.”

 

“One of the most important objectives is to enlarge & strengthen the faculty. The Trustees would plead for balance in each department. If we must have Marxist economists on our faculty let’s also have some who are staunch advocates of the American Free Enterprise economy as well.”

 

“The Trustees would defend to the last man the right of Professor Baran to extol the virtues of Castro & his Communism; although none of us would applaud his speech as an example of objective scholarship, least of all the trustees who heard him. We were and are each deeply disappointed that not a single member of the entire Stanford Faculty has risen to defend the contrary view. This kind of situation dampens if even slightly (illegible). One of the objectives of Stanford’s program is to increase the intellectual ferment among the faculty and among students. I would remind you that good wine takes more than ferment  – it takes good ingredients too. And a few bad grapes will spoil the batch. While it is true that too little ferment leaves you with only grape juice, too much ferment makes vinegar – and the process is irreversible.”

 

On the desire to give more emphasis to Humanities, Packard says he “…hopes some attractive & realistic proposals can & will be developed.”

 

“The trustees are concerned about many aspects of the University in addition to its financial needs. No doubt some of our concern comes from misunderstanding and in this we would all hope to know more about the academic aspects of the University. We are greatly impressed with fine progress Stanford has made in the last decade and we are aware of the possibility of even greater progress in the future. But we see the need not only in money alone but in critical examination and meticulous attention to the details of every aspect of the University. I would especially hope we can find a good inoculation for Harvarditus, Yaleitus, Europeanitus, and all others, and build Stanford to its own image of true leadership.”

Also included in this folder are several speeches given earlier by others, or Packard himself, apparently as research material for the above speech.

1/7/61 Typewritten letter to Packard from Alfred H. Grommon, Chairman of the Program Committee Stanford Faculty Club. Professor Grommon expresses pleasure and appreciation for Packard’s speech on 1/6/61 and responds to Packard’s comments concerning the fact that students may well enter their junior year before they have contact with a senior teacher. Professor Grommon laments the university emphasis on research as opposed to teaching and feels teaching must be considered more important than it has been.

 

1/12/61 Typewritten letter to Packard from Professor J. K. F. Oliphant. Professor Oliphant says Packard’s speech has “aroused a great deal of favorable comment.” He says the general tenor of comments have expressed appreciation to hear “a trustee who understands the major and pressing problems facing the University.”

1/13/61 Copy of typewritten letter from Packard to Professor Alfred H. Grommon who thanks Professor Grommon for his note of 1/7/61 and adds the thought that “If nothing else I hope my discussion at the Faculty Meeting left the impression that the Trustees are very much interested in the Faculty and its problems, and perhaps it will encourage all of you to let us know when we can be helpful.”

 

 

 

 

Box 1, Folder 8 – Stanford

 

July 20, 1961, Introducing Herbert Hoover, Pace Dinner, San Francisco

 

7/20/61, Typewritten speech titled “Remarks of David Packard Introducing The Honorable Herbert Hoover”, Dinner at Mark Hopkins Hotel

Packard notes the role of Universities in America saying they educate most of the PHD candidates in America and are therefore “a major source of teachers for all of our colleges and Universities. “Their task,”  Packard says, is “to educate the best of our youth of today — the young men and young women who will be the leaders of America at the end of the Twentieth Century.”  He points to Stanford as “one of the youngest of these leadership Universities.”

 

Packard then reviews some of the history of Stanford and how the founders  wanted  “A University of high degree…a center of invention and research.” Packard speaks of David Starr Jordan, Stanford’s first President, who said “We shall have a set of young men at Stanford such as have never been gathered together in America.”

 

Packard tells of  “problems of the thirties” and the “stress of World War II” saying these brought into focus the “need for new leadership, new action, and new vision. Fortunately, the new leadership and new action came into being from the Trustees, from President Treasured, but most of all from the vision of the great team we have today in Dr. Wallace Sterling, as our President, and Dr. Frederick Terman, as our Provost.”

 

Packard then speaks of specific examples of progress at Stanford: moving the Medical School to the Campus, a “brilliant” engineering faculty, appointments to the Business School which attracted nation-wide attention,. Adding “outstanding people in History, in English, in the Classics, in Psychology and in other schools and departments as well.”

 

Packard continues saying “The strength of our Nation in the future will not depend upon its vast national resources, nor in the advantage of its geography, as in the past, but solely upon the strength, capability, and the vision of its people. And in this, Stanford, and all of our other great Universities have an unmistakable and unavoidable responsibility.” Packard feels Stanford has “an opportunity to undertake this responsibility, and opportunity which is unequaled at any other privately supported University in America.”

 

“It is for this most worthy objective we need your help.” Packard says that “We intend to do everything in our power to continue the emphasis at Stanford on the importance of the individual and on the great strengths of the free society — and the free enterprise concept.”

 

“These great underlying principles which have served Stanford so well are the same that have brought America from its position as a second rate Nation at the turn of the century to its position today as the most powerful Nation the world has ever seen….These are the principles which have made America great and it is time that these be reaffirmed and restrengthened in our great Universities.”

 

Packard describes how “A young man by the name of Herbert Hoover enrolled in the first class at Stanford [October 1, 1891]. How he devoted himself  to the study of engineering and how, “…through his  participation in extra curricular activities he developed an outstanding ability in organization and management…He has understood well the importance of freedom for the individual and the great driving force of the free enterprise concept.. It is indeed befitting then that he has agreed to serve as the Honorary Chairman of the PACE Program — for there is no better way to begin this Plan of Action for a Challenging Era for Stanford  than to reaffirm those principles which have served our University and our Country well.”

 

“There is no living American who has contributed so much to his Country and to the welfare of mankind as our beloved Chief. We are all tremendously pleased and highly honored that he can be with us tonight. It is my privilege to present to you the Honorable Herbert Hoover.”

7/20/61 Typewritten draft of above speech, with handwritten notations by Dave Packard.

Box 1, Folder 19 – HP Management

 

January 13, 1961, Fifth Annual Management Conference, Monterey

This folder contains loose papers from the conference: agenda and handouts. It is apparent that determining who had authority to do what was a big topic of workshops.

 

 

Box 1, Folder 19A – HP Management

 

March 19, 1961, Meeting of HP Sales people at, IRE, New York, NY

3/19/61, Packard’s handwritten notes, written on hotel stationary, in preparation of this   meeting.

Packard tells the audience that 10 years ago he told this group: “Meet quota this year.” He adds that it is just as easy to meet a quota today – set the stage for the future.

 

Packard says that four years prior he realized that they must build for “Unlimited Horizons” “Bring each area of the company into the light of critical analysis. Take time but do the job right.”

 

Packard notes the need for long range planning on manpower, engineers, managers, education. And long range planning for Stanford Plant, Loveland, Germany, subsidiaries.. Plus long range planning on manufacturing methods, quality, customers, proprietary position. Long range planning for new products, implement new product program.

 

“We want to make every HP instrument so good customers can’t possibly afford to have anything else.”

 

Packard returns to long range plans  – in foreign business – HPSA, GMBH, German sales, English Program. And also Long Range Plans in management structure of company. Small units for action.

 

Long range plans in service, parts, standards, facilities.

 

“All of these efforts toward making each area of the company meet highest performance standards.” He says we should have “no illusions we have accomplished anywhere as much as we should have.”

 

Packard tells the group that what they heard this morning from our “own stellar team” will give some idea of the enthusiasm, energy keen ability to apply to this task.

 

And, he says, “We are not unmindful of the magnificent progress you people have made in the sales job. And, he admonishes them to have “…no illusion that you can rest on your laurels, in fact the job of selling HP instruments is becoming fantastically complex and will become more so.”

 

Speaking of their sales job, Packard tells them to explain why HP instruments are better than the competition’s. “To do the selling job, someone has to make the customer know what we have to sell – convince him of the help we can give,  activate his imagination. This takes effort, great effort from all sides advertising, direct mail…,    ??.

He tells them this is their responsibility – knowledgeable men call on customers and convince him that HP is a great company – the product is just what he needs, and close the sale. Packard tells them during the next week to strengthen their ability to do the job which we expect in 1961. “Spend as much time at the booth as possible.”  He tells the factory experts to carry the message, and the sales people to “Get the customers into the booth so we can give them the message. Grab them by the collar and haul them into the booth..”

 

“Our boys and girls in Palo Alto are steamed up as never before. Get on the band wagon with us. Let’s show these other outfits how a job should be done.”

 

 

 

Box 1, Folder 19B – General Speeches

 

October 20, 1961, Talk at Boonton Radio Corporation New Building Dedication, Rockaway, N.J.

 

10/20/61, Copy of typewritten text of Packard’s comments

 

Packard notes that they are gathered in a beautiful autumn setting to dedicate a  new building, and he says “As I look over this landscape I am reminded of the years I spent in Northern New York some 25 years ago – hiking through the woods – picking choke cherries – fishing and hunting deer. And the atmosphere of my new job was as peaceful and as stimulating as the countryside in autumn, for I had just finished a university course in California and was undertaking my first job at the General Electric Company in Schenectady.”

 

He tells how they were working on developing new ideas for vacuum tubes, “using metal envelopes instead of glass. We were developing a new kind of power tube for industrial use – the ignitron which could control unheard of powers.”

 

Packard recalls his resentment at being required to punch in and out of the time clock – the Wage and Hour Act having been recently passed. He says he worked many hours, usually 10 or 12 hours a day, and often on Saturday as well “My pay of $28 a week was enough to live on and there were challenging things to be done.

 

He says “There was very little work on military devices – at the company the Aircraft and Marine Department made motors for submarines and naval gear of various sorts but World War II seemed very remote – the danger of Hitler was not apparent to us and we were looking into a future which promised a peaceful life for the whole world and the opportunity for a young engineer to do great things.

 

“It was about this time and in very much the same atmosphere and spirit that Mr. Loughlin [William Loughlin founded Booton Radio Corporation in 1935] was thinking that his newly developed device called the Q meter might make an important contribution to this youthful field of radio engineering – though little did he anticipate, I suspect, that this Q meter would become such an important device – or that this youthful field of Radio engineering would become the great electronic industry that it is today.

 

“As one views the combined changes of the Russian Military threat which now has the ability to destroy 140 million Americans and reduce our productive lands to a blackened waste in a matter of hours – these capabilities combined with a godless disregard for the rights of the individual – with the ideas that an individual person is useful only to the extent and only as long as he serves to promote the purposes of the government.

 

“As one views these facts the conclusion becomes clear and unavoidable – we must individually and collectively devote our strength, our abilities, and our resources, to the preservation of our country, both its land and its ideals.

 

“And even within our own boundaries – the rising threat to the free enterprise system which has enabled the United States – with 1/6 of the world population to generate half of the world’s wealth – threat from people who think progress can come from restricting work – from not growing crops – from people who think that big business is inherently evil but big government is inherently good.

 

“Indeed we are facing some of the most serious problems in the history of our country.

 

“And it is therefore proper that in dedicating this new building here today that it be dedicated to the strengthening and preservation of our free society – and a lesser objective is not worthy of our efforts and abilities.

 

“But in view of these great and frightening developments – what can be done?

 

“The solution lies in strengthening wisdom and strength – we would be presumptuous to assume we as individuals will have wisdom equal to the task – but we can and do have an important responsibility in this strengthening.

 

“Our objective to design and build the best of scientific instruments – design, manufacture, service – imagination, craftsmanship and industry. We do in fact have scientific strength.

 

“We must make contributions for the future. We must also prove to the world that our free enterprise system is more efficient – that it not only produces a superior product – but also provides better opportunities for people.

 

“And so lets join today in dedicating this new facility – not to continue the accomplishments of the past, but rather to the challenging opportunities of the future.

Box 1, Folder 35D – HP Management

10/26/61, HP memorandum from Lee Seligson to members of a development program for engineers telling them they have been selected for the program

 

11/1/61, Internal HP memo to Packard from Lee Seligson on the subject of the development program for engineers. He reminds Packard of the date and time he is to speak to the group.

 

11/1/61, Typewritten program for the training class. The objectives of the program are stated as: “…to explore the objectives and philosophy of HP in light of its present organizational structure; to study some of the fundamentals of organization theory; and to relate these principles to the Engineer by examining his role in the organization.”

 

11/14/61 through 3/1/62 – Typewritten schedule of training classes.

 

11/28/61, Text of Packard’s remarks to the class of engineers – handwritten, ten pages long. The title is: “The Reasons for this Program.”

 

Packard gives two reasons for the program: “To help you do your job better and therefore to help the company do its job as a company better; [and]… to help you understand the objectives of the Company, and the opportunities that are available to you here and hopefully to give you some guidance and help so you can better avail yourself of the opportunities.”

1962 – Packard Speeches

Box 2, Folder 49 – General Speeches

 

February 28, 1962, What Management Wants to Know About New Product Proposals, AMA, Chicago

 

2/28/62, Typewritten speech on above subject given by Packard.

“There is no subject more important for the manager of today than the problem of generating good new products unless it be long-range planning, and the two subjects are hardly separable.” Packard feels this interest in new products “has implications of larger significance. The survival of the free enterprise system will probably depend in the end on its ability to provide a better life for the people in the society which supports it. There has been much talk about the need for accelerating the growth of our economy. Behind this lies the need to continually improve the conditions for all of our citizens here at home – to demonstrate to the doubting part of the world that a free society can accomplish this mission better than can a socialist society….In this regard the ability of American management to improve its efficiency in translation of the advancing storehouse of new knowledge being generated from research into profitable new products could well be the major factor in accelerating the growth of our economy.”

 

Following this opening Packard says his “experience in this specialized area is limited to the new product program at the Hewlett-Packard Company and so I would like to tell you something about what we have been doing there, and then attempt to give you some general idea of how we go about the job.”  Packard explains that HP activities are “devoted exclusively to the development and manufacture of general purpose electronic measuring instruments. About 20% of  our sales are to the government agencies, largely in defense and now space. At least 25% of our sales go to prime contractors for the government, about 15% go to foreign markets, mostly Europe, while the remaining 40% goes to a wide variety of commercial customers generally in the industrial field.”

 

“Our sales have grown from an annual rate of 2.3 million in 1950 to the current annual rate of 100 million in 1962.” Packard acknowledges that some of this growth was from acquisitions but “all of the companies we have acquired are making the same general class of product, and have had most of their growth from new products generated during this same period.” Packard says that “most of the products we were making in 1950…we are still making today. But those products including a few which have been redesigned will account for only about 5% of our total sales in 1962. To maintain even this level of sales from technical products over a 12 year period has required some redesign, considerable quality improvement, strong effort in sales and service – and of course a good group of products to begin with. But with what might e considered a reasonable good job in management other than new product development our sales would, as I see it, have increased from 2.3 million to 5 million in more than a decade. This means over 90 million in sales we expect in 1962 will come from new products developed during the past 12 years. The general pattern of each new product – if it is a good one – and we will have to admit to a failure now and then – but each good new product will build up in volume over about a two year period and then reach a sales level that will remain relatively steady over a useful product life of often ten years or more…”

 

Packard describes the criteria they use in evaluating new product proposals and summarizes these in question form:

“1. Is it our main field of interest – is it a measurement device?

2. Is it a general purpose instrument – is it likely to have a broad market?

3. Is it a significant contribution to the field of measurements?”

 

Packard explains that “As a company grows it is not possible for the President or the top vice-presidents to continue to be in on the consideration and approval of each new product – this responsibility can be delegated to the division management,”  but he adds that they must use the above criteria and top management will take part in continuing evaluations of the project.

 

Packard says “There are some more specific criteria which we use to test each project which is proposed.”

 

“First as to policy – we believe that a good research and development department must be established on a stable long-term basis. For that reason we establish a level of activity which we believe can be maintained over a long period of time this entire activity is supported out of current income and is established in the general range of 6% to 8% of our sales dollar. This determines the number of scientists and engineers we have in the company and we add new people for this activity on the theory – and likelihood – we will have a long term opportunity for them.”

 

“The management responsibility here then is to see that this group of people are working on the most promising projects. Toward this end we make the best guess we can as to the probable development cost. Although we do not keep budgetary control, we do keep accurate cost records on each project. We also estimate the sales volume over a five year period and the profit we think we can establish. Our experience shows us that we should expect to obtain at least five dollars profit ever a five year period for each dollar we spend on development.”

 

“We have often considered the question of putting a large task force on a given project and hopefully accelerating the development, versus putting a smaller task force and allowing extra time. There seems to be no general rule that works best although we are tending to use larger groups today than we felt necessary”

 

“Another specific consideration we give to each project is whether we have the total capability to put the project through all stages of engineering. Often we find that we have a bottleneck in tooling or in some special production techniques, and we are anxious to see that these matters are properly considered on each individual project.”

 

Another important consideration which Packard discusses is that “…there be thorough communication between the people who understand the requirement, usually your marketing people, and the people who are going to do the development – your scientists and engineers. ….It is a major responsibility of management to establish the structure and atmosphere for this communication to be maintained during the course of each project.”

 

“And finally the matter of motivation. The new product process is a creative endeavor. Your people are being charged to do something that has not been done before. After all they aren’t sure how they are going to do the job when they start. This is especially true on products that involve important contributions to the field. Enthusiasm goes a long way and must be sustained if the project is to be really successful Often the simple fact that you top management people take an interest in a project – a continued interest – can be an important factor in generating the enthusiasm and sense of importance to the development team that will spell the difference between success and failure – or in the time necessary to get the job done.”

 

“This job of producing a continual stream of outstanding new products for the future is probably the most important and most challenging job in management today.”

 

March/April, 1962, Two letters from Packard and ten from his Secretary, Margaret Paull, sending copies of the above speech to people who requested same.

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 50 – General Speeches

 

November 8, 1962, What the President Wants to Know About Technical Programs, AMA,

Los Angeles

11/8/62, Handwritten notes by Packard for this speech.

Packard makes some general observations about American Industry.

 

“a. We have progressed from [an] economy based on raw materials and       energy of manpower to an economy based on brainpower. No only new       devices, but also service.

 

“b. We do ourselves a disservice to measure our growth in GNP- steel        production – carloadings – etc. [There is] much evidence to demonstrate         that our standard of living has grown faster than GNP or conventional        indicators.

 

“c. One of [the] most important characteristic of [the] American economy is its unique ability to convert new knowledge into products that have

 

1.Usefulness (in concept)

2. Quality (in practice)

3. And as a result real value to the buyer.

 

“And so in many ways the Technical Programs of our companies are the most important programs we have to insure Stability and Growth to our companies.

 

“The magnitude of R&D spending is not an adequate measure of the value to technical effort but it is important for any given business to have a technical effort commensurate with the level for its segment of the industry.

 

“And the range is wide.

[For] all manufacturing [R&D spending runs] 4% -1/2 Gov’t financed, 1/2 company financed.

 

Food less than 1%

Industrial Chemicals 6%

Scientific instruments 7% 1/2 [government funded], 1/2 [company funded]

Electronics & Communications 10% 2/3 Gov 1/3 Company

Aircraft 20% 7/8 Gov 1/8 Company.

“And as a final generalization it is important to recognize that:

 

The character and success of your technical programs todaydetermines      perhaps more than any other factor the character and success of your           business tomorrow.”

 

Moving to a description of the way things are at Hewlett-Packard Packard describes the business at HP as “Electronic Measuring Instruments. In terms of above classifications Scientific Instruments & Electronic & Communications.”

 

“We devote about 10% of sales dollar to R&D – more than 9% Company sponsored & less than 1% Government supported

 

“Sales without acquisition 1952 –  5 million

With acquisition 1962 – 100 million

“If we reconstruct acquisition back to 1952 [the sales would be] 18 million to 100 million or 5 times growth in 10 years.

 

“Growth has been primarily [the] result of new products from R&D. More than 1/2 of 1962 volume is from instruments developed & put into production since 1957 – 5 years.

 

“[There is] ample evidence that even the relatively good group of products we had in 1957 would have produced only minor growth… – not considering new products

 

“We have established some general criteria to guide this program

 

1. We concentrate all effort in area of electronic instrumentation – General   Purpose.

2. We back up technical program directed electronic instrumentation with                           specialization in

a. Manufacturing – facilities know how – quality control                                                       emphasizing needs of this field

 

b. Sales Program – Selection of people – training – service oriented                            to the instrumentation area.

3. We place emphasis on making an important contribution in the field.

 

a. Example of oscilloscopes where [there was a] good market –                                 [and we] tried to go in by “brute force” doing the job just as well –                              not successful.

b. Same area where we made a very important technical                                            contribution – good value – good profit.

 

c. We have seen examples where competition has attempted to do                           same in our field – copy products – add frills – no success – now                                  selling out on fire sale basis.

 

“The success of a technical program depends first on [the] selection of [the]right new product projects. We (WRH and myself) were very close to this & personally involved. Several years ago [it became] evident that we could not personally participate in [the] evaluation of each program.

 

[We] tried to have review meetings, [but it] took two days just to go over [the] briefest review of every project. King Solomon feeding all animals.

 

“As a result, established criteria [and] assigned responsibility on divisional basis for product areas. Criteria:

 

Profit over five year product life [divided by] the cost of development should average 5-6/1. May be reasons why 1 or 2/1 will be acceptable. A good product can be 10 – 20 to 1.

 

“Divisional responsibility

 

Group of people concentrating on all factors in a given product area. Close             coordination between technology of that area – manufacturing capabilities      and market problems.

 

Motivation that comes from small group of people having opportunity  to             do something where they can enjoy result of their success.

 

“In the matter [of ] the President

 

Should:

1. Establish well defined objectives

a. Concentration on instrumentation

b. Make important contribution

 

2. Provide environment where capable people can work toward those objectives with freedom and with enthusiasm.

 

“In answer to the question “What the President wants to know about technical programs:

He wants to know that they are at a level which will make it possible for    his company to keep up with the industry.

 

He wants to know they are taking his company in the direction he wants to           go.

He wants to know they are being accomplished with some measure of        success in terms of adequate profits for each dollar of expenditure.”

10/29/62, Letter to Packard from Philip Marvin AMA,  Asking if Packard would be willing to serve as chairman for the half-day session at the November 8 conference where Packard is to speak.

10/31/62, Copy of letter to Philip Marvin, AMA, from Packard saying he would be willing to serve as chairman for the half-day session.

11/19/62, Letter to Packard from Philip Marvin, AMA, thanking him for participating in the AMA California program.

Box 1 Folder 20 – HP Management

 

January 5, 1962, Sixth Annual Management Conference, Monterey

 

12/19/61, copy of a typewritten letter to Dean Ernest C. Arbuckle from Dave Packard expressing the hope that Arbuckle will be able to join the conference. Packard says they intend to spend most of the day discussing how various service functions fit into the total organization – particularly marketing and engineering. Packard expresses the hope Arbuckle can come.

1/5/62 Copy of the agenda for the conference.

 

Box 1, Folder 35D – HP Management

2/23/62, Copy of internal HP memorandum from Lee Seligson to Barney Oliver reminding him of his scheduled participation in a forthcoming two day conference for engineers. Seligson summarizes the speakers and topics.. Attached are some pages handwritten by Packard outlining his remarks.

 

Packard lists such topics as:

 

Balance sheet analysis

Engineering overhead – trends

General course for the future

General problems of Divisionalization

Geographical problems

Opportunities for engineers

Importance of New Product Development on Growth of American Industry

Undated, early 1962, Handwritten notes by Packard titled: “Sales Meeting Speech”

 

“Thanks everyone for help in making 1961 a good year.

“1961 was a year of change

Sanborn

Harrison

Divisions

Microwave

Oscilloscope

Time & Frequency

“New products – We intend to continue to push our capabilities into other areas in future.

“Our success this far has been the result of:

Excellent performance in the detail of day to day job.

The enthusiasm of everyone

A good sense of direction  – a common purpose

We have developed a good ability to keep one eye on the ruts in the road and the other eye on the stars.

 

“Gentlemen, we intend to continue to build the Hewlett-Packard organization from the clerk to the scientist  – from the janitor to the salesman – from transducers to systems – from audio oscillators to sampling oscillators – in every area in which we are engaged – into the best, hardest hitting, most capable company in the world.

 

“If there is anyone here in this room today who can’t help us get this job done – we’ill damn well find someone who can!”

1963 – Packard Speeches

Box 2, Folder 51 – General Speeches

 

April 19, 1963, Acceptance of  “The American Way of Life” award from the Sertoma Club, Pueblo, Colorado

 

4/19/63, Typewritten speech with handwritten notes by Packard.

 

Packard expresses appreciation for the honor of the award and to all the people who

came to the dinner and ceremony.

 

Looking back to his life in Pueblo 30 years prior Packard remembers several high school teachers, the various athletic teams, –  the hunting and fishing.

 

He remembers “something of the state of world affairs at that time. …the era of Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover….the feeling that America was sell isolated…from the power diplomacy of Europe….The prevailing opinion of the late 1920s and the early 1930s, was that the Monroe Doctrine – combined with the vast expanses of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans were more than adequate to keep America from being seriously entangled in the affairs of Europe – of Asia, Africa, South America – and the rest of the world just didn’t seem to count for much.”

 

Packard  tells of the depression which he says was “out greatest nation concern…..GNP had dropped to 60 billion dollars. In that period, government expenditures — Federal, state and Local combined – were only about 10% of GHP [GNP?] and as I recall, the Federal expenditures alone were only 2% or 3%. This year…combined Government expenditures …are about equal to our total national production 30 years ago.

 

“The influence of Science was beginning to have its effect – an effect which was to be accelerated to a tremendous pace in the years that followed. I remember the first broadcast station in Pueblo…in about 1924. By 1930, broadcasting was well established throughout the country, but programs from Europe were not yet feasable [sic]. Television had been produced in the laboratory…the automobile was an important part of our economy…Air travel was just beginning.”

 

“All in all”, Packard says, “the future looked bright to me in those days – despite the depression. But, looking back, the things which have come about in these past three decades, have been more expensive than any of us could have imagined in our wildest dreams.

 

“The rise of Hitler — and World War II, galvanized the latent strength and capability of our country — and we found ourselves in a position of undisputed world leadership….new forces have come to bear to make the world of 1963 totally different from the world of 1931. We understand some of these forces — but we do not yet know how to cope with them. We do not know in what way they will affect the future of our country, nor, for that matter, how they will affect the future of each of us as individuals.”

 

Packard calls to mind some of the forces “which have changed the face of our world in these three decades — …the revolution in communication, the revolution in transportation and the revolution in our knowledge of and…our ability to master nature and our physical environment….Radio, television, teletype, the vast array of publications of all types, bring to a majority of the people everywhere in the world – information in considerable detail, about what is going on everywhere else. Horizons are opened up, new aspirations aregenerated….They can transmit bad ideas as well as good and from all this arises a new concern, among millions of people as to whether their lot in life is what it should be. We see signs of this everywhere — conflict – as more people learn that their lot in life can be improved as the underprivileged see and hear what can be done, these pressures will continue to increase and become more widespread. This revolution in communication we have seen may turn out to be a boon for mankind – it may, on the other hand, be a Pandora’s box – and one already opened. In any case, it is a fact and must be dealt with.

 

“The advancement of our skill in transportation is having a similar effect. In 1930, the dimensions of the world was measured in weeks — now it is measured in minutes.

 

“In medicine – we have conquered some of the most serious diseases of man and increased life expectancy to over 79 years. But, again, we find this has raised serious problems; a population explosion which is going to make it extremely difficult to convert whatever gross gains we make into gains for the individual.

 

“In the last three decades, we have increased the generation of electrical energy so as to have six times as much available for our factories and for our homes as we had in 1930. Here, fortunately we have much more electrical energy available for each individual as well.

 

“I am sure you will agree that what has happened has been considerable in magnitude and scope. And these achievements have also generated some PROBLEMS for us which are considerable in magnitude and scope.”

 

“The continuing education of the scientists to carry these things forward in the future is…a matter if high priority,” Packard says. “But, of even greater importance for the future is the development of leadership which can better understand and guide these great social and human problems which we are generating with our science. Perhaps we will somehow find solutions through divine guidance — perhaps we can somehow turn the clock back to what many think of as the GOOD OLD DAYS. It is my view that we can and will find solutions for these problems in the future. It will require more knowledge and more wisdom than we now have – and this can come only from better education – at all levels…..”

 

“Our economy in America has changed from one dependent primarily on raw materials to one highly dependent on educated people. The future of Colorado may be enhanced by further mineral discoveries, and water will, of course, play an important role. but far and away the more important is the quality and extent of the educational opportunities you are able to provide for your men and women – old as will as young. New industries will be attracted by the number and quality of your college and university graduates. And they will find ways to establish new ventures as well as strengthen old ones.

 

“While I have touched on some of the things that have happened since I left Pueblo, I want to add a comment on why, in my opinion, our country has been at the forefront of this amazing progress. If one examines the progress in every area, communication, transportation – in education – in the discovery and application of new knowledge in every field — it has in a decisive way been motivated by the drive of our private enterprise system. The growth of radio from the old crystal set to the satellite communication system is the story of individual people working in private enterprise. America has more electric power capacity than the next five nations of the world combined — not because of our public power projects — but because of  the initiative and capability of the individuals working our privately owned utilities. Private enterprise firms developed the airplane from the beginning to modern jet. Private enterprise has built the finest air transportation system in the world. The American farmer with his eye on his crops, using machinery developed by private enterprise, has made our agriculture the most efficient in the world.

 

“And, not least of all, it has been our great privately supported and, therefore, independent universities which have provided most of the leadership for all of higher education in America.

 

“This amazing progress in America has been built on the strength of individual people applying their talent, directing their energies and capabilities in an environment of freedom  to shape their lives as they see fit. Nowhere in history has any other social order been so effective in advancing the welfare of its people.”

 

“But, as each of you well know, this American way of life of ours has been challenged and is under attack. Khrushchev and his communists have threatened to “bury us.” Socialists in our government – and among our people – would place the importance of the state above the importance of the individual. They would direct our lives from Washington! They would take our wealth and distribute it as they see fit!

 

“Colorado was built by resourceful individuals working against many handicaps — individuals who wrested minerals from the rocks of the mountains — individuals who turned arid plains by irrigation into fertile gardens. This is a tradition which we must all work to preserve. And I believe it is being preserved here in Colorado more effectively than in many other parts of America. This fact had a large influence in the choice by the Hewlett-Packard Company to locate two major facilities here. One in Loveland where we have already found that the tradition of Colorado for the American Way still runs strong. And one in Colorado Springs where we are counting on the devotion of the people to the American Way to continue to run strong in the years ahead.

 

“The future prosperity of Colorado, indeed of the entire Western World, will not be generated at the State House in Denver nor in the White House in Washington, but, rather, by resourceful individuals throughout our society — applying their talent and their ability to the myriad of problems which always stand in the way of progress This is the tradition we honor here tonight.

 

“I am profoundly grateful for this opportunity to be here with you tonight to join in this honor of American Freedom. I assure you, such success as has come my way is in no small measure a direct result of the influence of the Pueblo – and of THE COLORADO OF THREE DECADES AGO.”

 

4/19/63, Printed program for the Sertoma International “The American Way of Life award. Awarded for Exemplary Leadership and Achievement under America’s

Freedoms.

1/9/63, Letter to Packard from Ralph C. Taylor, News Director, Star-Journal Publishing Corporation. Mr. Taylor explains that he was a long-time friend of Packard’s father and he would like to interview Packard for story about his life. He would also like to discuss the possibility of Packard’s coming to Colorado to receive the American Way of Life Award.

1/14/63, Copy of letter to Ralph C. Taylor from Packard saying he would be honored to receive the award. Suggests some time to get together to discuss the story.

1/17/63, Letter to Packard from Ralph C. Taylor, News Director Star-Journal Publishing Corporation. Says the Sertoma officers are in full accord on presenting the award on a date acceptable to Packard. Suggest meeting Packard in Palo Alto around Feb. 17 for story discussion.

3/6/63, Letter from Ralph Taylor to Packard saying they enjoyed visiting with Packard at his home, and suggesting April 19 or 20 for award dinner.

Letter to Packard from F. E. Colescott Sertoma Club President saying the dinner is now scheduled for April 20 and asking for confirmation. Handwritten notes on the letter say Colescott called to ask if April 19 would be OK and he was told it would be OK.

3/20/63, Copy of letter to Ralph Taylor from Packard saying he would send along the list of possible attendees in a day or so.

3/25/63, Copy of letter to Ralph Taylor from Margaret Paull (Packard’s secretary) sending the list of  invitees Packard is suggesting.

4/8/63, Letter from F. E. Colescott, Sertoma Club, to Packard talking about arrangements for the award dinner.

4/2/63, Letter to WRH from Gene Colescott, Sertoma Club President inviting WRH to the award dinner for Packard.

4/9/63, Copy of letter from WRH to Gene Colescott saying he would be out of town and cannot attend. 4/11/63, Letter to Packard from Gene Colescott enclosing a draft of the program schedule and advising that dress would be formal.

4/11/63, Inter-Office memo to Packard from Dave Kirby suggesting possible topics for his award dinner speech.

4/11/63, Letter to Packard from Charles L. Thomson , General Manager Pueblo Chamber of Commerce, suggesting the possibility of meeting with Packard during his visit to discuss how Pueblo might become more attractive to industry.

4/11/63, Page from Pueblo Star-Journal discussing Ralph Taylor’s retirement from the newspaper.

4/11/63, Page from the Pueblo Chieftain describing to Sertoma award to be given to Packard by Major James W. Wood.

4/11/63, Letter to Packard from Louis T. Benezet, The Colorado College, saying he will have to miss the luncheon on Saturday April 20th and asking if they could have breakfast on the 21st for a brief tour of the science building.

4/15/63, Copy of letter from Packard to Louis T. Benezet saying he would be glad to join him for  a visit to the campus of Sunday April 20th.

4/16/63, Copy of letter from Packard to Louis T. Benezet saying he now finds he must return to Palo Alto the evening of April 20 and so cannot make the tour on Sunday AM. Hopes to do it later.

4/20/63, Clipping from The Pueblo Chieftain describing the award dinner with picture of Maj. Wood making the presentation to Packard.

4/22/63, Letter from Gov. John A. Love to Packard congratulating him on receiving the Sertoma award and expressing the hope Packard will call him for any service he can give in the future.

4/25/63, Handwritten letter to Packard from high school teacher Mary Melcher congratulating him on the award and enclosing a clipping from a newspaper.

4/29/63, Copy of letter from Packard to Mary Melcher saying he was pleased to get her note and telling her he had mentioned her name at the award dinner.

5/2/63, Copy of letter to F. E. Colescott from Packard thanking all for the honor of the Sertoma award.

5/2/63, Copy of a letter to Ralph Taylor from Packard thanking him for the hospitality he had given Packard and wife Lu, during their visit for the award.

5/2/63, Copy of letter from Packard to “Red: LeMasters, LeMasters Janitorial Supplies, saying it was good to see him during his visit to Pueblo and thanking him for getting all the boys together while he was there. He confirms his invitation for Red to visit California and promises “ buck or two within range.”

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 52 – General Speeches

 

April 21, 1963, Speech at Colorado Springs

Packard appears to be speaking to primarily a group of Colorado Springs citizens, telling them about HP’s plans to build a new permanent building and become a corporate citizen of their community.      It is an informal, chatty approach, rather than a prepared text.

 

4/21/63, Copy of a typewritten transcription of Packard’s remarks

 

Packard starts by telling his audience why they decided to build facilities in Colorado in the first place. He makes it clear that their decision had nothing to do with the fact that he was born and raised in Pueblo – and is, as he says “very fond of Colorado….I want to assure you,” he says, “that the selection of Colorado Springs was not made for any sentimental reason but only after a very careful analysis by some pretty smart people in our organization as to where a good location might be for the future development of an important activity of our company….We do indeed try and make an objective analysis of many factors that are important to the success of the business, but …it is not only the impersonal things, in many ways it is the attitude and the personal environment that may be decisive as to whether the choice of location is right or not.

 

Packard stresses that the decision to establish a new plant location is a very important one – to the company, to the community, and to the people who will be asked to pull up stakes and move. “…if for any reason our choice of location has been wrong, this is a disastrous thing both of the company and for the community, and I want you to realize that we recognize this fact and that we have put a good deal of consideration into this matter.”

 

To test the waters Packard tells how they started out in a modest way, renting a small facility so :…”if it did not work out as well as we anticipated it would, we could move back from this decision and do so without any serious damage either to the future of our company nor to the community of which we made a choice.

 

“But I am delighted to be here today to tell you the experience we have had since the decision was made a year and a half ago to come to [here] that the choice has been fully verified by the expansion we have had in the little over a year that our people have been in your community.”

 

“So we are here today to tell you folks that after having given this matter of whether we should or should not be located in Colorado Springs very careful consideration, we have decided that this is indeed a very desirable place for us to commit a substantial portion of our future success of our company and we are here to announce that we are going to go ahead with our plans to carry on and make Colorado Springs a permanent location for one of the important activities of the Hewlett-Packard Company.”

 

Packard talks about the site chosen for the plant. “…I think everyone in the organization who has seen the site feel that this…is a wonderful location and …we hope to develop what you will come to think upon as the finest plant in your community.”

 

“The building,” Packard says, “is going to be designed in a two-level construction to hopefully fit into the contours of the area—it will be designed in the context of the surroundings and it is going to be devoted to both manufacturing engineering and development….

 

“The building has been designed in accordance with a long range plan because we have found from experience that it is desirable to think ahead again on these matters, although I want to assure you that our ability to think ahead with any position is not as good as it should be. But, at least we like to do some planning in terms of what might happen in relation to the ultimate development of the site and we have done that, and this particular building will fit into a master plan which would allow expansion to some 400,000 square feet – whether this will come about or not only time will tell, but we are of the mind that it is important when you make a major move like this to be sure that it is made in context with what you might hopefully have to do later.

 

“This first year will cost approximately $2,000,000 and so it is going to be an important investment for our company and we can not commit this amount of money to a facility unless we have a great deal of confidence that it is going to be productive and it is going to be permanent.”

 

“Now I think this gets into one of the very important aspects of our business….in our business we’re not dependent on the things which were traditionally important in industry—raw materials, transportation, labor costs, and all of these things. These factors have to be reasonably favorable, but they are by no means decisive. The decisive element in our business is people and unless we are able to locate a facility where we can attract the kind of people who are going to be able to keep   ahead of everything that is going on in the country, we have no hope of keeping up in this business and making this particular venture successful. And that one of the decisive reasons that we considered Colorado Springs as a location for an important activity of our company had to do with the question of people.

 

“[The people] in this plant are going to have decide what the trends of this business require and they are going to have to find ways to invent and develop and put into manufacture devices that are going to be better than somebody else’s. To the extent that [they] are able to do that this plant is going to be a great success. To the extent to which they fail, the plant is going to be a failure. It is just as simple as that. So we have to consider the question of whether a particular location is one to which we can attract some of our most capable people, whether they are going to be satisfied with the community environment, whether the educational opportunities are to be such that they will be able to keep up with the rapidly advancing trends in the technical phases of this business.”

 

Packard describes the severe competition among companies for new graduates – “graduates who ask ‘Where am I gong to be? Am I going to have a place to carry on my intellectual development, educational activities for myself, and am I going to have the opportunity to bring up my youngsters in the kind of environment I would like to see for them? And so, in this aspect Colorado Springs is a very important choice and this had a good influence in our decision here.

 

“Now this gets into the question of education and education is important. We looked at Colorado pretty carefully in this aspect and I think I want to be frank with you. I would say that the educational system in Colorado is good but it has a long way to go to be as good as it should be, so we think there is some concern about the matter here. We think it is our duty to build strength in the educational foundation which you have and we hope that this can be done because this is going to be decisive, not only for our particular business here in Colorado Springs, but it is going to be decisive in terms of the entire state to attract the kind of industries which I think are going to be important in the future and I think the kind of industries which will be attractive to your community and to your state.

 

“You have made a good deal of progress here at Colorado college. You have made a good deal of progress at Colorado University, but it might interest you to know that some of the bright young boys who are working in Palo Alto whom we would like to ask to come out to Colorado Springs would like to get some more education and they are asking ‘Can I go on and work toward my Masters degree when I come out here?’ The answer is ‘We hope so, but we are not sure.’ This is a question that I think we are going to get together with all of you people and see if we an develop opportunities to do some of these things and I assure you they are going to be important to you, perhaps even more important to you and the community than they are to us and to the industries that are moving in.”

 

“The attitude of the community,” Packard says, “is an important element in a decision of this nature. I think we want to try to move into a community where the government of the community people doesn’t expect industry to support everybody in their jobs plus the government and everything else to boot. On the other hand I assure you that when we come into a community of this characteristics we hope that we can carry our weight and do our part of the job and we will ask for no more than a fair shake in these matters.

 

“Now one thing about this I wanted to comment [on] and I wanted to comment from experience. I think there is a happy medium in how far you can go in attracting industry into a community and at the same time keep the community environment  where it should be and I think it is important not to go overboard in this matter because if all the emphasis is put on the importance to industry to attract a great many people, you generate a tremendous number of corollary problems, so I would hope here in Colorado Springs that you don’t come to the conclusion that having industry is the end and aim of the community in any sense of the word. We would hope that this matter can be kept in context and we think that this is important for those of you in the industry as well as those of you in the community who are anxious to continue to see Colorado Springs one of the attractive residential communities in the country. And so in this matter there are many aspects which need to be considered on both sides of the coin and I assure you that we intend and hope to be able to cooperate and help in this matter.

 

“So this decision as I think you an see has been made in terms of some fairly careful considerations of the factors that are important to us and I think it has been made in terms of the considerations that are important to your community to keep it one of the attractive communities of the country. We are delighted that we are able to go ahead with this program and I assure you that we are going to do everything we can to prove to you and to prove to ourselves that this was the right decision for the long run.

 

“Thanks very much.”

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 53 – General Speeches

 

May 7, 1963, National Conference on Peaceful Uses of Space, The University/Industry Partnership in space Programs, Chicago

 

5/7/63, Printed pages from undetermined publication giving full quotations from panel member presentations at the above conference. Below is a summary of Packard’s presentation along with some exerpts from his participation in the panel discussion that followed after each member gave their individual presentations.

 

Packard opens his comments by reviewing “a little of the history of the university-industry relationship in the specific area around Stanford University. “. He says that the part of this relationship which he wishes to discuss “was not influenced in any way by the Space Age…but it should be remembered that the industry and the activity which have developed from this particular relationship with Stanford have, in fact, had a great influence on the space accomplishments to date.”

 

Packard says that “When Hewlett-Packard first established its firm in the Palo Alto area, there were about five electronics firms around the San Francisco peninsula.” And having “somewhere between 200 and 300 “ employees. Packard says that at time “we looked to Chicago as the center of the electronics industry…” Packard  gives “A few statistics on the situation today, some 20 to 23 years later…. At the present time in the bay area there are well over 100 electronics firms, including the large effort of Lockheed in their Polaris program, employing approximately 30,000 people.” Aside from Lockheed Packard says “there are approximately 70 firms employing approximately 12,000 people, and the annual volume of production of electronic devices almost three quarters of a billion dollars annually.”

 

Packard says that the population of the city of Palo Alto increased from 25,000 to 52,000 over the preceding 10 years; and that the assessed valuation of the community increased from $42 million to $170 million during the same period. “This is one of the direct and important results for the community. There has been a threefold increase in retail sales as compared with a 2 to 1 increase in population.”

 

“Thus”, Packard continues, “the electronics industry [in this area] has had a very important and beneficial effect on the community as well as made an important contribution to the whole area of technology. The interesting thing about this development is that a majority of these firms were started by young people coming out of the university. In many cases they were started with very little capital and well over half of all the firms in this area are new ventures that were started as private enterprises by young people with some knowledge, with some help from the university relationship, and with a desire to get into the private enterprise segment of our economy.”

 

Packard draws  “Several conclusions …from this university-industry relationship that has developed over the last 2 decades or so the Stanford area. In the first place, almost all the new businesses in this area are based upon new products which were generated in the laboratories at Stanford University.” He gives some examples from HP’s experience: a counter “developed by a young man doing his graduate work at Stanford University on a fellowship which we sponsored,…many devices in the microwave field …were first conceived in the Physics Department at Stanford…More recently some of the work in what we call backward-wave oscillator tubes and traveling-wave amplifier tubes was the foundation of some additional instrument which have added to the product line and the capability of our organization.”

 

Packard tells how the Varian brothers, having invented the Klystron tube in the physics lab at Stanford a little before 1940, founded Varian Associates shortly after World War II and  built “one of the most important industries in the country in the field of microwave tubes.”

 

Packard tells how, in fields other than electronics, physics, and electrical engineering, activities at Stanford have contributed to the development of industry.

“For instance, a program at Stanford Research Institute involves investigation of explosives. Dr. Poulter, in the laboratory that was established in his name, did some important research in the use of shape charges and various kinds of explosive devices, and a program was developed which is the basis of the United Technology Corporation program of solid fuel propellants.”

 

“Packard points out that “While these programs have contributed to “big” science, they have also made a very important contribution to the free enterprise segment of our economy; this is an especially important characteristic of the development around Stanford University.

 

“In addition to specific products, the university has contributed a very important resource of trained manpower–engineers, and scientists and business leaders–and trained manpower has, in many ways, been developed around some areas of specific technology not unrelated to these particular product areas already mentioned–microwave tubes and solid-state electronics, for example. The University has attracted a very strong group of faculty and from this has come the Fairchild semiconductor program; William Shockley was attracted back to the area from Bell Laboratories and he, too, has established a commercial venture in the electronics field.

 

“Underlying all this there has developed over the years an important relationship between the university and industry. A number of times during these 2 decades, university administrators have come to us in industry and pointed out that they had a faculty appointment open, but did not have the resources to attract the person they wanted; they have asked if we would be interested in providing either a consulting job or in some other way supporting this appointment financially. Our firm has provided this support in a number of cases and it has enabled Stanford to attract some important people.”

 

Packard gives another example of Stanford/industry cooperation, this time in the field of aeronautical engineering. Lockheed wanted a particular man who was interested in the university association – which worked out well. So well that the enrollment in Stanford’s aeronautical engineering program grew from two graduate students before the program was worked out to more than 100  graduate students 2 years later.

 

“This consulting service is effective, not just in terms of having a conference now and then to talk about a program, but in bringing a university professor into a close association on a continuing basis with a particular program that is of mutual interest; this has been done in the field of microwave tubes and in many areas by a number of firms….

 

“Particularly effective has been a university-industry program in which industry hires graduates from various colleges and universities around the country and, in an arrangement with Stanford, allows these baccalaureate-degree holders to obtain advances degrees by spending about half time working and half time going to school. This was worked out by Dr. Terman, who was then Dean of the School of Engineering.”

 

“In summary, it might be reemphasized that this astounding growth in the technologically based industries in the San Francisco Bay area has been due in large part to the contributions from Stanford University….There is no question that one of the important responsibilities of universities is to generate new knowledge; it seems, as well, that one of the responsibilities of universities and industry is to find ways in which this new knowledge can be converted into useful purposes as efficiently and as effectively as possible. The programs in the bay area, particularly those around Stanford University, have been especially effective in this way.”

 

This ended Packard’s prepared comments. After the other panelists finished their talks there followed a round table discussion among. One commented on the greatly increased level of government support since World War II, Packard replied that “The situation at Stanford has been very much the same way. The amount of government support for research has gone up at a tremendous rate. Stanford has never had a very large amount of industry-supported research, in any case. Stanford Research Institute was set up to handle this problem, and they are involved in the more specific jobs for industry. The university has followed a policy of not taking on any specific job for a specific firm; only with rare exceptions does Stanford do this. the university tries to limit its research program to areas that are of interest to a particular professor and can be continued over a period of time. The figures of Stanford Research Institute are very interesting because an attempt has been made to keep a large proportion of research for private concerns there. The trustees would like to have not more than half of the entire Research Institute program supported by government funds, but it keeps increasing every year until it is almost 80 percent this year.”

 

5/7/63,  Five pages of handwritten notes by Packard containing various facts and figures that he had gathered for the above presentation.

2/1/63, Typed fact sheet on Stanford Industrial Park giving the names of companies who lease land including number of acres, number of employees etc.

3/24/63, Program for “The Second Northern California Junior Science and Humanities Symposium” apparently reference material for Packard.

4/63,  Copy of printed article by Professor Frederick E. Terman on the subject of Federal grants.

3/19/63, Letter to Packard from Lyle H. Lanier Executive Vice President and Provost, University of Illinois, asking if Packard would be willing to participate in the May 7 conference and panel discussion on the topic of “The Role of Universities in Space Research”

3/22/63, Copy of letter from Margaret Paull (Packard’s secretary) to Lyle Lanier replying to his letter of 3/19/63 and saying that Packard is away until the second week of April.

4/18/63, Copy of a letter to Lyle Lanier from Packard saying that he would be “most pleased to participate in the panel discussion …on May 7th”

4/17/63, Letter to Packard from William L. Everitt, Dean, College of Engineering University of Illinois, saying they were delighted that Packard would participate in the panel, and giving more details of the program.

4/19/63, Letter to Packard from Hale Nelson, General Chairman, expressing appreciation for Packard’s willingness to serve on the panel, and giving details on the program.

4/23/63, Copy of letter to Hale Nelson from Packard saying he would meet at noon luncheon on May 7.

4/29/63, Letter to Packard from Hale Nelson giving more program arrangements.

5/2/63, Telegram to Packard from Sidney Jones of the conference staff asking that Packard discuss “Broad concepts of university – university relationships”  and not limit discussion to research parks.

 

5/6/63, ID badge sent to Packard for conference.

5/6/63, Printed copy of conference program.

5/14/63, Letter to Packard from Hale Nelson and Sidney Jones thanking him for participating in the conference.

5/16/63,  Letter to Packard from Bill Everitt thanking him for participating in the conference and also suggest HP consider the Champaign-Urbana area for a future facility.

Undated, Bound booklet titled Interstate Research Park.

 

 

Box 2, Folder 54 – General Speeches

 

June 6, 1963, Address before New York Society of Security Analysts, NYC

 

6/6/63, Typewritten copy of above speech.

 

Not having talked to this group for over four years Packard says he wants to bring them up to date on the many changes that have taken place at HP in the interim. But first, he gives some statistics on operations for the first six months of FY 63. A few of these were:

Total income $55,690,000, compared to $54,530,000 for year ago period.

Earnings were $3,522,000 compared to $3,446,000 year ago.

EPS 29.7 cents vs. 29.5 year ago.

 

Packard mentions that during the first half of 1963 they have been integrating the sales groups into the HP organization.

Long term debt $437,000 vs. $339,000 year ago.

Overall Packard says “I think we can feel reasonably satisfied about the balance sheet position of the company, and we have no financial problems of consequence.”

 

Turning to organizational changes over the past four years Packard describes the HP organization in 1959 as “…a highly centralized organization in which the management was on a functional basis with a vice president for Manufacturing, one for Marketing, one for R & D, and one for Finance, and there were very few activities outside Palo Alto.” He recalls that at their previous meeting he had said that  “our policy was to specialize in the field of electronic instrumentation, to develop products which would make a contribution to the field, and to develop products which were general-purpose in their nature, thereby having a broad market rather than being designed for specific, individual applications, I also stated our policy was to finance our growth from earnings.”

 

“Since that time we have moved from a highly centralized organization into one which is largely divisionalized — and geographically disbursed.” He describes some of the specific changes:

 

“We have in Palo Alto several divisions. The Frequency & Time Division has a very important area of product responsibility having to do with frequency standards, frequency counters and other devices used in the measurement of time and frequency, as the name indicates.

 

“The Microwave Division, which is one of our very strong areas of involvement, makes microwave signal generators and all sorts of measurement devices concerned with radar communication equipment, microwave links, etc.

 

“The Oscilloscope Division is still headquarted in Palo Alto, but it is scheduled to be moved to Colorado Springs with the next two years.

 

“The Dymec Division in Palo Alto handles the job of developing and selling instrument systems — that is, combinations of instruments which go together to do a complete job for the customer.

 

“Palo Alto Engineering Company was set up to manufacture magnetic devices such as transformers. It is being phased out, and its work will be integrated into other divisions.

 

“We have established a new and important activity called HP Associates. This group was set up to concentrate on the development of advanced solid sate electronics. Over the years we have done a good deal of solid state work in our own laboratories — the intent to provide better components and better technology with which to manufacture instrumentation. This new group is set up to broaden the area of solid state R & D and is already beginning to develop some outside sales. The only opportunity for us in this field of semiconductors is if we happen to be able to make some important contributions. There’s a very good chance that we might be able to do this, but HP Associates is still oriented primarily to give us some lead in technology for use in our own shop.

 

“Outside of Palo Alto we have a division in Loveland, Colorado, manufacturing what we call the audio-video class of instruments.

 

“We have acquired the F. L. Moseley Company in Pasadena, California; the Boonton Radio Corporation in New Jersey; the Harrison Laboratories in New Jersey; and the Sanborn Company in Waltham, Massachusetts. In addition to that, we have rather extensive activities overseas with a sales organization in Geneva, a manufacturing plant just out of Stuttgart, another manufacturing operation outside of London, and a joint venture planned for Japan. The acquisition of our sales organizations has brought in a number of additional discrete corporate entities and has encouraged us to set up some of our own. So from all of this you can see we have moved from a highly centralized company into one that is involved in the management of a widely dispersed group of activities.”

 

Packard says that these changes  “have brought about a good many management problems, but I am very much encouraged by the fact that we have been able to accomplish the transition without serious difficulty.”  And he adds that “We have been able to meet this new management challenge with people from within our own organization.”

 

Packard assures the group that “Despite the major change in the structure of our organization, our policies have not changed in any essential way. We are still in the business of general-purpose electronic instrumentation. We are trying to do those things where we think we can make an important contribution to the field, and are not taking on new projects just to get into a bigger area of activity. Our policy is to continue to finance our growth from earnings, and we have been able to do so. Government business is important to us, but we make no products that are designed specifically for military or other government applications.”

 

Packard explains that “One of the very important things about our company is that our growth has come almost entirely from new products….and the overall sales growth that we have been able to achieve is the result of the superimposition of new products on [the] steady level [of the more mature products].”

 

Packard then goes projects several charts: [Which are also included with the typed text]

Chart No. 1 – “Shows our consolidated shipments for the past five             years….we shall probably wind up in the range of $120 million for fiscal ‘63    total income”

 

Chart  No. 2 – Presents a breakdown of HP markets in different categories, military, non-military, government subcontracts, commercial.

 

Char No. 3 – Shows the relative proportion of  HP’s business subject to renegotiation adjustment.

 

Chart No. 4 – indicates international market activity.

 

Chart No. 5 – “Presents an analysis of our European business. It points out a very interesting situation. The lower bar represents the products of U. S. origin, the products that are manufactured in the United States and sold in Europe. We started manufacturing in Europe about the beginning of 1960, and the bar on the top represents sales in Europe from our European factories. As you can see, the portion represented by our European manufacturing operations is growing rapidly. But despite this growth, we have been able throughout this period to consistently increase the export of our products from the United States. I think this pattern is going to continue for some time.”

 

Chart No. 6 – Pacific area markets. “This market is not significant because of its size, or of its past importance, but because an analysis of the area indicates why we have decided to make a major move in Japan. You will see from this chart that our Japanese business was moving ahead in a rather satisfactory way up until 1961. At that time, restrictions on imports into Japan reduced our business there. As a result of studying this situation, we have decided to set up a joint venture with a firm in Japan. The agreements are completed To do this with the Yokogawa Electric Words, one of the most respected firms in the instrument field in Japan.”

 

Chart No. 7 – “is the most significant of all in evaluating the real nature of our company and the nature of its growth potential. This chart shows the additions, year by year, which our new products have made to our annual sales volume….This chart also indicates that if we had not maintained a steady output of new instruments, our present volume would be only slightly larger than it was in 1955. Furthermore, if our new product effort were to stop completely, the general trend in our business would be either level or slightly up and down from year to year, and certainly after any reasonable period, would go downward. This pattern is one that we study carefully, We try to analyze our new product effort to see that we continue to do the things which will continue to generate substantial new product growth. As a result of studying this pattern over the past few years, we decided a couple of years ago to increase our total R & D expenditure, and the last chart will show you how this has gone.”

 

Chart No. 8 – As a general overview Packard says that “In total we have spent something like $23 million of company generated funds [over the past four years] as compared to about a quarter of a million of government sponsored effort. Our business is one which is highly dependent upon our new product effort, and we are supporting this effort almost entirely with our own funds.”

 

Packard gives some specific examples from the current new product program. “We have just introduced what we call a Frequency Synthesizer. I mentioned this in our first quarter report. This device has now been finished, and we are beginning to get some orders. We don’t have it in full production yet, and I don’t think it is going to have any significant effect on this year’s volume, but it will have a significant effect on next year’s business. This is one of the largest and most expensive new product developments we have ever undertaken. We have spent over a million dollars of direct R & D on this project, but it is significant that we already have negotiations in progress for many millions of dollars worth of business.”

Packard mentions the medical instrumentation as an area “which is growing very rapidly and which has a great deal of potential.”

 

Packard talks of HP Associates and says that “One of the very important areas they are working on is related to the field of optics. As perhaps you know, there are methods of generating electromagnetic radiation in the range of light — infra red, visible by some of the new solid state techniques. We are already using some of these techniques in our instrumentation, and this work should open up important new fields of measurement.”

 

“Of Dymec [working in the area of measurement systems] Packard says “I am happy to say that as a result of what they have already done, their orders this year are at a new high and moving up rapidly.”

 

Regarding facilities Packard says “We are expanding the facilities for HP Associates for reasons that I think should be obvious. Harrison Laboratories, an acquisition last year in the field of power supplies, has completely outgrown its facilities, and we have a plant under construction for them in Berkeley Heights, New Jersey. We are going to let contracts within the next month or so for a $2 million facility in Colorado Springs to move our Oscilloscope Division, and set it up on a completely integrated basis there. Our manufacturing program in Germany has come along so well that we have authorized plans to triple our facility there within a year or so.”

 

“In Japan, the agreements between Yokogawa and ourselves are completed, and are awaiting approval by the Japanese government. We hope the approval may be obtained within a month or two, but we don’t have any experience with the Japanese, so it may not be as soon as we think. In any case, this joint venture organization will manufacture our products for the Japanese market. We will have the responsibility for international sales of their products. This program may have some supplementary benefits in providing low cost manufacture of certain items in case that should be necessary to meet world-wide competition.”

 

“In summary, our business has changed in its character as it has expanded. We are now operating a world-wide corporation compared to one that was centralized in Palo Alto some four or five years ago. Our policies have continued to be much along the same we have followed for years. We believe there is still a big job to be done in the field of electronic instrumentation. As we look to the future, we come to the conclusion that there is ample opportunity ahead, and there is really no limitation except our own ability to get this job done.”

 

 

8/28/62, Letter to Packard from John S. Wilson, Investment Analyst, asking if Packard would be willing to address a meeting of the New York Society of Security Analysts.

10/8/62,  Copy of letter to John S. Wilson from Packard saying he would be willing to address the security analysts and giving a couple of dates.

10/23/62, Letter to Packard from John S. Wilson confirming the June 6, 1963 date and enclosing a n outline of meeting procedures.

5/28/63, Copy of letter from Margaret Paull (Packard’s secretary) to John S. Wilson giving him information he requested.

5/29/63, Letter to Packard from John S. Wilson, giving details on meeting times.

5/29/63, Copy of letter from Margaret Paull to John S. Wilson, giving information on slide projector needed.

6/3/63, Inter-office memo from Austin Marx to Packard giving financial data.

Group of letters and cards asking for copies of Packard’s presentation

Two newspaper clippings commenting on Packard’s talk.

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 55 – General Speeches

 

September 16, 1963,  Speech at Yokogawa Ceremony, Tokyo, Japan

 

This speech hs been moved to box 1, folder 22A

 

 

Box 2, Folder 56 – General Speeches

 

September 19, 1963, Making Maximum Utilization of Corporate Resources, International Management Congress, NYC

 

9/19/63, Typewritten copy of  the above address by Packard.

Packard sets the scene describing  “the impact of science and the advancement of knowledge” – nuclear energy, travel at thousands of miles per hour, computations in minutes that previously took years. Social changes too. “They stem from greatly expanded communication, the radio, television, the press – they are nurtured by a rapid increase in literacy and understanding. These social changes are the inevitable result of, and at the same time catalog, a rising level of education of all people,”

 

“We see on every side a ferment of dissatisfaction with things the way they are….We see it most strikingly in the underdeveloped countries, but we find it here too in the United States among our minority and underprivileged groups of people.

 

…“The frontiers are advancing very rapidly and many people are being educated right up to these frontiers. He, then, is a resource growing in magnitude and in value and it must not be overlooked….the rising aspirations of people in the underdeveloped countries are generating tremendous markets for the essentials – food, housing, clothing and transportation. And these expanding markets which are part and parcel of today’s social flux are by no means unimportant to those of us in management.”

 

Packard refers to the “great scientific developments of the past few decades” and says that “management  now has “unlimited energy for our factories…, automation to control our machines,…communications facilities to transmit any amount of information we require,… and sophisticated instruments and procedures to collect our data…and computers to process it for us. “But,” he says, “the all important question remains – how do we effectively utilize these resources we have at our command?”

 

Packard says that with all these resources at our command we might be tempted to try and automate the entire process. “But this fantasy is soon dismissed when one remembers that machines cannot yet think or innovate, and probably never will.” And he concludes, therefore, “that the ability to think, to innovate, is now vastly more important than it ever was, simply because these vast impersonal resources must be effectively utilized.”

 

“Now the traditional resources which the corporate manager had to utilize were money, raw materials, energy and human labor — the latter largely as a source of energy, Much of the theory of management was about how to utilize these traditional resources efficiently.”

 

Packard says that while methods were developed to help managers utilize such resources as money and raw materials, “the beginnings of scientific management came from how to utilize human labor more effectively. Many of the things we still talk about in management are how to get a bit more work out of our people. Time and motion studies were designed to show the worker how he could use his physical capability more effectively. Piece work recognized the proposition that if you gave the worker an incentive, he might be able to figure out how to do his job better than you as a manager could tell him or show him. this was an important recognition of the fact that an employee might contribute something more than physical labor if you gave him a chance.

 

“The trend of management thinking, particularly over the past decade or two, has been directed more and more toward the management of the human resources of an organization. The fact that we have a rapidly expanding impersonal scientific base for our affairs places more importance on people rather than less. And fortunately we have the kind of people we need in increasing number to do this job well.

 

“I would propose then that the efficient utilization of people, as our most important corporate resource, is the sum and substance of management today. The value of people is primarily in their ability to think, to innovate, to bring imagination rather than their physical energy to their jobs. There are many ways in which people can be encouraged to apply their intelligence to their jobs and this can and should be done in every area of a business” – and he discusses two of these: – “the utilization of the resource generally described as “know-how” in a day-to-day manufacturing operation, and the capability of an organization to develop new products considered as an important corporate resource. Both depend on the effective utilization of people rather than money or physical assets.”

 

Looking at all of the books and specialized technical papers that are written on many subjects, Packard says “one might think that all the “know-how” necessary for efficient corporate operation would be available for the asking. But our experience tells us there is a decisive difference between reading how to do something and being able to do it. Experience — the ability to make the idea actually work — is the priceless ingredient the expert person brings to the job. The more complicated the problem, the more necessary the expert person becomes.”

 

Packard says he sees many examples of innovation as he walks around HP, “But at the same time I have never seen an organization which would not benefit from more special know-how. There are always innumerable problems to be solved. There are always jobs which should be done better.

 

“What, then, is the method of developing and utilizing this important resource? Unique and valuable know-how comes from people who are able to innovate. Such people can be identified by trial and error — perhaps in other ways too, although I do not know of any. They operate best in an environment of freedom. They are professionals in the true sense , not managers or organization men. Management has not always recognized the importance of this ability to innovate, and when present, it is often stifled by restraints and controls. With the growing complexity, particularly of a technologically oriented business, people who have the ability and opportunity to innovate are a great resource which must be effectively utilized.

 

Saying that people who are the most effective innovators “are not usually good executives or administrators”, Packard suggests “One way they can be utilized is as specialists in a given functional area. Give this type of person a special problem area to work on and then let him have the freedom to do it his way….His motivation and satisfaction come largely from his being able to see his know-how put to practical use.”

 

Packard sees three steps by which this innovative resource can be utilized: “The first step is to recognize that people can contribute by innovation. They must be given some general guidance which should restrict them as little as possible.

 

…“The second step is to give the people who can do this kind of work some operating freedom. You have to tell them or give them guidance as to what you want done. Then you have to let them do it their way.

 

“The third step is to make sure the people who make contributions by innovation in your organization receive credit for what they do. They are much more likely to do a good job the next time if they receive some recognition for the last one.”

 

Packard says “We have in our company a number of such specialists. They provide a great deal of invaluable know-how in all areas of the company….We consider one of our most important management challenges that of expanding their influence and developing their opportunities to innovate.”

 

“A second and most important resource of our company has been our capability to develop and market new products. This capability also comes, of course, from individuals who are able to innovate. But there must also be guidance and direction if this effort is to be efficient. Innovation in the field of day-to-day know-how is well directed because there is a specific job to be done, or a problem to be solved, and the expert is readily directed to the problem There is almost no limit to the variety of new products which might be developed. With limited resources in money and people, the all important question is which project is most significant? What is the priority among all possible projects.?

 

Packard says “Studies have indicated that of all the new product projects initiated by industry, only a very small percentage is ultimately successful. Thus…there appears to be considerable room for improvement in the results which can be achieved with the present level of effort.”

 

Saying he believes that the growth and profitable of HP is a result of their new product program, he presents a picture of  HP’s program for developing new products. “Our sales in 1962 were $109,000,000, over half of which came from new products developed since 1957. On a corporate -wide basis for every dollar spent on new product development, five dollars in profits before taxes have been generated, and in addition, the dollar spent on research and development has been recovered.”

 

Packard says, “Without question the most important step in a new product program is the initial selection of the project to be undertaken. …it is necessary that the resources available be applied to the products most likely to be successful”, and “…toward this end certain guiding policies have been adopted, and a specific procedure has been followed.”

 

Packard describes HP’s new product guidelines as requiring the project selected “must be in the field of electronic instrumentation, and must, if possible, bring some new contribution to the field — not be just a copy of something someone else has already done. But in addition to these general objectives, we need to provide specific guidance for the project.

 

“First, the marketing and the technical people, working together, prepare a tentative specification  for the proposed product. Usually the proposed product is discussed with potential customers for their reaction. the marketing people then prepare a five-year forecast of sales volume. From this an estimate of five years’ profit is made. The research and development people prepare a time schedule for the development and estimate the cost — including production engineering and tooling. The ration between estimated five-year profit and estimated development cost then becomes a figure of merit for that project. With a figure of merit thus calculated for each proposed project, we have a fair method of comparing projects and selecting the most attractive for development. The detailed specifications of the proposed project and the figure of merit calculations provide a very specific objective for the project. These provide guidance toward what the product will be, what it will cost, what will be the volume, and what will be the resulting profit. These specific objectives are kept before the development team throughout the course of development.”

 

Packard emphasizes that “…every new product project is a total company responsibility. Marketing people, manufacturing people, financial people, as well as the development engineers, are continually involved from the beginning and work together. This procedure provides not only a useful method of evaluation and decision making at the beginning but also continual communication between interested people during the entire development process. It  provides strong motivation for the innovation.

 

“The people who are responsible for innovation — the development people — are in continual contact with the manufacturing and marketing people. The project engineer thus receives company-wide recognition of his  product is successful. He is encouraged to help introduce his new product in the field as well. He thereby receives much more satisfaction and motivation from accomplishment than if he were involved only in the laboratory technical development.

 

“These two illustrations of contributions by people working as individuals, or as part of a team, are only examples of the many ways in which human resources can be effectively utilized. The requirements for effective encouragement of individual resourcefulness are actually very simple, The first is to provide for a common objective. This objective may be a level of profit performance, it may be a target for cost reduction, or it may be a new product with a carefully defined and extensive set of objectives.”

 

“In simple form then, one very useful approach to the better utilization of human resources in management is: Provide a well-defined objective, give the person as much freedom as possible in working toward that objective, and finally, provide motivation by seeing that the contribution of the individual is recognized throughout the organization. This is an attitude that can be applied in many ways, but when applied will help assure the maximum utilization of the most important corporate resource of all — the individual capability of all of our people.”

 

9/19/63, Printed copy of above address

9/18/63, HP News release on above address.

10/21/63, Letter to Packard from Harold A. Wolff, McKinsey & Company, Inc., asking for a copy of this address.

Undated, Brochure describing the Council for International Progress in Management.

7/1/64, Letter from Philip Garey , Vice President of the CIPM, asking for a French translation of Packard’s address.

7/31/64, Copy of a letter from Margaret Paul , (Packard’s secretary) to Philip Garey send the French translation.

8/3/64,  Letter to Packard from Philip Garey, thanking him for the French translation.

 

 

Box 2, Folder 57 – General Speeches

 

November 4, 1963, A Businessman’s View of the New Technological Revolution, Proceedings of the University/Industry Liaison Conference

 

11/4/63, Typewritten copy of Packard’s address to the conference.

Packard says “We are here today to discuss ways in which we can help the economy of Colorado grow and help improve its social climate. This so-called new technological revolution is going to have an important influence in this matter. But I would like to take a few minutes to look at the broader aspects of economic growth, because I think it’s a mistake to expect new technology to be the only factor which will contribute to the things we are trying to achieve.”

 

He names some of the other factors which “are going to have a bearing on how well we will be able to take advantage of such technological advancement as is made…growth of population…changing pattern of spending…sources of capital…the nature of our economic system.”

 

Looking at each of these, starting with population growth, he recalls that when he was in college it was thought that the population of the United States would level off. “Things have turned out differently as they often do….this population growth will affect our economic growth in several specific ways….there will be more economic units, more people to buy things. There will be new families and there will be expanded markets for old and new products as a result.”

 

“The changing spending patterns of our people are going to continue to be an important factor in economic growth. …the majority of our people are now able to earn above a subsistence level….A larger number of people now have money to spend in discretionary ways….There will be money to spend on education,…They will have time to travel, and they will have money to travel.

 

So it is in the total environment of these various factors that we should consider our economic growth and the effect of this so-called new technological revolution.”

 

Packard points out that the technological revolution is actually not new. “It is really just a continuation of the old industrial revolution that began in the eighteenth century in England with the application of steam power to the work of men. It has the same characteristics which it has had since the beginning, but for some reason we don’t always seem to appreciate that these characteristics are present,. One of the important characteristics is that new technology destroys established jobs, established industries and established interests while it is creating new ones. In doing so, it creates economic stress and social stress often of considerable magnitude.”

 

“I am confident [the technological revolution] is going to create growth in such a way as to continue to generate social and economic problems. These problems must be solved, in my view, by private business, private institutions as well as by government action.”

 

Packard gives the example of the technological revolution’s effect on agriculture saying that “Prior to World Wear II a relatively large proportion of our total research and development effort was directed in fields related to agriculture, and a substantial amount of effort is continuing. From chemistry we have been able to develop new and better fertilizers, insecticides and chemicals for weed control. From our knowledge of biology we are able to develop new breeds of animals, new strains of plants, obtain better productivity from these. Engineering provided new labor saving devices which were applied throughout agriculture. And other technology added for us new methods of food preservation, transportation and processing.”

 

“But, as we all know, this technology has generated by virtue of its very success some serious social problems. Today we have less than half as many farmers and farm workers as we had in 1920. These farm workers have gone to the city to seek jobs in industry. This migration is continuing and it is going to continue for some time in the future.”

 

“This provides an example of the kinds of problems that are generated by new technology. When we look at technology as a simple means to advance our economy, we would do well to give serious attention to some of the problems which are likely to result”

 

“There are examples in industry as well, as you all know. In railroads the diesel engine replaced the steam engine in something like ten years. This and other developments reduced the number of jobs in the railroad industry from 1,300,000 in 1948 to less than 830,000 in 1958….Aluminum has reduced the demand for steel and plastics has reduced the demand for both….It is a changing pattern. It is important for business people to become aware of the fact that it is a continually changing pattern which results from technological progress and that there are social and economic by-products which must be dealt with.

 

Packard asks what, then, is new about the new technological revolution. “In the first place, it is getting bigger all the time. It is the nature of growth that each new increment tends to increase in proportion to the level of activity already in existence. Growth tends to be at a constant percentage rate….We are in fact spending a great deal more money on technology, on  research and development than we were a few years ago….We were spending something like four billion dollars in 1953 and the spending rate has gone up to 15 billion dollars per year in a space of ten years. This is an annual increase of about 15% per year.

 

“This can be compared with the growth of our gross national product which has come to be the most convenient, if not necessarily the best measure, of the health and growth of our economy. The growth of our gross national product has been at the rate of between three and four per cent per year. There is some evidence that an increased research and development effort will generate increased growth for a company or an industry. It may do so for an entire economy. We are not sure but many people believe that because we are in fact spending proportionally much more on research and development we will accelerate the growth of our economy as a direct result.

 

There are, however, some reasons why this is not likely to be so. In the first place, there are other factors which affect economic growth. economists have placed more emphasis on other influencing factors. For example, there are many economists who hold to the theory that if you can simply increase the purchasing power of the people, you thereby are able to increase the growth of your economy. This has been attempted, not always with the predicted results. Then there is another school of economists which holds to the theory that id you simply invest more dollars in your productive establishment, this will necessarily generate more growth for the future….There is some correlation but whether cause or result has not been established,. Then there are those who hold that the increase in the research and development effort is a prime factor. I think the truth probably is in between, but it is very easy to over-simplify this matter.

 

Now I want to say a word or two about why I think this present high level of research and development is not very well directed to bolster the growth of our economy and why the results may not be quite as good as we might hope. In the first place, we have today too much money being spent on sophisticated military problems and space applications. These things are very important in themselves and very glamorous. The story is given us that the “fall-out” from this work is going to generate a lot of future economic growth, but I think if this is examined in detail, the question is doubtful at least.”

 

“But despite these problems research and development is going to be a very major factor in our growth in these coming years….Certainly Nuclear energy is going to be a major source of generation of electrical power within a decade or two. …There is one very significant field that is bound to become more important in the future because of past and present technological effort. This is the field of computers and data processing. Computers have become a billion dollar industry in this country in only about a decade, and we seem to be only at the beginning of their potential. And related to this is communications, how do we get this information from where it is generated to where it can be utilized or processed in some way.

 

“We have seen the extension of direct dialing in our telephone system in the last few years and now it seems almost commonplace to pick up the hone and dial a couple of numbers and have someone answer from across the country as though he were next door.”

 

“Biochemistry is an area of very important research and development which holds as much promise as any field for important advances in the future….technology will be a tremendous stimulus to growth in the future as it has been in the past….The population growth, improving income levels, the availability of capital and the motivation and drives which come from the free enterprise system are also going to be equally important. In considering economic growth we should pay attention to all of these factors.

 

Packard continues looking at past trends and says that “I think that we come to the conclusion that our society…has changed from an economy which is dependent upon raw materials, power, and transportation and money to an economy that is much more dependent upon human intelligence and human wisdom. And it is going to require the highest level of human intelligence to develop and understand and apply this new technology. And it is going to take the highest level of wisdom to be sure that we apply it for the benefit of our society as a whole.

 

Packard poses the question “What then do all these trends mean to the State of Colorado?”  He goes on to describe some conclusions that can be drawn: “Some of your old and established industries will continue to have difficult going in the future. Minerals will continue to be under pressure, and even steel is going to be replaced in more places in the future by aluminum and plastics. There will be further adjustment in agriculture. But I think in balance the present problems of agriculture will eventually be solved, and agriculture will be a very strong segment of our economy, not only in the nation as a whole but I think here in Colorado too.

 

“The tourist trade should improve as technology improves transportation, and as people everywhere have more money to spend and more time to spend it….supersonic transport of Mach II speed for our airlines might by of more relative value to Colorado than to Illinois, New York or Massachusetts.

 

“But most important of all”, he says, “your state is now in a position to attract many important industries which it could not attract before. What will this require? In the first place, it will require some of the elements that industry has always required. It requires good transportation to other centers of industry and to other markets. Air transportation for people and other light-weight products is most important. Bit it is also important that your trucking and railroad industry be nurtured and encouraged because these will be important factors in your future economic development. It requires desirable living environment so that you can attract to your state the capable scientific people and their families. The people who can contribute to this growth.

 

“It requires, also, attention to the development of a climate which is favorable to the free enterprise system, because it is the initiative and drive from this system which can perhaps provide as much for your growth as any other single factor.

 

“Most important of all the opportunities for you to participate in these things in the future require that you develop the best educational system that you can possibly afford. Your future will be improved as you are able to encourage your universities to develop in substantial ways to the advancement of new knowledge. Help them generate the environment which will provide the cooperation between business and industry so that business and industry can take advantage of the things that your university people do. In turn your universities will be supported substantially by business and industry.

 

…”It’s important that your educational system be excellent because you must attract capable scholars from other parts of the country. It is just not possible for you to educate your own professors and faculty at a rate which is adequate for the job. You’re in competition with the most important and the greatest universities in the country, and the success in strengthening your universities will, in part, depend on how well you can meet this competition. It is important for you also to raise the level of all your educational institutions, your schools and colleges. Not only because this new technology and the environment in which it will operate will require more education and more training on all levels of employment, but also because it’s going to involve a [more] rapid change in the future than it has in the past. Life-long learning is going to be very important.

 

“This is a Herculean task. It will take money. But it will also take understanding and cooperation of business and industry and the community at large. You have here in your state several good universities. They should become great universities. To do this they will need more money. But they also must be kept independent and protected from the cross-fire of politics, of selfish local interests, including selfish local interests of business. Your universities are the pillars of excellence on which the quality of your entire educational system depends and they will by a very large degree determine how well Colorado fares in this competition with the rest of the country for the benefits of this new technological revolution.

 

“I think it can be safely said that your universities are worth more to your state than all of the gold you have ever mined. Treat them accordingly.

 

…”Ladies and gentlemen I think this conference is ample evidence that many of you here in the state are aware of this opportunity which is offered. I am pleased that it is recognized as a joint responsibility. A joint responsibility of people in business, of people in universities, and of people in the government. And I am very pleased too, that our company has been in a position to participate in this opportunity here in Colorado. We are very delighted from the specific progress of our program here, and I have every confidence that our trust in the future of Colorado is going to be well justified.

 

“And finally, I am greatly honored to have the privilege of talking with you here today. Thank you.”

 

5/1/63, Letter to Packard from William H. Miernyk, Conference Director, inviting him to speak at the conference.

6/26/63, Copy of letter to William H. Miernyk from Packard accepting his invitation to speak at the above conference.

7/1/63, Letter to Packard from William H. Miernyk, expressing  pleasure that Packard will be able to attend the conference and discussing a title for Packard’s speech.

7/9/63, Copy of letter from Packard to William H. Miernyk agreeing to title for speech.

7/10/63, Letter to Packard from Janet R. Ryan asking for a biographical sketch for the conference program.

11/6/63, Letter to Packard from Dan McMahon, Chairman of the Governor’s Advisory Committee to the State Division of Commerce and Development expressing gratification that both Packard and Dr. Terman will be billing to provide guidance to their committee.

11/27/63, Letter to Packard from William H. Miernyk enclosing manuscript to Packard’s address for editing..

1/9/64, Copy of letter from Packard to William H. Miernyk returning the edited manuscript.

1/14/64, Letter to Packard from William H. Miernyk, acknowledging receipt of the manuscript.

 

11/4&5/63, Bound paperback book titled Colorado and the New Technological Revolution, Proceedings of The University-Industry Liaison Conference, 1963. This booklet contains a copy of Packard’s speech which is briefed above.

 

11/4/63, Two typewritten pages of speech introducing Packard for the above speech. Introduction speaker is unnamed.

 

11/4/63, Typewritten list of conference participants.

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 58 – General Speeches

 

November 8,1963 – Taxation Panel, California Industrial Development Conference, San Francisco

 

11/8/63, Handwritten outline notes by Packard for his address at this conference, titled Taxation and the Future of California.

 

1. We are here because we are interested in discussing California’s economy and what might be done to improve it in the future.

 

2. State taxes are not ordinarily a dominant factor in considering industrial location.

 

A. Markets, labor costs, transportation, raw materials – and for technologically based industries – excellence of universities and education in general may be dominant factors. This latter factor has been dominant factor in the Bay Area.

 

B. Taxes can be significant factor in some cases.

1. Where an industry must be competitive and other factors are equal.(Not             often much chance.)

2. Taxes and State Fiscal policy are indicators of political climate and political climate is always a dominant factor influencing industrial location.

C. Any consideration of taxes in respect to industrial location must be more concerned with trends than with current levels.

1. A decision to locate in a particular area influences the business for a long time in the future.

Let’s look at trends – last 10 years.

Population – up 46%

Personal Income – up 96%

Combined State and Local Taxes up – 160%

Property Taxes – up 189%

Spending – up 10%

                                                                                      General Fund Revenue – up 7.6%

 

If we look at trends we need a fix on where we are – it wouldn’t be so bad if we were catching up.

 

School costs per pupil among highest in nation.

Cost of Living among the highest.

Skilled labor among highest

We don’t need to catch up with anyone.

 

Must look at trends in State.

Economy – To see if we can afford this.

 

1. Large part of growth in California economy over past 10 years based on Federal Government support. Largely because of the growth in early 1950s   – 4% per year growth in employment.

“Changing emphasis military and space – slower operating rate, fewer new jobs – more unemployment. Defense and space based industry has grown rapidly in past decade – is now slowing down. It is not in the slightest influenced by State tax – or local political environment. Its costs are passed on the Federal government. This situation is bound to change:

“We have the problem here in California – How do we change the environment from on attractive to pie in the sky philosophy to one attractive to those industries who must compete in rough and tumble competition with the world.

 

“Tend to appoint non employer representatives on Unemployment Compensation – State Disability  and Workmen’s Compensation Boards. These programs are supported by do-gooders in state government [and] are scaring away industry.

 

“We are generating unemployment in the State of California by our tax policy and by the political philosophy behind it. The trends indicate we are on a collision course which will be very serious. It is manifestly absorb that a state with the potential of California could have such a poorly administered tax and fiscal policy as we have had in the past years.”

11/8/63, Three pages of Packard handwritten notes with reference data for speech.

11/8/63, Copy of typewritten conference program.

8/2/63, Letter to Packard from Stanley E. McCaffrey, President, The San Francisco Bay Area Council, Inc. inviting Packard to participate in this conference.

8/23/63, Letter from Stanley E. McCaffrey to Packard asking that he attend a meeting on 8/27 to discuss outline of conference. Handwritten note on letter says “Didn’t attend”

9/26/63, Letter to Packard from Neil Jacoby, Dean Graduate School of Business Administration, University of California, Los Angeles, and Chairman of the Taxation Panel for the conference giving Packard some logistical data for the conference discussion.

9/30/63, Copy of letter from Packard to Dean Neil H. Jacoby in reply to his letter of  9/26 saying the plan looked OK.

10/1/63, Letter to Packard from Clark Galloway, California State Chamber of Commerce sending Packard several reports and tabulations on taxes all in response to Packard’s request relayed by his secretary.

10/7/63, Letter to Packard from Stanley E. McCaffrey, President, The San Francisco Bay Area Council sending announcements of conference for Packard to distribute to Hprs.

10/13/63, Letter from Carl F. Stover of SRI sending an outline of a talk by a fellow speaker at the forthcoming conference, Dr. Weldon B. Gibson, asking for any comments Packard may have on the draft.

In addition, this folder contains many booklets and tabulations on taxes gathered by Packard as reference material for his address.

 

 

Box 2, Folder 59 – General Speeches

 

November 12, 1963, Luncheon Talk, Peninsula Manufacturing Association, San Mateo

11/12/63, Handwritten notes by Packard for this speech [No typed text]

 

General subjects of interest:

National scene

State

Local

 

National – General business situation

Business good – Will be good through 1964 election

Tax cut bill

 

a. Determine whether business encouraged through private enterprise or through  more deficit spending.

 

b. Tax bill very important.

 

1. Could give boost to business which could carry us to a new plateau –                              1965 and beyond.

 

2. Features of bill.

[None written]

 

3. Present Status

Write to your Senators and Representatives to urge passage.

State Scene

Population growth – 3.9%/year

Employment growth – 2.5%/year, last three years.

Unemployment at 6%

 

Defense – Space employment high

Likely to drop off

1. National reduction

2. Other states

 

Economic environment for business not good in California.

Taxes higher – labor costs higher.

Trends – 10 years

Population up 46%

Personal income up 96%

Combined state and local taxes up 160%

Property taxes up 189%

 

State spending +10% per year

General fund income 7.6% per year

 

Highest indebtedness generated by taxes

2.3 Billion

1.5 Billion for New York

 

Taxes spent

Education –  40%

Highways – 12%

Welfare – 8.5%

 

This year tax problem – 100 million gap in General Fund. Governor             proposed to close gap with advance of State Tax Payments. Nothing to reduce spending to keep within means. Clearly action is needed – support.

 

California economic climate is less attractive to business than most other                            states. No business would [invest?] money in California except for:

1. Markets

2. Raw materials

3. Transportation

4. Advantage of university associations

 

Unless something constructive is done about state government spending

1. Unemployment will increase

 

Civil Rights Problem

1. It has been a problem for a long time and getting worse so eventually                                                      something had to happen

2. There is no quick solution – it will take years – better education is best                                                    hope.

 

3. It is important enough that everyone should take it seriously and                                                                        everyone who can should do something.

 

4. What can business and industry do?

 

A. Avoid discrimination in jobs stretch the point where measurable.

 

B. Give attention to training and upgrading.

 

C. Encourage some of your people to participate in community programs.

 

D. The most serious problem is education – integration per se will not necessarily result in better education for young people. They must be encouraged to appreciate education as the way for them to get ahead.

 

A good project for Peninsula Manufacturers Association would be to sponsor programs to help young people take advantage of education opportunities and to appreciate what it can mean to them.

 

A. Part time jobs with guidance

 

B. Scholarships and awards for achievement.

 

C. Plant tours and programs for student groups.

 

D. Sponsorship of young people activities.

We have a problem in Civil Rights here on the Peninsula – it can                                          easily be solved if all groups put their shoulder to the wheel. Solutions by local groups with right leadership is much preferable to:

 

1. Radical action groups

2. State intervention

3. Federal laws

Community Environment

1. Peninsula is a residential community

 

11/12/63, Three handwritten pages by Packard with supporting data for the above talk.

2/14/63, Letter to Packard from Jon B. Riffel, president of the Peninsula Manufacturers Association, inviting Packard to speak to their group.

3/19/63, Copy of a letter from Packard to John B. Riffel saying he would be pleased to address the group later in the year.

3/20/63, Letter to Packard from Jon Riffel expressing the hope Packard will be able to address their          group in the year.

7/11/63, Letter to Packard from Jon Riffel confirming the Packard will address the group November 12th. Attached are publications about the PMA.

8/8/63, Letter to Packard from Dick Kluzek of PMA giving details of the luncheon meeting Nov. 12.

8/9/63, Letter to Packard from Roy Brandenburger, VP, Monsanto Chemical Company, enclosing an article from Chemical Week on taxation. [article not in folder]

9/17/63. Letter to Packard from Jon Riffel enclosing a copy of the PMA publication, Manu-         Facts.

11/8/63, Letter to Packard from Jon Riffel giving details on luncheon meeting.

11/13/63, Letter to Packard from Harry Goodfriend, VP and Manager, Crocker-Anglo       National Bank, enclosing an ad from the Wall Street Journal describing the impact of high taxes on small business in California.

11/15/63, Letter to Packard from Joe Fessio, President Palo Alto Transfer and Storage       Company, saying he enjoyed seeing Packard again at the PMA luncheon.

12/9/63, Letter to Packard from Jon Riffel thanking him for speaking to the PMA group.

1/22/64, Letter to Packard from Karl Bizjak requesting a copy of Packard’s talk to the PMA. Handwritten note by Packard’s secretary says she called Mr. Bizjak to say there was no text.

The folder also contains some more PMA publications.

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 60 – General Speeches

 

November 22,1963, Remarks on the occasion of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy

 

This speech has been moved to Box 1, folder 22B

Box 1, Folder 21 – HP Management

 

January 11, 1963, Management Conference, Monterey

No longer referred to conference by number. This is the only document in the folder. There were several comments from attendees along the line that there should be a published agenda ahead of time, and there should be more small discussion groups at conference. [It is interesting that there is no mention of Packard.]

 

 

Box 1, Folder 22 – HP Management
 
January 21-26, 1963, Sales Seminar, Field sales people, Palo Alto

 

1/24/63 Handwritten notes in Dave Packard’s handwriting, apparently for comments he    intended to make at the seminar. Some of the items he noted were:

1962 operations, shipments, orders

Balance between orders and shipments

Finished goods and work in progress

Better deliveries, more instruments in stock

Improved order processing

Need to improve R&D

General notes about GNP, space flight, taxes

1/21/63 Agenda for seminar

 

 

Box 1, Folder 22A – General Speeches

 

September 16, 1963,  Speech at Yokogawa Ceremony, Tokyo, Japan

 

9/16/63, Copy of typewritten text of Packard’s remarks announcing “the official beginning of our joint venture, Yokogawa-Hewlett-Packard Ltd.”

 

After giving the names of the directors of the new company, Packard says “I speak for all of the directors and officers of the Hewlett-Packard Company when I tell you we believe it is a great honor and a great privilege to be associated with Mr. Yokogawa, Mr. Yamasaki, and all of their fine and capable people in the Yokogawa Electric Works.” He says they “have known…of the magnificent contribution the Yokogawa Electric Works has made…to the scientific and industrial progress of Japan.

 

And Packard expresses the hope that “this new partnership between Yokogawa and Hewlett-Packard will be able to carry forward and expand this fine reputation which you have established.

 

“It is our aim that this new company will combine the most advanced technology of the United States with the most advanced technology of Japan, and thereby be able to develop and manufacture the finest instruments that are made anywhere in the world.”

 

“We in the United States are proud of the strong ties of friendship which have developed with the people of Japan over the past decade. It is my special hope that this new partnership which we are celebrating today will serve to strengthen those ties of friendship between our countries. Japan and the United States are joined in the common objective to support the freedom of  mankind against the tyranny of communism. This partnership between our nations will grow and become stronger as we are able to form sound and lasting bonds between the business concern of our respective countries.

 

“It is my firm hope that our new company will make an important contribution to the future of Japan by developing a useful measure of economic strength, and also a useful measure of friendship and understanding between us.

 

“Again, my appreciation and best wishes to each of you for being here with us this afternoon.”

 

 

Box 1, Folder 22B – General Speeches

 

November 22,1963, Remarks on the occasion of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy

 

11/22/63, Copy of typewritten text of Packard’s remarks

 

“There is little we an do to alleviate the nation-wide sorrow for the assassination of President Kennedy but to offer our prayers for him and his family – each in our individual way. In this hour of tragedy for our country we should remember that the affairs of the world will and must go on. Since much of the work we do contributes directly to the strength and stature of our country we will carry on with our work today, but we urge any employee who wishes to attend a memorial service to take time off during the day to do so.”

Box 1, Folder 35D – HP Management

7/16/63, Sales Seminar Luncheon

Packard’s handwritten notes for this talk give a mid year report of orders.

He says their job is not only to sell, but to help control expenses

Of the overall economy he say business is good – but not good enough.

He says new products will be the key to company success

He includes many statistics on company operations.