1969 – Hewlett Speeches

Box 2, Folder 21 – General Speeches

January 10, 1969 – Thirteenth Annual Management Meeting, Cupertino, CA

This meeting was also held in three other sites:

January 22, 1969 – Eastern Sales Region, Paramus N.J.

January 24, 1969 – Greeley CO

January 31, 1969 – European HQ. Geneva, Switzerland

1/10/69, Handwritten notes of comments Hewlett made at all meetings

I Introduction – Hewlett discusses Packard status, namely that he is leaving to assume the duties of Deputy Secretary of Defense in Washing D. C.

II HP Without Dave

“[Dave and I] have worked together for 30 years. In principle – think the same, act the same, have been able to sharpen our ideas against each other.

“In all 30 years Dave and I had only one disagreement – it was sharp, it was very intense, it was also very brief. We discovered [it was due to] a misunderstanding of what the other person meant. We were in fact in complete agreement but did demonstrate that each was fully prepared to fight for our principles.

III HP With Dave

“Despite general agreements we are not the same people

“I will tend to operate slightly differently than Dave, in detail, in the way I work with the people around me.

“A corporation is never one man, or it never should be. Its strength is in the collective ability and dedication of its people. The day Dave and I hired Harvey Zieber we lost ability to make all decisions and we have been losing it ever since. In the long run the boat cares little whether the pilot is left or right handed as long as the course is steady.

“There is no disagreement at all between Dave and myself as to where the boat is going or how it will get there.

“The organization of Group structure which we will talk about was fortunate in timing and completely independent of Dave’s appointment, but could not have come at a better time. Its implementation has delegated responsibility out of the executive office into lower operations echelons of management. [Note to himself to introduce John Young]

“The fact is that the hardest of all jobs will be to fill Dave’s shoes – true, we were both running at half throttle in a sense with our outside activities. These pay off in long run but this was a luxury that I think Dave and I knew in our hearts could not last forever. In a company that needs all the help it an get this was a disproportionate distribution of assets to have two people in position of top management where most companies are in many cases happy to have one. {and I consider myself capable}

“To help fill this vacuum left by Dave, I have asked both Ralph Lee and Noel Eldred to serve as Executive VPs. Noel’s appointment in addition to his own very considerable ability reflects the increasingly outward looking character of our company with its more diverse and expanding areas of activities.

“Ralph’s appointment reflects the requirement for a firm grip on what is going on within the company – Groups and Divisions are fine, but if they don’t work and pull together then you have all disadvantages of largeness with none of the advantages.

“Finally, with this grouping of strength here in the Palo Alto area it is increasingly important to assure that the voices in the hinterland are heard and listened to. I have asked Ed Porter to come back and take on the role of Operations V.P. with responsibility to speak for and represent the non-P.A. divisions. This is a considerably more active and responsible position than the somewhat amorphous position of the job with the same title of 3 or 4 years ago.

“Finally, I need all of your help and dedication to really keep this operation a ‘going Jesse.’ Without your help all this execution would do no good.”

1/10/69, Copies of many charts, graphs and tables for the management meeting. Included is a separate folder titled Long Range Plans. These are attached to a memo from Austin Marx to H & P and the Executive V.P.s. Marx says these are the initial look at the plans submitted by the Manufacturing Divisions.

Box 2, Folder 22 – General Speeches

February 6, 1969 – Peninsula Manufacturers Association Dinner, “Industry Man of the Year” Award to Packard, Palo Alto, CA

2/6/69 Four typewritten sheets titled “Notes for WRH talk to PMA”

On behalf of Packard, Hewlett apologies for his not being present to accept this award. He says Packard planned to be here, but had to leave a couple of days ago to go find his boss, Mel Laird. Hewlett adds that, as he understands it, Packard never did find Laird, and, in fact, is still trying to find his way back to his office in the Pentagon.

Hewlett says he knows the award being presented to Packard is based to a great extent on his efforts in the field of human relations. This has been an area of great concern to Packard, he says, and one to which he committed his energies and talents.

Hewlett says he knows Dave would say that, although we have made progress in trying to solve the human relations problems in this area we have just begun to scratch the surface. He quotes Packard as saying that progress comes not from force, but from “self enlightened action of all concerned.”

Hewlett says “That is the challenge he would leave with us tonight if he were here.”

2/6/69, Earlier draft of Hewlett’s talk, handwritten in pencil on notebook paper.

1/8/69, New release from Peninsula Manufacturers Association announcing the award to Packard

2/6/69, Memo from Dave Kirby to Hewlett giving some background and pointers in preparation for the award event

2/7/69, Letter to Hewlett from John J. Murray, Jr. thanking him for his “reminiscences and high tribute” to Packard

2/13/69, Letter to Hewlett from William E. Roberts, Jr. President of Ampex thanking him for standing in for Packard, adding that he, himself, was not able to attend as he was in the hospital

2/28/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to William E. Roberts, President of Ampex, thanking Hewlett for standing in for Packard at the award ceremony

Box 2, Folder 23 – General Speeches

February 25, 1969 – United Fund dinner, Palo Alto, CA

2/25/69, Typed notes for talk

Hewlett talks about his past association with the Community Chest – back in 1957. Says he learned “an awful lot” about the agencies. Says he has continued to maintain an interest “in this type of operation” through the San Francisco foundation and HP.

Hewlett talks about change and the need for organizations to change with “the tenor of the times… either by established agencies changing their pattern or by dropping some agencies who are moribund – replacing them with new agencies that more accurately reflect the needs of the community.

Hewlett says HP is “spending more on minority problems than on our contribution to the United Fund.”

He says that if HP were forced to cut back on their contribution program they would have to evaluate which area represented the more optimum use of their funds.

He adds that he thinks some of United Fund’s problems in getting support from local branches of national companies “rests exactly on this point.”

Hewlett talks about ways the Fund might seek broader support:

Got to get the top people involved – much variation between firms. Need to get to know the top policy makers, learn why low level of support – maybe something they don’t like about United Fund. He says he has no inside knowledge on this, but if support is lacking there must be a reason.

Hewlett says he sees the tide turning. Business leaders are recognizing the need to support local programs. He urges them to “look at themselves as others see you – are you staying contemporary…fit the modern scene?”

“I commend you on your efforts…you can do better…the need is there.”

Box 2, Folder 24 – General Speeches

February 25, 1969 – HP Shareholders Meeting, HP Palo Alto plant

2/25/69, Text of talk he intends to give at the meeting, handwritten by Hewlett.

Hewlett introduces himself and briefly runs down the agenda for the meeting. He says he will report on the business performance of the company, they will take care of some business items – electing Board members, approving a new stock option plan -–and then talks by two Group Managers. Tours of the 1501 Page Mill site will be available afterwards.

After reviewing operations data Hewlett talks about Packard’s departure to assume the duties of Deputy Secretary of Defense in the Nixon Administration. He notes that Packard placed all of his stock in trust while he is in Washington, and these shares will be voted at this meeting by a representatives of the Bank of America.

Hewlett talks about Packard’s departure in some detail, saying:

“I don’t think that there is a person here who will not miss him greatly. It is fortunate indeed that Dave and I had a very special relation here at the Company, for although Dave was the chief Executive Officer both in name and in fact, we shared the management responsibilities of the Company to a degree that is not common in American businesses. We had worked together for so long that, given the same set of facts, there was a very high probability that we would reach the same conclusion, albeit by different reasoning.

“Further, we made it a point to keep each other informed of our activities and of our thinking. Thus, although the loss of Dave cannot be minimized it will have less effect than if our relationship had been otherwise.

“It was also fortunate that sometime last summer we had planned a reorganization of the management structure which would provide for further delegation of responsibility from the top office to the operating divisions. The first steps of this plan had already been implemented at the time that Dave was first approached to accept a position in the government.

Hewlett goes on to name the new Group Managers: John Young, head of the Palo Alto Electronics Group, Carl Cottrell, head of the Data Products Group. Hewlett also introduces two new Executive Vice-Presidents, Ralph Lee and Noel Eldred.

Hewlett describes some of HP’s activities in “the field of the minority problems” saying, “We believe strongly that this is not a problem that an be solved simply by turning it over to the government. There is much that individuals can do, there is much the community an do , and there is much that industry an do.”

Hewlett closes with reference to their policy on dividends: “…in view of present and anticipated expansion, and the resultant need for plant and working capital, I do not anticipate any change in our present dividend rate.”

2/25/69, Printed Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders

2/25/69, Two additional pages of notes written by Hewlett with various operational figures

2/25/69, Typewritten suggested agenda for the shareholders meeting

2/25/69, List of Directors, Officers and Managers attending the meeting

2/25/69, Typewritten list management’s slate of nominees for Director, and biographical data for each

2/25/69, Typewritten description of 1969 Incentive Stock Option Plan

2/25/69, Several pages of tables and miscellaneous reference data

Box 2, Folder 25 – General Speeches

February 27, 1969 – How to Make R&D Pay, White, Weld Technology Conference, Pebble Beach CA

2/27/69, Copy of typewritten text of Hewlett’s speech based on an edited transcription

Hewlett says the first step toward making R&D pay is to “employ smart, well-trained, creative people.” He adds some additional factors:

“An atmosphere that is conducive to constructive and creative thinking

An evaluation system that can select the best and most appropriate ideas for further development

A control system that ensures that a selected program will progress according to a schedule and still remain viable at any point

An evaluation or feedback system that looks back and asks, ‘Did we do what we set out to do, and if not, what sent wrong.’

Emphasizing the importance of good people, Hewlett states again that it is not the total dollars you spend on R&D, it the quality of the people doing the R&D. And he gives a corollary to the effect that getting good people is not just a question of pay – although that is obviously a factor. He gives a number of factors that he feels rate equally high:

“People want an interesting job and appreciate the opportunity to participate in technical management early in their career.

People want an organization that is receptive to new ideas, not one that has a closed mind.

They want an organization that believes ideas come from the bottom up, not the top down

Most would like to have the opportunity to further their education

They hope they can have a management that is understanding of the development process and reactive to it.”

Talking about the R&D system at HP, Hewlett says one of the characteristics of their program is that they have a large number of small projects. Working in an atmosphere where there are a number of smaller projects gives the younger engineer the opportunity to have his inputs more quickly recognized, and more likely be given some administrative responsibility for the project.

Hewlett says that the process of selecting which project should be developed is one of the most critical steps in running an engineering program. He says HP has used what they call “an index of needs,” a sense of what people would like to have. It involves keeping your eyes open for new technologies that may be applied to solve particular needs. To use this method it is necessary to have a very good knowledge of the field, he acknowledges.

Hewlett addresses the question of payout, saying, “What kinds of measurements can be used to determine possible payout?” He says there are two elements involved in determining payout: – the probable cost of the development program, and second, assessing the market’s reaction to a new product.

Hewlett says they have standardized a procedure for determining these numbers, and they call the result a “return factor.” The typical return factor says that for every dollar spent on engineering you will receive four to five dollars in before-tax profit. He emphasizes that other factors may need to be considered to fit individual situations – time being one of them.

Hewlett moves on to talk about the organization of the company and the R&D program. He explains that HP has some fourteen “reasonably autonomous” divisions and each has its own research and development organization. In addition they have a central corporate laboratory, HP Labs, with what he calls a “wide open charter to investigate interesting new concepts and ideas. About 15% of total Company R&D funds are spent by this group.

Another important step after having decided on a development project is to set up a schedule and establish good standards for performance and timing. He notes that it is in the nature of engineers that they can always see some improvements that could be made if only they had another six months to work on it. He says he and Packard used to spend a great deal of time going around putting a great deal of emphasis on keeping to the development schedules.

Another important step is the post development evaluation to review how well cost and market predictions were met, even to knowing who was optimistic and who was pessimistic about the project, so you an calibrate their comments next time around.

In summary Hewlett gives an answer to the question “How do you make R&D pay?” He says “I think you get good people and then you let them grow. Put them in the sunlight where they can see the real world and react to it. Most of all you give them tender loving care and understanding and guidance, because they are really the ones who are going to determine the future of your company.”

3/14/69, Letter to Hewlett from George B. Shott sending a typewritten copy of the transcription of this speech and asking that he edit and return it. The copy to be edited is attached – notations have been made on it.

2/27/69, Outline of speech handwritten by Hewlett

2/27/69, Copy of typed agenda for the Conference, with attached list of guests

10/25/68, Copy of a letter to Hewlett from George B. Shott of White, Weld & Co., inviting Hewlett to speak on the subject to R&D at a technology seminar they are organizing

10/31/68, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to George B. Shott saying he cannot make the suggested dates for the meeting

12/23/68, Letter from George B. Shott to Hewlett thanking him for agreeing to speak at their conference

3/4/69, Letter to Hewlett from George B. Shott thanking him for participating in their Conference

3/4/69, Letter to Hewlett from T. C. Pryor of White, Weld & Co., thanking for speaking at their Conference

Box 2, Folder 26 – General Speeches

March 26, 1969 – Analyst Breakfast, New York, NY

3/26/69, Outline of talk, handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett discusses Packard’s departure to Washington D. C. and the minimal effect this will have on the organization. [See speech January 10, 1969 also]

He talks about the changing nature of the instrument business – price increases, the role of integrated circuits, programmable systems, and the role of computers. “When it comes to meeting the needs of our customers we intend to make it unattractive for companies strictly in the computer business to come between us.”

Hewlett discusses other areas: Colorado springs, all of Palo Alto, New Jersey, Analytical, Medical, International.

3/26/69, Copy of a general letter to Security analysts inviting a group of them to join HP management people at a breakfast to be held on March 26^th.

3/26/69, Copy of typewritten list of analysts invited to the breakfast

3/18/69, three identical letters written to Walter Frank, Sr., Joseph Mindall, and Mortimer Marcus inviting them to the breakfast meeting

Box 2, Folder 27 – General Speeches

March 28, 1969 – Atlanta Sales Meeting

3/28/69, Outline of topics to cover, handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett discusses operations financial data and production figures.

Using the metaphor of a church sermon he speaks of their latest missionary program, some of the fallen, and passing the plate. He ends with “Now go forth and sell and sin no more.”

HP’s New Look

HP’s roots have been in a narrow field – With newer fields, computer, medical, analytical, must organize to go from a multimillion dollar company to a billion dollar company. Group structure designed to help.

Need to couple with customer.

Product line has grown from 480 products in 1962 to 2160 in 1969. Average order was $400 in 1959 – $2200 now.

To customer we are only HP.

He admits we may seem confused and unorganized and describes two approaches to change:

A master plan from on high; or a plan that grows from the bottom up. The latter may seem fumbling, but it is the best way. Grounded in the belief that the people most directly concerned must have a direct and strong influence in development of a plan. That is your role.

“This is the fundamental difference between a completely planned economy and a reactive one. This does not mean there is no planning – it is necessary to concentrate effort, but real management must come from bottom up – from you. That is your benediction.”

Box 2, Folder 28 – General Speeches

May 16, 1969 – HP Board Meeting, Geneva, Switzerland

5/16/69, Text of talk, handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett welcomes the Board members to the dedication of HP’s new Headquarters in Europe. He reviews history a bit – how before the Treaty of Rome which created the European Common Market, HP marketed its products in Europe through independent sales representatives. The Treaty made it evident that Western Europe would be a major market for HP products. Two steps were necessary:

Strengthen marketing program by establishing HP’s own marketing offices in the principle countries of Europe…

Secondly, the need to establish an HP headquarters somewhere in Europe to coordinate and control the expanded European organization. Geneva was decided on because of its proximity to several major markets, its excellent transportation, ease of doing business across borders – and we were made to feel we would be welcome, that, in time, we could become accepted as a member of the community.

Hewlett says that the decision to place HP’s European Headquarter in Geneva was “one of the happiest that it has been my privilege to make.”

He talks about the growth of business in Europe – “We will do more business in Europe alone than we did for the whole world just ten years ago.” He pays special tribute to HP’s Swiss Directors: Mr. Max Gamper, Mr. Maurice Merkt, and previously, Mr. Max Paul Fry.

In closing Hewlett says: “In the decision making process that every executive must master it is important that you review past decisions , not so that you may find fault, but so that you may learn from them. If I had the ability to remake the decision that brought us to Switzerland – to Geneva – ten years ago, I would make the same decision with even more enthusiasm than I did on that day in November of 1958 when we first incorporated Hewlett-Packard SA.”

5/16/69, Earlier draft of talk, handwritten by Hewlett

5/16/69, Copy of list of dinner guests: U.S. Directors, European Directors, and HP Employees – and spouses

3/7/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Max Gamper, thanking him for the “wonderful weekend,” he and Mrs. Hewlett had skiing.

5/16/69, Note with Dick Alberding’s address in Vaux, Suisse

5/16/69, Copy of list of managers and secretaries in Geneva

Box 2, Folder 29 – General Speeches

May 23, 1969 – London Dinner

It is not clear who the guests are at this dinner – probably HP people from Bedford and/or Slough (?)

5/23/69, Outline of talk handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett states the occasion as the 10^th Anniversary of HP in Europe. He says Europe and the U.K. contribute 20% of total HP sales. This is a chance to visit the plant here.

Hewlett talks about HP citizenship objectives

Support for R&D

Have not withdrawn funds – grow through reinvestment

U. S. companies should be prepared, on occasion, to report on what they have added or subtracted to economy of country.

Expresses appreciation for the level of cooperation received both from British industry as well as British Government

5/23/69, Note, in Hewlett’s handwriting, on stationary of Royal Garden Hotel, London, saying “a corporation cannot be separated from the society in which it lives. It has a responsibility to it and draws its strengths from it. It is incumbent, therefore, that HP as a corporation and its employees as citizens work toward the improvement of the basic elements of the social structure that surrounds it.”

Box 2, Folder 30 – General Speeches

June 16-17/1969 – Managers Meeting, Palo Alto, CA

Hewlett is on the agenda for this meeting, but no notes or text of his comments are in the folder.

6/16/69, Copy of meeting agenda

1/10/69, Copy of a memo to Hewlett, Lee, and Eldred from Austin Marx with some thoughts on the management meeting in June

2/11/69, Memo from Hewlett to Marx suggesting they get together later to plan for the management meeting

5/20/69, Copy of a memo from Austin Marx to major managers attaching a draft of the agenda for the management meeting

5/29/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Robert M. Brown inviting him to the meeting

6/26/69, Copy of a memo from Byrd Beh, Dave Kirby’s Secretary, sending managers a copy of Kirby’s speech at the meeting titled “Growth, Revolution and the Corporate Image”

Box 2, Folder 31 – General Speeches

October 18, 1969 – Santa Clara Plant Dedication

10/18/69, Outline of speech handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett gives special recognition to the City and the County, recognizes Alan Bagley, the General Manager of the plant, and says this site will be a major site for HP.

He says that because HP is new to this area he will give a few words about the character of the company. He talks about their belief that they must make a profit, although that is not the sole criteria. HP management believes they have a greater responsibility – to its people, to their customers, and to the community. He adds that “…we believe it and practice it.”

He closes with the thought that HP tried to be a good citizen of Santa Clara County, and he hopes they can become as good a citizen of Santa Clara City.

Box 2, Folder 32 – General Speeches

November 7, 1969 – California Manufacturers Association Award, San Francisco, CA

11/7/69, Typewritten draft of comments by Hewlett, with heading that it is the “Latter half” of his speech

On being presented with this award, Hewlett says that awards are measured by the character of the organization presenting it, and by the qualifications of the previous recipients. On both counts he concludes this award is significant.

He makes another point – that awards should be considered an award to the company as much as to the individual. And he closes with “I am delighted to accept this award and plaque both individually and in the name of my company.

6/20/69, Letter to Hewlett from Horace M Brown, VP at Continental Can Company, representing the California Manufacturers Association. Mr. Brown confirms their previous telephone conversation to the effect that The Association has chosen Hewlett as the person to be honored as “California Manufacturer of the Year for 1969.”

6/24/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Horace Brown saying he is “complimented indeed” by the award.

7/18/69, Copy of a telegram to Hewlett from Charles W. Huse, President of the California Manufacturers Association, giving official confirmation of his selection as “California Manufacturer of the Year.”

7/21/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Charles W. Huse saying he is honored and delighted

8/28/69, Letter to Hewlett from George G. Montgomery, Kern County Land Company, congratulating him on his honor

9/3/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to George Montgomery thanking him for his note

8/28/69, Letter to Hewlett from H. V. Burton, Bank of America, congratulating him on his selection

9/3/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to H. V. Burton thanking him for his note

8/28/69, Copy of a telegram to Hewlett from “Norman and Bob,” congratulating him on the award

8/29/69, Letter to Hewlett from Nicholas J. Hoff, Chairman of Stanford University’s Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, congratulating Hewlett on the award

9/3/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Professor Nicholas Hoff thanking him for his “nice note”

8/29/69, Letter to Hewlett from Grover D. Turnbow saying he is “impressed with the contributions you have made under our private enterprise system”

9/3/69, copy of a letter from Hewlett to Grover Turnbow thanking him for his note and ending with “I hope that I will have a chance to see you down at our bull sale on Saturday”

8/30/69, Note to Hewlett from William J. Miller congratulating him on the award

9/4/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to William J. Miller thanking him for his note

9/2/69, Letter to Hewlett from Dean A. Watkins. Ch. Of the Board of Watkins Johnson Company, congratulating him on the award

9/5/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Dean Watkins, thanking him for his note

9/2/69, Handwritten note to Hewlett from Albert C. Beeson congratulating him on the award

9/8/69, Letter from Hewlett to Albert Beeson thanking him for his note

9/2/69, Letter to Hewlett from James K. Blinn, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith Inc. congratulating him on the award

9/11/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to James K. Blinn thanking him for his letter

9/19/69, Letter to Mr. and Mrs. Hewlett inviting them to a reception and dinner the evening before the award ceremony

10/1/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Charles Huse saying he and Mrs. Hewlett accept with pleasure

9/30/69, Letter to Hewlett from Ernst Weber, Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn congratulating him on the award

10/6/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Ernst Weber thanking him for his note

9/17/69, Letter to Hewlett from R. G. Bowen, Electronic Manufacturers Representatives, congratulating him on the award

10/7/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Ron Bowen thanking him for his note

9/3/69, Letter to Hewlett from Dr. Robert J. Wert, Mills College, congratulating him on the award

10/13/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Bob Wert thanking him for his note

10/13/69, Letter to Hewlett from Walter J. Maytham congratulating him on the award

10/27/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Walter J. Maytham thanking him for his note

10/22/69, Letter to Hewlett from Gage Lund sending his congratulations on the award

10/29/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Gage Lund thanking him for his note

10/23/69, Letter to Hewlett from Robert K. Cutter M. D. of Cutter Laboratories, congratulating him on the award

10/29/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Dr. Cutter thanking him for his note

10/15/69, Letter to Hewlett from J. M. Wait, Chairman FMC Corp., congratulating him on the award

11/2/69, Typewritten note to Hewlett’s Secretary, Madie Schneider, from HP PR person Merle Mass, giving her a list of people who will attend the dinner

11/25/69, Letter to Hewlett from Representative Don Mulford, California Legislature, enclosing a draft of a resolution being prepared in Sacramento, offering the congratulations of the State Assembly members

12/6/69, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Representative Donald Mulford thanking him for introducing the resolution

11/6/69, Newspaper clipping from the San Jose Mercury covering the award

Box 2, Folder 33 – General Speeches

November 25, 1969 – Management Seminar Luncheon, Cupertino

11/25/69, List of a few topics for comment, handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett lists:

Opportunity for change

Change within HP

Importance of a strong anchor in instruments

Role of computer in instrumentation

Problems of a frontal attack on a well established, well managed company

Role of corporate philosophy on assigning responsibility downwards

11/20/69, Copy of a memo from Mollie McRae to seminar attendees giving the time and place for luncheon

Box 2, Folder 34 – General Speeches

December 1-2, 1969 – Semi-Annual Managers Meeting, Palo Alto, CA

12/1/69, Outline of topics he wishes to cover, handwritten by Hewlett

We are on a basis of doubling every four years – 400 million now, should be 10 ⁹in 6-7 years. International at 38% – domestic 14% – equal in ’75 or ’76

What will we be like in the 70s, what will our problems be?

We will not do a billion + in electronics field alone – field not big enough

New areas will be electronically based and technically oriented – can see this pattern now: computers, calculators, medical, analytical

Growing trend toward systems

Must keep strength in basic electronic instrumentation

Role of International: Will continue to grow, need to look for additional plant site, establish operation in Singapore,

What does short time picture look like?

In U. S.

Battle with inflation

Nixon policy and high cost of money

Summary

HP enters the 70s strong, in good shape, lots of momentum – optimistic

12/1/69, Bound booklet containing agenda, and many charts, tables etc. giving operational data for FY 69

1968 – Hewlett Speeches

Box 2, Folder 10 – General Speeches

January 12, 1968 – Twelfth Annual Management Meeting, Palo Alto, CA

The Management Meeting was also held on January 22 in Colorado Springs, Colorado, January 25 in Paramus, New Jersey, and February 2 in Les Diablerets, Switz.

1/12/68, The only paper containing notes of a Hewlett talk is a two page handwritten paper by Hewlett, with the heading “M by O,” Management by Objective.

Hewlett writes that he and Dave make the same decisions – “matter of training,” – and he adds that if it doesn’t work “it is my fault.” Independent management thinking is a hard path, he says. Non-military type management pushes responsibility down to lowest level.

Role of Targets.

Targets are the glue that holds the corporation together – serve the role of planning and evaluation.

Hewlett writes that “We must learn how to do…this year. Targets are unacceptable. Called all managers together to develop more acceptable ones.”

1/2/68, Copy of a letter from Dick Reynolds to several managers in Geneva discussing arrangements for the forthcoming management meeting there

1/4/68, Copy of a letter from Austin Marx to HP Managers discussing arrangements for the management meetings

1/9/68, Copy of a letter from Austin Marx discussing long range planning.

1/9/68, Letter from Wayne Briggson to Bill Hewlett providing some data for the management meeting

1/12/68, Copies of several charts and other data relative to business operations. These all stapled together as handouts for all meetings.

Box 2, Folder 11– General Speeches

January 29, 1968 – New Engineers Dinner, Waltham, MA

1/29/68, Three pages of notes handwritten by Hewlett

Under the heading of “General State of Health of Company,” he writes the “Last year good but not enough – last quarter down.”

Role of Targets

“Targets are a method of forced planning – prevent procrastination, indicate warnings of trouble areas, need to react.”

On the size of the engineering budget Hewlett says that it has been running less than 10% [of sales?], but last year was 12%. He says they will have to hold R&D down and let shipments catch up.

On the outlook for 1968 he says U.S. looks slow, international strong.

Hewlett talks about how HP looks at Engineering.

HP built by Engineers – products initially for engineers, but departure from the “for engineers” aspect.
Company makes its progress through new products – vintage chart
Hewlett says that experience has shown that when they are able to make a measurement more efficiently or accurately there is a market.
He says they are willing to enter new somewhat related fields: synthesizers, computers, desk calculators, ultrasound, – but he sees a limit to the “number of balls “ in the air at one time.

Talking about other factors Hewlett says that projects tend to be relatively small and many – therefore a good opportunity to have a say in what is done.

He talks about a few problems.

Reliability. There has been a sharp increase in the warranty rate, .9 to 1.34%. Partly the result of some of the above problems – willingness to gamble, encouragement of new ideas and techniques – and a relatively young engineering staff.

He says that a study has shown that some 75% of failures are due to components.

Inexperienced engineers tend to solve problems by using more parts, more complicated circuits, rather than analyzing the real problem.

Conclusion

Engineering imagination and creativeness –well executed – is the heart of the Company. It all starts at that point. He tells the new engineers that they have a real responsibility, and a real opportunity, to contribute to HP. Our problem is to provide the encouragement and stimulation to give you a maximum charge to achieve.

Box 2, Folder 12 – General Speeches

January 30, 1968 – Analyst Meeting, New Orleans, LA

1/30/68, There are no notes in this folder as to what Hewlett’s remarks were. He was invited to speak to the New Orleans Financial Analyst Society about HP – its background, where it is today, and where it is going in the future.

6/21/67, Letter to Hewlett from David L. Markstein, President Financial Analysts of New Orleans, inviting Hewlett to speak to their group

6/23/67, Copy of a letter from Madelen Schneider, Hewlett’s Secretary, to David Markstein saying Mr. Hewlett is out of town and will be back around mid-July.

8/17/67, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to David Markstein saying he would be available to speak to their group after the first of the year – January or February.

8/24/67, Letter to Hewlett from David Markstein suggesting January 30 as a good date.

9//12/67, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to David Markstein accepting January 30, 1968 for their meeting

1/8/69, Copy of a letter to David Markstein from Madelen Schneider giving Hewlett’s travel plans

1/10/68, Letter from David Markstein to Madelen Schneider suggesting Hewlett call him the morning of January 30.

1/16/68, Memo from Wayne Briggson to Packard, Hewlett, Ralph Lee, and Ed Porter, giving two months manufacturing results data

12/27/67, Handwritten letter to Hewlett from W. M. Snyder replying to an earlier letter from Hewlett, – a chatty personal letter saying he plans to try and come to New Orleans to see Hewlett

1/18/67, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to W. M. Snyder saying he is going to stay over the night of January 30 in New Orleans and could see Snyder then

1/19/68, Memo from Bob Brunner to Hewlett talking about some R&D work the Santa Clara [F&T] Division is doing on “fast transforms”

1/30/68, Letter to Hewlett from David Markstein thanking him for his visit

Undated, Copy of a sheet titled “Typical Analyst Questions”

Box 2, Folder 13 – General Speeches

February 27, 1968 – HP Shareholders Meeting, Palo Alto, CA

March 8, 1968, – Western Investment Forum, Group Palo Alto, CA

1/27/68 & 3/8/68, Several pages of handwritten notes and financial data by Hewlett covering information he plans to cover at these meetings

Some of the subjects Hewlett covers:

I Last year’s Financial Data

Sales, Income, Profit, E/S,
Balance Sheet
Source and Application of Funds
P & L
Footnote #3
P. L. for year

II Product Information

Computer
Medical
Nuclear
Precision Time

III General International Picture

Strong Increase
U. S. Exports Growing
Devaluation of Pound
Foreign Funds
I. C. Program
Oscilloscope
Development by foreign subsidiaries

IV Return to domestic Scene

Marketing
Minority Groups

V Summary

Had a good year – not quite up to expectations, but still good.

Financially considerably improved over 1966

Strong development program

Strong international position

Share concerns about minority problems and will continue to work toward long term solutions to this increasingly serious problem

2/27/68, Copy of typewritten agenda for this meeting

3/6/68, Memo from Wayne Briggson to Hewlett with agenda for the Investment Forum

Undated, miscellaneous data sheets

Box 2, Folder 14 – General Speeches

May 14, 1968, Analysts Meeting, San Francisco, CA

1/14/68, Three pages of notebook paper with Hewlett’s handwritten notes on the material he plans to cover.

Hewlett says he wants to talk about a case history:

Not the most important

Significant and growing

Product of informal planning

Field of computation

He says about five years ago a small group began to promote an idea of program utility:

Voluntary where applied
Independence of divisions

In four years, after study by HP Labs, brought a small group from UC & C (?). Decision was made to design and build a small computer. Main reason: data reduction, customers want it.

The 2216 and the 2114

Limited objective of data reduction, danger of moving too fast and away from area of strength.

Problem of marketing a stand alone unit

Uses for Data Reduction

Dymec application
Example of micro wave application
Some stand alone

Customer Reaction

You must be in field
Take necessary steps

Program to Push Ahead

Straight in peripherals – Datamec tape, card reader,
Disc pac by Datamec

Development of Time sharing – Directed to Scientific fields

Our cost on time share
Decision to limit language
HP time sharing – own use

Entry into Desk Top Field

Again, push came from HP Labs
1. Confluence of two schools of ideas
Decision to keep separate for computer
Description of 9100

Conclusions

Data processing and computer is part of field of instrumentation and data taking
Either instrument people more so or the computer people do – easy decision
So far, so good. 400% increase – hit from small losses
We think this will be an important field

4/15/68, Copy of a letter to Packard from Livingston Jenks, Jr. of the Security Analysts of San Francisco, discussing arrangements for H & P, plus other HP management people, to address their group

5/17/68, Copy of a letter from DP to Jenks giving names of management people, in addition to Hewlett who will attend

Box 2, Folder 15 – General Speeches

June 10-11, 1968 – Semi-Annual Managers’ Meeting Palo Alto

6/10/68, Hewlett’s handwritten notes for his comments on the first half of 1968

He discusses earnings, the balance sheet, and goes through the graphs showing various operations

6/10/68, Bound folder, a handout to meeting attendees, containing the agenda for the meeting along with copies of graphs and other data on operations

6/4/68, Letter to Hewlett from Bill Doolittle reminding him that he had said he would discuss the idea of having several HP managers serve on the Boards of subsidiaries at the managers meeting

5/29/68, Copy of a letter from Austin Marx to HP managers enclosing a copy of a letter from HP’s counsel wherein the counsel discusses various legal implications of being large enough now to attract more government scrutiny on things like antitrust, restraint of trade, and so forth

Box 2, Folder 16 – General Speeches

August 12, 1968 – Summer Engineers Lunch, Palo Alto

8/12/68, Brief handwritten note by Hewlett indicates he spoke to the summer students about the HP organization and what was manufactured in each of the various divisions.

7/16/68, Memo from Frank Williams to Hewlett asking if he would be available to speak to the summer students – a list of these is attached.

Box 2, Folder 17 – General Speeches

August 20, 1968 – “How to Plan for Management in a Growing Organization, WESCON, Los Angeles

8/20/68, Notes for speech handwritten by Hewlett.

Hewlett puts a sub-heading on the title for his talk to say that he wants to put “particular emphasis on the critical period when the company must pass from the direct control of the original entrepreneur to an organization with delegated responsibilities.”

He describes several types of companies in terms of their growth pattern:

One would be the company which starts with a major idea or product and then gears up to develop it with a full blown organization. Xerox is an example he says

Another example is the company that grows through acquisition – a Litton

The third example he gives is the company that starts from scratch and grows from within. He says he is familiar with this area and I would like to talk about this type of company.

The Growth from Within Company

He says this is one of the most common types. There is a low investment of capital, direct involvement in technical aspects, and the company grows fast.

Some problems develop: lack of previous management experience, inadequate capital, no management development program – so many current problems can’t worry about training.

Hewlett gives some thoughts on various problem areas:

Growth rate of annual sales must equal the return on net worth after taxes – if not the entrepreneur may lose control

On markets he points out that some thin markets move very rapidly – have to get in and get out

Even if original management is successful in solving financial and market problems the character of the entrepreneur can lead to other problems. He may be ruggedly independent, self reliant, effective in one or more areas that inhibit delegation of responsibility. Difficult for such a manager to operate in a larger organization where he cannot call the shots.

Hewlett says the companies with which he is familiar who have made a successful transition have been able to do so because:

they could delegate substantial responsibility

they recognized contributions

they provided adequate opportunity to share in the profits of the company

they encouraged vertical mobility within the company

He takes a look at HP

By 1952, the first year HP exceeded $10 million sales they had:

The present VP of marketing as head of marketing

The present VP of R. & D as head of development

One of the VPs in operations as head of production

By 1953 present VP of Finance in a key position in the department

In 1947 5 of 8 future VPs were with the company

In 1953 had 7 of 8 VPs with the company

Of managers of present product divisions (12), 5 were with the company in 1952, 5 came with the company since 1952, and 2 came into specific management jobs.

Problem of what to do with early employees who are unable or unwilling to take on more responsibility. May not be necessary to get rid of them – many important jobs to do, once over the shock of demotion.

Need to introduce a formal management training program.

A formula of things to do at an early stage:

Start looking for good people with growth potential

Be willing to delegate responsibility to them even if they appear to be only ½ as efficient as you

Try and share the financial benefits of growth

Provide every opportunity for vertical mobility

And at a later stage:

Be willing to fit employees into the organization early

Keep doors open to all in the organization who are interested and qualified to manage

Be willing to hire senior people from the outside – keep organization from becoming ingrown

Start developing a management bank through employment and training of professions interested in management

8/30/68, Earlier draft handwritten by Hewlett

8/30/68, Newspaper clipping covering speech

8/30/68, Typewritten list of panel at WESCON

8/5/68, Copy of a letter from Don Hoefler of WESCON to Hewlett and panel members indicating the part each will play

10/23/69, Copy of a request from North American Rockwell Corp. for the text of his talk. Reply from PR Secretary Byrd Beh says he did not have a prepared text.

Undated, list of HP managers and the date they started with the company

Box 2, Folder 18 – General Speeches

September 12-14, 1968 – Importance of Higher Education in the Ability to Attract Industry, Federation of Rocky Mountain States, Great Falls, Montana

9/12/68, Copy of the full text of Hewlett’s speech as included in the bound booklet titled “Proceedings of the Federation of Rocky Mountain States, Inc.”

Hewlett clarifies that there are many factors that companies weigh when considering a plant location, and education is an important one. He says he would like to approach the subject by reviewing some of HP’s activities in the field of education.

He reviews HP’s Honors Cooperative Program with Stanford where employees can obtain advanced degrees while continuing to work full or half time. Since the program was started 15 years ago about 300 advanced degrees have been granted to HP people. HP also has similar programs with Santa Clara University and San Jose State.

HP has close ties with Colorado University in Colorado Springs and with the University of Colorado in Boulder, both in training HP people and in providing consulting services.

Hewlett talks about similar programs underway in other companies – Motorola with Arizona State University in Phoenix. In addition he mentions General Electric, Goodyear, Sperry-Rand, and others.

Hewlett also talks about the importance of research in universities – to generate new ideas and new knowledge.

On the role of industry.

Hewlett defines the role of industry as “the generation of technology and to use the products of research. Roles of education and industry work together but they are independent. One should not dominate the other.

Technical schools are also important. He puts the need for technical education on a par with the need for higher education. Industry has close ties with technical colleges as well, maybe closer than with universities. Industry can supply people, instructors, and can make special equipment available.

Hewlett ends by submitting and answering the question: –
“How can research attract and hold industry?” He says they can do this by “providing an under girding to produce a meaningful program of higher education. It can also provide a higher intellectual climate in a community that is so important to industry, which must in turn attract and hold creative engineers and scientists.”

9/12/68, Bound booklet titled “Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Meeting, Federation of Rocky Mountain States, Inc,” This contains the complete texts of the remarks of the major speakers, including Hewlett.

9/12/68, Three rough drafts of Hewlett’s speech in his handwriting

Undated, Copy of typewritten text, which appears to have been written by Hewlett, and which is titled “Importance of higher Education in the Ability to attract and hold Industry.” This appears to have been his summary of various discussions held in preparation for the above speech.

4/17/68, Memo from Hewlett to “File,” saying he had been invited, by Jim Fletcher of the University of Utah, to speak at the Rocky Mountain Governors Conference

6/18/68, Letter to Hewlett from Governor John A. Love of Colorado, sending him a made in Colorado attaché case, which he says is “one of the primary symbols of business in the nation today”

6/26/68, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Governor John A. Love thanking him for the attaché case – made in Colorado

7/15/68, Copy of a letter to Hewlett from W. S. Partidge, of the U. of Utah, sending a report of the 1967 meeting of the Federation of Rocky Mountain States, plus an agenda for the forthcoming conference in September

8/8/68, Memo to Hewlett from Chick Alexander enclosing background informational material for use in preparing for the September conference

9/3/68, Memo to Bill Terry from Hewlett giving information on HP operations in Colorado

9/17/68, Letter to Hewlett from Donald F. McMahon of the Federation of Rocky Mountain States, thanking him for his participation in the Conference

9/25/68, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to William A. Shinnick of the U. of New Mexico, sending information on HP’s Honors Co-op Program with Stanford

8/30/68, Letter to Hewlett from H. W. Welch, of Arizona State, sending material and comments relevant to Hewlett’s forthcoming talk

9/25/68, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Dr. H. W. Welch of Arizona State, thanking him for his letter

9/25/68, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Lloyd A. Calhoun of the New Mexico Electric Service Co., sending a copy of the site selection factors used by HP

9/3/68, Letter to Hewlett from Paul A. Elsner, Community Colleges Division, State of Colorado, sending information about the Community College Program in Colorado

9/25/68, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Paul A. Elsner thanking him for the material he sent

9/30/68, Letter to Hewlett from L. Ralph Mecham, asking for a copy of Hewlett’s speech at the Rocky Mountain Conference

10/3/68, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Ralph Mecham saying he spoke only from notes and does not have a copy of his speech

1/10/68 Copy of a letter to L. Ralph Mecham saying he recently received a copy of the proceedings at the conference which contained a copy of his speech, which he encloses.

Various dates, Copies of various kinds of background material collected by Hewlett in his research for the Conference

Box 2, Folder 19 – General Speeches

October 29, 1968 – Security Analysts’ Meeting, Palo Alto, CA

10/24/68, Memo from Dave Kirby to Hewlett enclosing an outline of information for talking to the analysts, plus some proposed news releases. The topics covered in the outline are listed below.

The major topics covered in the outline are:

Overall picture

International

Medical

Analytical

Data Products

Organizational Developments

Strengthening International Operations

Increasing Plant capacity

Introduction of John Young – a biographical statement is attached

10/29/68, Typed list of analysts expected at the meeting

10/15/68, Letter to Hewlett from Otie T. Bradley, Jr. thanking him for speaking to their group of analysts

11/12/68, Letter to Hewlett from John M. McCarthy thanking him for speaking to their group

Undated, Two statements discussing minority hiring and affirmative action activities at HP

Box 2, Folder 20 – General speeches

Undated, 1968 – Talk to Menlo Park City Council

Undated, 1968, Four pages in Hewlett’s handwriting outlining his comments

I Hewlett starts by telling why he is here

Not as a resident or as an employer

Talk about a community problem – not Palo Alto’s, not Santa Clara’s, not Menlo Park’s – but these cities are a close enough group to be effective. [ It is apparent he is talking about minority hiring and affirmative action.]

II Some steps industry in the area is taking

Using HP as an example, Hewlett talks about job fairs – HP hired 58, lost only 2

Hard core employment – objective to hire 100,000 before 1969

Lockheed’s program

OICW – Opportunity Industrialization Center, West – receives much corporate support

Cooperation with schools – tutoring, Ravenswood

III Counterpart Program

Kemp Miller, from HP, assigned full time to this program. Ask them to consider his suggestions, – if some aspects not acceptable, work with him and his group on these pressing problems.

He assures the Council that great progress can be made when all aspects of a community work together – government, business, industry – and private citizens.

Undated, two earlier drafts in Hewlett’s handwriting

1967 – Hewlett Speeches

Box 2, Folder 1 – General Speeches

January 4, 1967 – Datamec Division Orientation, Palo Alto CA.

11/17/66, Memo to Hewlett from Ray Wilbur asking if he would be available to speak to the employees of Datamec, a recent acquisition

1/4/67, Copy of typewritten agenda for the meeting. No copy of Hewlett’s remarks is included in folder

Box 2, Folder 2 – General Speeches

January 11-14, 1967 – Management Conference, Monterey, CA

1/11/67, Copy of typed draft of Hewlett’s remarks

Introduction

Hewlett says the purpose of this session is to review both one year and five year programs in light of past experience.

“The year past,” he says, “is behind us for good or bad. The time is spent; the money is gone. The past is only important to the extent that it builds a platform for the present and the future and to the extent that we can learn and gain experience from the past to apply to the future.

“The only way to be infallible is to do nothing….Thus we come to the syllogism that nothing can be gained without some risk of failure. But this does not say that mistakes should be repeated. Therefore, it is important that at times we stop and look back – evaluating our successes and failures so that we may learn for the future.

“Two years ago we instituted a program of budgeting, first on a trial learning basis of six months at a time. Last year was the first year of full annual budgeting. It would be unreasonable to assume that those people involved in the budgeting process should be one hundred percent correct. …I have asked Ed Van Bronkhorst…to review critically last year’s performance both on a general base and also in comparison to what we said we were going to do in our budgeting forecasts. I have Austin Marx to give us his appraisal of the economic environment in which we will most likely find ourselves in ’67. Then I would like to take a few moments to review our ’67 budget forecast and in so doing, to draw heavily on our previous historical background. Then I would like to spend a little time reviewing the five year picture with you….I hope to draw some general philosophical conclusions about the meaning and implications of a five year forecast. And finally, Dave will windup the session with some rather specific comments about the year past and the year to come.”

HP Plans for ’67

The notes here are only in outline form, listing the topics to be discussed:

Comparison of ‘67 to years ’65 and ’66

Sales ’61 through ’67

Growth slipping – need to get momentum back

Profits: 10 year average 7%, push for 9.3% on sales

Push for 24% R.O.I in ’67

’67 and beyond

Discusses past forecasts in comparison to results

Look at forecasts

Five year cash flow

Comments on space

1/11/67, Two pages of handwritten outline by Hewlett of what appears to be an earlier draft of comments

3/9/66, Memorandum from Cort Van Rensselaer sending managers result of a survey among them on their thoughts about the Monterey Conference held in 1966. He suggests they learn from it in preparing for the 1967 Conference.

12/7/66, Proposed agenda for the conference

1/3/67, Memo from Bill Doolittle to Bill Hewlett, and other managers, giving a list of HP international managers who will be in town for the conference

1/4/67, Copy of a memo from Austin Marx to all attendees at the conference giving transportation and room assignments

1/10/67, Copy of a memo from Austin Marx to workshop chairmen with instructions on how this will work

1/11/67, Copy of typed list of all attendees

1/11-14/67 Copies of many papers, charts and notes gathered from various sessions and discussions

Box 2, Folder 3 – General Speeches

February 28, 1967 – Annual Shareholders Meeting, Palo Alto, CA

No text of comments by Hewlett is in folder

1/20/67, Copy of printed Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders

2/28/67, Copy of drawing showing instrument display setup for meeting

Box 2, Folder 4 – General Speeches

April 1-3, 1967 – National Industrial Conference Board Meeting, no location given

4/1/67 Four 4×5” slips of paper with handwritten notes by Hewlett with outline of his remarks

The theme of the meeting appears to have been the “Specter of the day the world runs out of food” – taken from a contemporary newspaper article.

Hewlett says most suitable land is already in use – must improve what we already have, develop new approaches. Livestock and fish alternatives.

Need to extend educational programs. These are serious problems – need to get going.

Box 2, Folder 5 – General Speeches

May 4, 1967 – Sloan Seminar, Stanford

5/4/67, Hewlett agreed to participate in a question and answer session with the Stanford Sloan Fellows. The questions were submitted ahead of time and Hewlett’s handwritten notes are very brief. The areas presented by the questioners covered such subjects as international operations, government relations, organization structure, diversification and acquisition, management development, finance, marketing.

1/30/67, Letter to Hewlett from Carlton A. Pederson inviting him to anticipate in another Q & A session with Sloan Fellows

12/66, Typed list of internal and external development programs

Box 2, Folder 6 – General Speeches

May 31, 1967 – Talk to Loveland Engineers

5/31/67, Five pages of notebook paper containing an outline of remarks, handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett talks first about the “Technical Gap” between the U.S. and Europe. He doesn’t specifically state it but the implication is that the U.S. is ahead of Europe. Although he says some “reverse” gap exists, e.g. nuclear, power, chemicals. He says the causes are complex – education, government, management, tradition. The greatest problem, he says, is computers. This is not a problem of U.S. vs. Europe, but “of IBM vs. the world.”

Talking about HP vs. Tektronix he says “HP underrated the problem and did not gear up to really overtake Tek.” Result was HP succeeded only in spurring Tek on to better performance.

“The move to Colorado Springs was a set back,” he says. Need to settle down and “run Tek down over the long haul, adding that HP has greater resources in people, technology, and general health.

Hewlett gives his conclusions:

“HP has always stressed balance between R&D – Production, Marketing, and Finance.
HP role in scopes and pulse generators must now rest with R&D.
What I saw today gives me hope.”

Box 2, Folder 7 – General Speeches

July 24, 1967 – Marketing Seminar, Palo Alto, CA

7/24/67, This is another seminar for new marketing sales people. Hewlett was asked to give a welcoming talk on the first day. His very brief notes, handwritten on a sheet of notebook paper say he planned to talk about the importance of marketing, the “Tek” gap and Japan.

He notes “How the Company is run,” and the “good old days vs. the future.”

And he concludes with “Your job tomorrow.”

7/20/67, Memo to Hewlett from Aldo Palossi, reminding him of the forthcoming seminar, and giving a few ideas on subject material.

7/24/67, Copy of program for the seminar

Box 2, Folder 8 – General Speeches

August 8, 1967 – Summer Lab Engineers Luncheon, Palo Alto, CA

8/8/67, One typewritten sheet with topics for Hewlett’s remarks

Hewlett lists some questions and then provides some answers.

Why do we take these people on?

What do we gain from it?

What is the objective of the corporation itself?

Indeed, what should the objective of corporations be?

By way of answers Hewlett notes that “100 years ago, the only answer would have been to make the maximum amount of money for shareholders.” While saying that this may still be true for very small companies, he adds that “As companies grow, so do their responsibilities and what society expects of them”

This all may vary from country to country he says. “In Japan, life long employment; in pre-war Germany: [business was] an instrument of national policy; in France, feeling is that profits are slightly immoral. In the U.S. the more enlightened companies take very broad view of responsibility, i.e., not just to shareholders, but to employees, customers, local and state governments, and the general health and well being of the nation.”

“No system is perfect,” he says. “Many bad actors among corporations just as among people. Just as I feel people are intrinsically honest and well meaning so I feel about corporations for they are collections of people.”

8/8/67, Three pages of Hewlett’s handwritten with notes in preparation of typewritten talk

8/8/67, Copies of several lists of the summer students

8/3/67, Memo to Hewlett from Norm Williams discussing arrangements for the luncheon and suggesting some topics

1/1/66, Copy of the printed booklet “Hewlett-Packard – A Statement of Corporate Objectives”

Box 2, Folder 9 – General Speeches

November 13-14, 1967 – Managers’ Meeting, Palo Alto, CA

11/13-14/67, Typewritten notes titled Summary-Management meeting – W. R. Hewlett and is unaccountably dated 1/12/68. It does appear these reflect Hewlett’s comments at the meeting.

Hewlett lists points of change for HP:

End of WW II
Plan for future growth by hiring people on spec.
Breaking out into a divisional plan
Establishing own sales organization

He says similar problems are now being faced:

Moving into the classic structure of a large corporation; “breaking away from the friendly advice of father Dave.”
Product line expanding – threatens to “burst wide open …unless it can adapt to challenges”
Increased responsibility flowing to divisions [brings] problem of control. He points to the problem of budgeting as an example of “a failure to understand…the function of such targeting.”
How to use total assets of the corporation when such assets cross divisional lines
The continued role of International in developing world markets

“This is a period of winnowing. We are a corporation in change – good opportunity for the imaginative and creative individual.

Also dated 1/12/68 – but in the folder for the 12/13/67 management meeting: Typewritten notes identified as W. R. Hewlett notes

These notes give Hewlett’s comments on each of the usual management meeting slide charts covering 1967 operations. The charts and related handouts are included in the folder.

1966 – Hewlett Speeches

Box 1, Folder 71 – General Speeches

January 5, 1966 – Talk to New Marketing MBAs, Palo Alto, CA

1/5/66, Brief notes for talk, handwritten by Hewlett Packard

Speaking about the problems associated with the assimilation of the sales representatives, Hewlett talks about stress saying it means a challenge, means an opportunity.

“A great opportunity for you to contribute to and help in the working of these problems. I hope that you find this interesting and challenging.”

12/23/65, Copy of a memo from Len Gibson to Bill Hewlett inviting him and his wife to a dinner affair.

12/27/65, Copy of a memo from Len Gibson (no addressee) listing the attendees with brief biographical facts.

Box 1, Folder 72 – General Speeches

January 12-15, 1966 – HP Management Conference, Monterey, CA

1/12/66, Folder contains many papers and notes of data for discussion

Box 1, Folder 73 – General Speeches

February 14-17, 1966 – Northwestern Medical Association Annual Meeting, Sun Valley, ID

2/14/66, Copy of program for the meeting. Hewlett appears to have been only an attendee, along with enjoying the skiing. The folder contains a rather erudite paper written by “Ken” which discusses Hewlett’s ski boots and the bindings for his skies, giving precise changes in the length of these resulting from changes in temperature.

Box 1, Folder 74 – General Speeches

February 24, 1966 – New Employee Indoctrination Seminar, Palo Alto, CA

2/24/66, Outline of remarks, handwritten by Hewlett on notebook paper.

Speaking to a group of new sales representatives, Hewlett discusses some sales techniques and emphasizes the changes underway from a small to a big organization. He says their education will be continuing – as is his to this day. He says “[Management] is going to be looking for people with real ability and leadership which in a decentralized organization is our most critical commodity.”

2/15/66, Copy of a memo from George Stanley to Bill Hewlett, giving some background information for his remarks to the seminar group.

Box 1, Folder 75 – General Speeches

March, 1966 – HP Board Meeting, New York, NY

3/66, Several pages of topics, facts and data, handwritten by Hewlett on notebook paper

Box 1, Folder 76 – General Speeches

March 15, 1966 – Talk To National Accountants Association, Palo Alto, CA

3/15/66, Outline of remarks handwritten by Hewlett on notebook paper.

Hewlett discusses HP problems in building international markets. He describes the changes starting in 1959 with HP headquarters in Geneva and a small manufacturing plant in Germany, talks about foreign governments, as well as the U.S Government. Among his concluding points he says:

“Need to be willing to adapt

Must maintain ethical standards

Need professional management

Much effort – much to be gained”

3/17/66, Letter to Hewlett from W. J. Massey thanking him for speaking to their group

3/30/66, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to W. J. Massey thanking him for the “attractive sterling pen knife.”

Box 1, Folder 77 – General Speeches

May, 1966 – Talk to YHP Sales Group

5/66, On two small pieces of paper Hewlett lists some items he intends to cover – in pencil, difficult to read

Box 1, Folder 78 – General Speeches

May, 1966 – Turkey Revisited

5/66, Copy of typewritten report of Hewlett’s second trip to Turkey. Hewlett’s first visit to Turkey was made in September/October, 1965, and his report on that trip is summarized in the speech file dated November 8, 1965. He revisited Turkey in May, 1966, and wrote another report which he considered a supplement to the first. A Summary of this second visit report follows.

POLITICAL CHANGES AND ENVIRONMENT

As predicted the Justice Party won a substantial victory in the elections last fall. The Republican Peoples Party, headed by Inonu, one of Ataturk’s old Generals was out. The leader of the Justice Party is Suleman Demirel, and he will be the new Prime Minister.

Hewlett also reports that there has been a change of President in the country as well. General Sunay was elected to replace General Gursel and is supposed to represent the politically “hands-off” faction of the Army.

The Demirel Administration

The Demeril Government has introduced two controversial bills. The first changes election rules which would make it harder for smaller opposition groups to return to power, and the second provides for a general amnesty which would free some remaining political prisoners.

Visit with Minister Demirel

Hewlett, along with the Ambassador Hart, met with the Prime Minister, and he reports on several subjects they discussed – such as Turkey’s State enterprises, high import duties, encouraging foreign investment, sources of capital for private enterprises, and agriculture.

STATE ECONOMIC ENTERPRISES

Hewlett, accompanied by Deputy U.S. AID Minister Wagner, talked with the Minister of Energy, a Mr. Deriner, who oversees the Turkish Coal Industry, and with Mr. Behzat Firuz, Manager of the Turkish Coal Industry, a SEE. The coal operation runs a high deficit and Firuz said the subject of higher prices was extremely sensitive. Hewlett quotes Firuz as saying he was not in favor of SEE operations and would be happy to see them abolished. Hewlett says Mr. Firuz “was the most superior person I have come across in a State-owned enterprise.”

The Turkish Forest Service has shown no great signs of being willing to cooperate with private industry in the development of their forest preserves. Turkey has a fine stand of suitable pulp wood trees, and as there is a continuing need for pulp, Hewlett says this area would be ideal for the development of a sustained yield demonstration project.

The State Petroleum Industry is pushing its plans to produce PVC despite the fact that there is a Turkish company ready, willing and able to take on this production with the assistance of a U.S. firm, Dow Chemical.

Hewlett concludes with some examples of inefficiencies in various State owned operations and makes it clear he does not have great respect for the Turkish SEE system.

THE PRIVATE SECTOR

Hewlett says it does appear that aggressive and imaginative people can carve out an effective place for themselves in the private sector and he talks about one such person, Orhan Sertel. Mr. Sertel owns a fleet of trucks which have been used to haul oil from central Turkey to a Mediterranean port. A pipeline will soon eliminate the need for these trucks and Sertel has started a new fleet of refrigerated trucks to haul fruit and vegetables to Europe. This project appears to have great potential to earn much needed foreign exchange for Turkey if additional transportation equipment can be obtained. But there is a 100 % import duty on such equipment, so a given investment will buy only half as much equipment as it could with no duty. Hewlett says he pointed this example out to Prime Minister Demirel.

Hewlett met with one of Turkey’s principal industrialists, a Mr. Nejet Eczasabasi, President of Eczasabasi Pharmaceuticals. Mr. Eczasabasi has obtained license agreements with foreign manufacturers to allow him to produce their products in Turkey. He appears to have prospered in this tightly regulated field. As an example he took on the Ipana toothpaste line and now has 74% of the toothpaste business in turkey. Hewlett says Mr. Eczsabasi is typical of some of the successful larger entrepreneurs in Turkey in that he is concerned as to how he can hold all of his operations within his family. He sees little need for the development of a capital market in Turkey.

Hewlett had lunch one day with Mr. Sehap Kocatopcu who is the President of Pesabache Glass company, which makes flat glass and stemware. Hewlett says Mr. Kocatopcu told an interesting story of their relationship with the Russians who were trying to penetrate the glass industry in Turkey – with political objectives in mind.

Hewlett describes two trouble spots involving oil and steel. He spoke with William Fricker of the Mobile Oil Company who was very unhappy with the Turkish Government for having imposed a 40 cents per barrel tax on refined petroleum and will not allow this tax to be passed on to consumers. The net effect will be to cause these refineries to operate in the red. Hewlett feels this is such a flagrant case of persecution of the oil industry that they will probably be able to obtain some relief.

Hewlett found the Eregli Steel still in trouble with an improper capital structure and the costs of raw materials way out of line. Mr. Danis Koper, Chairman of the steel mill says they hope for a rollover of financing charges and expansion of their facilities. AID has obtained the services of a team of experts to make a survey of the overall situation. This is a serious situation because this mill is the largest AID undertaken and stands as a symbol of American prestige in Turkey. Hewlett says its failure would be a most serious blow not only to American prestige in Turkey, but in most of the developing nations of the world.

BANKS

Hewlett visited representatives of three classes of banks – the Is Bank which is a quasi-governmental bank, the Guarantee Bank which is strictly a private bank, and the Industrial Development which was established for this purpose.

Hewlett met with Mr. Bulent Yazici, the Manager of the Is Bank. Their conversation centered around the availability of funds to support a capital market. He, along with others, was not enthusiastic about the proposal to seek investment funds from Turkish workers in Germany [who evidently save money in Germany over and above what they send home to their families in Turkey.]

Yazici pointed out that in developing countries like Turkey, it is unreasonable to assume that a shareholder will be willing to invest, or even should invest, in an untried company through public subscription. Some intermediate financial organization is required that will back a new company during the initial critical years. This financial organization should be able and willing to sell its interest in this corporation to the public.

Hewlett talked with Resid Egeli, of the Industrial Development Bank, and his principal assistant, Bahaeddin Kayalioglu. Egeli echoed many of the views of Yazici, who is not only Manager of the Is Bank, but is also Chairman of the Industrial Development Bank. Mr. Egeli pointed out the desirability of legislation that would facilitate the development of the capital market. Although there is a bourse in Istanbul, a review of the daily transactions showed that most of the stocks had not been traded for many weeks or months. The U.S. Rubber issue was an obvious exception to this rule.

Hewlett says it was not clear whether Egeli was meeting the full obligations of a development bank. There was some indication that he might be charging excessively high interest rates, and that he might not be rolling over his equity positions in successful companies early enough – preferring to hold them for their gains.

At the Guarantee Bank Hewlett met with President Cabir Selek, who had provided a great deal of information about the “unfair competitive tactics” of the SEE. Mr. Selek seemed to be meeting the challenges posed by the SEE rather successfully. Selek was concerned about the drying up of program loans for Turkey which have been an important source of foreign exchange.

AGRICULTURE

Hewlett met with two of the agricultural specialists in the AID office in Ankara. One project which had impressed Hewlett on his previous trip had been the Agricultural controlled Credit Bank program at Denizli. Apparently this project is still prospering and has prompted the Turkish Government to try and establish similar projects in other parts of the country.

Turkey still appears to have a lack of adequate agricultural programs at the universities and an associated extension program. The new university at Ergurum may permit some progress to be made in this direction. Turkey is in urgent need of an effective seed development program and is most anxious to get an expert from the Rockefeller Foundation to help on this problem.

TOURISM

On his first trip Hewlett was pessimistic about the prospect for tourism in Turkey. However, this time he says he sees tourism on the increase, primarily from Europe. Hotel accommodations are improving with a new hotel in Ankara under Swiss management.

EDUCATION

The only educational institution Hewlett visited during his second trip was Robert College in Instanbul. He says this is a fine institution founded by American funds many years ago. It has had influence all out of proportion to its size in Turkey due to the caliber of the people that it has educated and the quality of its educational content. The college has an enrollment of about 820 students – about 80% men. The engineering faculty is reported to be one of the most distinguished in Turkey and is currently planning to expand into the important field of sanitary engineering. It has two campus locations. The principal one overlooking Bosphorus and adjacent to the old Turkish Fort built in preparation for the final attack on Constantinlple, circa 1453, is absolutely magnificent.

However, the school is under heavy regulation and is having rather severe financial difficulties. It has an endowment of about 15 million dollars which is managed in the U.S. and has a budget of 1.5 million dollars annually. During the last few years AID has furnished about two million dollars annually in support for the college.

Restrictive regulations are also a burden. Certain courses must be taught in Turkish, regulations control faculty appointments and advancement, and importantly, the amount that may be charged for tuition and expenses.

ANTI-AMERICAN SENTIMENTS

Contrary to his first visit when he did not come across any particular anti-American sentiments, Hewlett says that during his last trip he sensed some anti-American feelings and learned about some others.

A serious example was a reported discussion between representatives of Mobil Oil and the Minister of Finance, Ihsan Gursan. William Fricker the top American at Mobil (and interestingly enough related to the Minister of Finance), had a meeting with the Minister to discuss some mutual problems. At one point the Minister expressed an intense dislike for Americans – said that Americans had Turkey on a stake – and other uncomplimentary comments. All this is particularly interesting because the Minister of Finance is the primary contact between the U.S. AID and the Turkish Government. And it may explain why programs that have gone through the Minister of Finance have tended to drag at times.

Hewlett concludes his report with a statement of high regard for the quality of people that are working in the AID Mission in Turkey. He says “I am not talking just about the top one or two but some very dedicated and competent people at the second and third tier level. I could only admire the skill with which critical problems …were handled by the top people.”

Box 1, Folder 79 – General Speeches

June 6, 1966 – Engineering Meeting, Colorado Springs

6/6/66, One small piece of paper upon which Hewlett has written some points he wishes to cover

Apparently referring to products, he speaks of the problem of “how to catch up.” “Cannot go across the board – must rifle shoot. While guarding rear must move ahead.” Says impressed with 180.

Box 1, Folder 80 – General Speeches

June 7, 1966 – Loveland Engineering Management Meeting

6/7/66, Two “steno book” pages of Hewlett’s handwritten notes of data and ideas for his remarks

Box 1, Folder 81 – General Speeches

June 8, 1966 – Engineering Meeting, Location not given

6/8/66, Page of notes handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett’s notes bear on the role of management and the role of headquarters

Box 1, Folder 82 – General Speeches

June 30, 1966 – Microwave Division Dinner, Palo Alto, CA

6/30/66, A page of notes handwritten by Hewlett

In talking to engineers about what makes for good engineering, Hewlett says: “I speak for bold ideas, unwillingness to accept old cliches . I speak for pushing your ideas – don’t take no for a manager. I speak for listening, for being willing to take the risk based on good analysis, i.e., for being a good manager in a decentralized company.”

Box 1, Folder 83 – General Speeches

July 27 and August 31, 1966 – Meetings with Westwood Oaks Home Owners’ Association, Santa Clara, CA

7/27/66, Apparently this Association had some reservations about HP building the Santa Clara plant, and this meeting was to permit an exchange of concerns and pros and cons. Hewlett’s notes are one page typewritten, and one handwritten page.

Hewlett’s written note says that he asked his wife what she would think about such a plant. He writes that she expressed concern about smoke, noise, acres of parking, traffic, and loss of property values. He concludes that “With this kind of introduction I thought I should tell you about HP as a company, and what its plans would be if it came here.”

From the typewritten points he lists such topics as what HP does, what it makes; who the customers are. He says HP does not make things for the government. He covers the typical division departments, and closes with telling why HP finds the Santa Clara site attractive, e.g., intellectual atmosphere, attractive place to live, climate, competent labor force.

8/321/66, Copy of a letter to David Kirby from Mrs. Jan Jeensby, of the Home Owners Association discussing the place for the meeting.

Undated, Memo, unaddressed, listing the people who are likely to be at the meeting along with an assessment as to whether they are pro or anti HP.

Box 1, Folder 84 – General Speeches

August 31, 1966 – Talk to Summer Engineering Students, Palo Alto, CA

8/31/66, Hewlett’s handwritten notes on the back of a site map

Hewlett says that HP still has the problem of how to market a more diverse line of product. Must move into [adjacent?] fields if continue to have new horizons. HP must use [care] in selecting new fields – must have some tie, must have good potential, must be able to make a contribution.

8/26/66, Memo to Bill Hewlett from Norm Williams discussing arrangements for a breakfast meeting with summer students. Attachments list names of students

Box 1, Folder 85 – General Speeches

September 22, 1966 – Dedication of HP Ltd. Scotland plant

9/22/66, Four pages of notes handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett speaks of the short time of only 16 months since he attended the groundbreaking for this plant.

Hewlett says he would like to mention some of the HP policies on foreign operations.

“This is a British firm – although owned by an American company, guided by British law
British management –one American
Half of the Board is British
Allow to adapt to local environment”

He talks about the importance of locating near a university and cites the Edinburgh U. as an example.

Other factors guiding the selection of a plant site Hewlett says are people, housing, adequate utilities.

He closes saying “I hope that we can be a credit to this community that has done so much for us.”

9/22/66, Two pages of notes handwritten by Hewlett which appear to be an earlier outline of points he wanted to cover.

Box 1, Folder 86 – General Speeches

November 3, 1966 – New Sales Engineers Indoctrination, Palo Alto, CA

11/3/66, The folder contains no notes for Hewlett’s remarks.

10/19/66, Memo from George Stanley to Hewlett listing some social functions he may wish to attend

11/2/66, Memo from George Stanley to Hewlett giving him some background on what other managers have already said to the group

Box 1, Folder 87 – General Speeches

December, 1966 – YHP Shareholders’ Meeting, Japan

12/66, Notes for talk, written by Hewlett on back of program for Marketing Banquet, Sunday, December 4, 1966. Hewlett says he is sorry he has not been able to meet with each person – got too interested in talking about problems.

Reviewing results for the year, Hewlett says it has been a good year: orders up 27%, shipments up 24% to 203M, profits up 24%.

Hewlett says the YHP record is “most impressive, the first time in the black… a credit to Shojo, George and the whole team.

“A great job”

12/66, Several pages of notes written by Hewlett and headed “Review Results”

Talking about management he says he does not think Shojo is happy in management job, doesn’t like to make decisions, better in staff job. Now is a good time to make changes – after a successful year. He favors Katagami as a replacement – “But he would need help.”

Hewlett concludes his notes with a section headed, “Possible framework in which Katagami could operate.

Shojo to remain as president but be appointed Chairman of the Board
Modify by-laws permitting delegation of management to General Manager
Appoint Katagami to this position
George to give up VP position, but remain as director
Board appoint Executive Committee with Shojo and George meeting weekly. This would allow Shojo to spend more time at YEW and George more in planning and staff work.”

12/13/66, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Richard Wheeler of the First National Bank in Tokyo, thanking him for arranging a breakfast to meet local people.

11/66, Statement of YHP earnings for the month of November

11/66, Note with typewritten figures on Order Records

Box 1, Folder 88 – General Speeches

December, 1966, Service Awards Luncheon, Palo Alto, CA

12/66, Several pages with typewritten listing the names of employees receiving awards and the number of years – from 5 to 25 years.

On a copy of this list Hewlett has written a few notes of comments he wanted to say.

He says we have just announced the best year in the history of the company. “Looking back,” he says, “it is the ideas that were generated in early years of the Company that were worked out by you and with you – Perspectives in Europe and Japan – things so obvious now, but not then. So, in handing out these awards they are not for ‘time spent,’ but for ‘contributions made,’ We are all deeply indebted to you all.”

Box 1, Folder 89 – General Speeches

December 15-17, 1966 – Business International Chief Executive Roundtable, Bermuda

Hewlett was a member of discussion panels at this conference, but did not present a speech.

6/22/66, Memo from Bill Doolittle to Hewlett telling him of the Business International roundtable and asking if he is interested in going.

7/12/66, Letter to Hewlett from Eldridge Haynes, President of Business International, inviting him to attend the roundtable meeting in December; a meeting agenda is attached

8/1/66, Copy of a registration form completed by Hewlett

8/8/66, Letter to Hewlett from Carol Kirschenbaum of BI acknowledging receipt of his $400 registration fee.

10/19/66, Letter to Hewlett from Eldridge Haynes they enjoyed meeting with him and look forward to seeing him in Bermuda. He asks that Hewlett return an enclosed panel signup sheet. Also enclosed is a list of company clients of BI services

12/1/66, Copy of a letter from BI to Roundtable participants giving information on activities

12/12/66, Copy of typewritten travel schedule for Hewlett

12/15/66, Copy of sheet giving biographical information for major panel leaders

1965 – Hewlett Speeches

Box 1, Folder 61 – General Speeches

January 12, 1965 – Sanborn Credit Union Talk

1/12/65, Brief handwritten notes for talk as written by Hewlett

Report on year’s operations

Very good, sales up 9%

Profits up 24%

Outlook for next year good.

Hewlett says their GM, Bruce Wholey, suggested they might be interested in what is going on around HP. Discusses divisions – what they do

Letter to Hewlett from William Hughes of Sanborn Credit Union inviting Hewlett to speak to their Ninth annual Credit Union Meeting.

Box 1, Folder 62 – General Speeches

January 13, 1965 – Acquisitions in Retrospect, Harvard Business School, Boston MA

1/13/65, Several pages of handwritten notes by Hewlett. His remarks were recorded and printed in a copy of the Harbus News, and since this is clearer than his notes the following summary is taken from the newspaper.

Hewlett says he is not giving a “canned” speech – “It is a talk about some problems that I’m worried about right now.”

Hewlett speaks of how they concluded some eight years ago that they needed to expand. They felt the need to spread out of California, not only because of high labor costs, but simply so as not to keep “all their eggs in one basket.”

Hewlett says their first acquisition was a subsidiary they had established to make transformers. “We picked ten good men to run the company and they were successful – almost too successful. From this experience Hewlett says they learned that “most people don’t like to share the wealth – especially if it is their own.”

Purchase of most of the F. L. Moseley Company in Pasadena was next, in 1958. Hewlett says “We quickly learned that people who start their own company are usually convinced that their own way is right.” They found it more difficult to make necessary changes. Hewlett says they looked upon Francis Moseley as “the loyal opposition because he was outspoken and elegant in doing this.”

HP acquired Boonton Radio in New Jersey in 1959. “This was a company that had made no progress in ten years,” Hewlett says – “and did not have a progressive management.” How to get things going again was a difficult problem – “Either you throw everybody out, or you use the low pressure long time approach,” which HP followed

Sanborn was the next acquisition, manufacturers of general and medical instruments. In this case they found they had to change the management. There was too much paternalism, no discipline, people promoted who were not qualified. Management did not know what was going on down the line -–most were not qualified.

Hewlett says they learned three things form the Sanborn experience. “First, two years is about the minimum that you an expect for a turnaround; second that organizations that don’t have a progressive management are very expensive; and three, given a chance people want to do a good job.”

Although he says it is a limited sample, and that from the electronics industry, Hewlett says they learned six lessons from their acquisition program.

“The most successful firms were the ones with the ‘go ahead’ [attitude]. “You can tell this,” he says, “by wandering out in the shop and seeing if the men are charged up – or are leaning on their shovels.

“In most areas you do better by persuasion than by direction.

“Stagnant and dormant companies take a great deal of push to get going again.

“It is hard to avoid conflicts of management when the management has part ownership.

“It is hard to determine the quality of the company from the outside.

“A strong marketing organization is vital. It should be married to a good product line.”

8/25/64, Letter to Hewlett from Benson P. Shapiro, Vice-President of the New Enterprise Club of Harvard Business School inviting him to speak to their Club.

9/9/64, Copy of a letter from Shapiro to Packard with same.

9/11/64, Copy of a letter form Hewlett to Shapiro saying he would be glad to speak to their group in December or January.

9/24/64, Letter from Shapiro to Hewlett saying the month of January would be open for them.

10/1/64, Copy of a letter to Shapiro from Hewlett saying the 13^th of January would be a good date for him.

10/26/64, Letter to Hewlett from Shapiro saying the 13^th is fine.

11/10/64, Copy of a letter to Shapiro from Hewlett enclosing a biographical sketch, adding that it will not be necessary to meet him as he will be meeting with his son who attends Harvard.

12/3/64, Letter to Hewlett from Shapiro discussing logistics.

12/10/64, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Shapiro enclosing photos and saying he will meet at 3:45 PM.

1/14/65, Letter to Hewlett from Shapiro thanking him for speaking to their Club

1/15/64, Letter to Hewlett from Frank L. Tucker, Professor of Business Administration, saying he enjoyed hearing and talking with Hewlett.

1/26/65, Handwritten letter to Hewlett from Jason Fane enclosing page from the Harbus News with transcript of Hewlett’s speech.

2/11/65, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Jason Fane thanking him for the article.

Box 1, Folder 63 – General Speeches

January 15-17, 1965 – Monterey Management Conference

1/15/65, Hewlett’s handwritten notes for his remarks at the Conference

Hewlett starts with a review of recent acquisitions:

Mechrolabs, Delcon, EMI, ICM, Datamec,

He lists several problem areas in departments, and ends with two “basic questions.”

How to Digest what we have.

He suggests:

Impose HP’s accounting system
Keep hands off younger firms until we find out more about them
When changes are made make them as part of a total plan or program
Have a clearly defined point of contact in HP for communications in both directions

Future Policy on Acquisitions

Acquisitions should not necessarily stop
Must recognize the problems that mount up with each one
Should know in advance how they will fit in with HP, particularly with regard to marketing, financial, relation to other divisions, anticipated demand on management

Hewlett talks about R&D problems

How to coordinate aspects of R&D
Foreign R&D
What is the role of R&D

1/14/65, Copies of charts and graphs describing various areas of company operations

11/25/64, Copy of a memo from Bob Brunner to ‘file’ on the subject of appropriate location for some instruments now manufactured in Loveland

12/9/64, Copy of a memo from Bob Brunner to G. Benoit and Bruce Wholey, on the subject of Sanborn’s engineering accounting system

1/4/65, Copy of a letter from Ernie Arbuckle, to Packard, with copy to Hewlett, saying he will not be able to attend the Monterey meeting and providing some points for possible discussion

Undated, Copy of a memo from Packard, possible sent to all senior managers, providing some management philosophies from Bill Harrison of Harrison Labs

Box 1, Folder 64 – General Speeches

February 8, 1965 – KCL Management Conference, Russian Talk, Bakersfield, CA

2/8/65, Hewlett’s handwritten outline of his remarks.

Hewlett says he was a member of a group of business people who visited Russia the previous November. The purpose of this visit was a study of their economic system, not political, although both are intertwined in Russia. They met with high level members of the Soviet government.

Hewlett discusses Planning, saying that it is centralized although some efforts have been made to decentralize. Problems with centralized planning in a complex society.

He talks about foreign trade – increasing need, prices,

Agriculture – big push to improve. Have increased production of chemical fertilizer. Need western technology in animal feed program.

No information on oil.

Their group met with Kosygin who Hewlett says is a quiet, serious man with a sense of authority. He says Kosygin said they have such things as long distance transmission lines, continuous casting of steel, and would like a complete chemical plant and a consumer plant.

He says Kosygin expressed a desire to strengthen mutual confidence with all countries, particularly the U.S.

[See also Hewlett’s speech folders dated November, 1964 and February 11, 1965]

Box 1, Folder 65 – General Speeches

February 11, 1965, Comments on Current Trends in Planning and Management Philosophies in the USSR, Stanford Graduate School

2/11/65, Handwritten outline of remarks written by Hewlett on notebook paper

Hewlett says this was a serious trip of 92 executives, organized by the Business Institute to study Russian economic system – not political. They spoke with top Russian representatives.

Hewlett discusses central planning saying “they have come a long way.”

He says the most stressed subject was foreign trade. The Russians want to increase trade and they discussed problems of trade with the U.S., and prospects of future trade.

Hewlett says the Russians have large plans to improve their agricultural production.

The businessmen met with Kosygin who he says was a quiet, serious man, with a sense of authority. He says Kosygin also stressed the importance of developing their foreign trade. Kosygin said Russia has much to offer, long distance transmission lines, continuous casting of steel, special mineral sources. In exchange Kosygin said they needed a complete chemical plant – and consumer goods.

Hewlett says Kosygin emphasized some points

They adhere to the principle of peaceful co-existence

They desire to develop maximum economic cooperation

They desire to strengthen mutual confidence with all countries

Hewlett makes note of conclusions in his outline but does not elaborate.

[See also Hewlett’s speech folders November, 1964 and February 8, 1965.]

Box 1, Folder 66 – General Speeches

February 23, 1965 – HP Shareholder’s Meeting, probably in Palo Alto, CA

2/23/65, Outline of points he wishes to mention, handwritten by Hewlett on notebook paper

He concludes with:

1965 a good year

Major commitment in new year

Moved to consolidate marketing

Establish new concept of HP Labs

2/23/65, Copies of printed Statement of Income

Box 1, Folder 67 – General Speeches

October 20, 1965 – Long Range Planning, HP Planning Meeting, Palo Alto, CA

10/20/65, Handwritten notes by Hewlett on the back of the day’s program for the meeting. Hewlett is to give an introductory talk.

Hewlett says long range planning may have a bad name, however it is necessary.

In earlier years, when HP at 100 million, would plan for personnel, cash flow and plant. Now company of the size that demands a formal coordinated structure. Planning starts with ground rules of the company, objectives, general strategy. Basic plan must come from operating people – you. Management by objective – not directive.

This meeting is intended to lay the ground work for such planning.

10/20/65, Earlier handwritten outline – very brief.

this discussion is in the folder. [See also speech November 23, 1965, as well as report dated May, 1966 which he describes as a supplement to this earlier report]

Box 1, Folder 68 – General Speeches

November 8, 1965 – Visit to Turkey and Afghanistan for the General Advisory Committee on Foreign Assistance Programs. (See also speech May, 1996)

11/8/665, Typewritten text of Hewlett’s report on this trip to Turkey. Although the title of the report includes Afghanistan, he did not cover the latter herein. Hewlett made a second trip to Turkey in May, 1966, and a summary of his report on this trip is included in the speech folder of that date.

This is a report, not a speech, and a very comprehensive report it is. He visits with many people, private and in government, and gives his impressions on many aspects of Turkey’s people, government, industry, education and so forth. U. S. aid programs to Turkey were an important backdrop to his visit. The following provides brief summaries of Hewlett’s report.

I . THE IMPORTANCE OF TURKEY

U. S. assistance to Turkey is about equally divided between military and economic aid. Turkey is strategically important, not only as a member of NATO, but also because it controls the entrance into and exit from the Black Sea. Turkey has a long history of wars with Russia.

U. S. economic aid to turkey is important because it is important that Turkey be economically healthy if it is to carry out its military assignments and remain an independent state aligned with the free world. There appears to be no reason why Turkey cannot gain self-sufficiency within a decade or so.

II. HISTORICAL TURKEY

Modern Turkey, as a western democracy, started with the Ataturk revolution in 1923. Ataturk drove out most of the Christian and Jewish people from Turkey, leaving the nation short of people experienced in commerce and industry. Typically, the Turk looked down on such activities as unbecoming to a member of the ruling class of the Ottoman Empire.

However, the Ataturk regime did do much to encourage the development of industry, passing a law favorable to industrialization in 1927. But the Turk’s inexperience in matters of business and the depression which affected much of the western world in the thirties did much to prevent the development of any substantial industry in turkey. The legislation which had favored industrial development was repealed in 1942.

During the thirties Turkish thought was much influenced by ideas of a planned economy as practiced by Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Communist Russia. Great emphasis was placed on State industries which have been characteristic of the Turkish economy since that time.

After Ataturk died in 1938 his governmental traditions were carried on by his lieutenant, Inonu, until 1950 when elections brought in Menderes. The Menderes regime was, more or less, a reaction to the paternalistic policies of the Ataturk-Inonu governments which had appealed particularly to the peasant population which made up three-fourths of the people.

The Menderes government was overthrown in a revolution of 1960 and a new liberalized constitution was approved in 1961. A series of coalition governments followed, headed by Inonu, who continued to reflect the policies of the original Ataturk regime.

The Inonu government fell in early 1965 and, in forthcoming general elections, will likely be replaced by the Justice Party headed by Suleyman Demirel, a man with considerable business background who will likely implement policies favorable to free enterprise.

III. CURRENT STATUS

Three-fourths of Turkey’s 30 million people work in agriculture, which accounts for 40% of the national income and 70% of exports. Industrial development has been slow, with government business accounting for 40 to 50% of output. Turkey has had a high imbalance of payments – about 400 million dollars a year – with the deficit made up by outside aid. The per capita income of Turkey is one of the lowest in Europe. Turkey has been slow to develop export markets which have remained almost static since 1953. In addition, the military program puts a big load on the economy, taking about 30% of the budget.

IV. THE STATE ECONOMIC ENTERPRISES

The State Economic Enterprises, the SEE, are active in a wide variety of fields such as coal mines, steel mills, textiles, glass, mines, lumber, and insurance. The State also owns and operates the railroad system, has control over the pulp and paper industry, much of the petroleum industry, and is expanding in fertilizer and chemical businesses. They tend to be largely inefficient and expansionary in nature.

V. DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE ENTERPRISE

The lack of a substantial entrepreneurial class in Turkey tends to limit the growth of private industry. Typically, the Turk is inexperienced in management and has little background in the concept of general public ownership of a corporation, The limited availability of risk capital has also served to restrict industrial development. Those enterprises which are labor intensive and capital light most nearly match the resources available within the Turkish economy.

VI AGRICULTURE

Turkish agriculture employs the bulk of the people and accounts for 40% of the national income. It is tied to traditional crops such as cereals, fruit, nuts, tobacco, sugar beets, and cotton. Principal exports have been tobacco, dried fruits, nuts, cotton, mohair and wool. Little has been done to develop such export crops as fresh fruits and vegetables to the available European market. Great potential exists to improve Turkish agriculture and thus allow Turkey to become self-sufficient in its food supply as well as increase exports.

VIII. TOURISM

There is much in Turkey that should be of interest to the tourist, particularly along the Aegean and Mediterranean coastlines. This area is important in a historical and archaeological sense and there are many ruins of considerable importance and interest, which are just now being developed. The Turk appears to be a poor hotel-keeper. He somehow fails to develop a concern for the guest and what his needs are. Although the Turk is friendly, he does not appear to have the light, happy disposition for which so many of the inhabitants of other Mediterranean countries are noted.

IX. POPULATION CONROL

The population of Turkey increases about 3% a year and this substantial increase does much to reduce the effectiveness of its industrial and agricultural progress. Steps must, and are, being taken toward a family planning program that will bring this population growth more into line with that which the economy an justify.

X. GENERAL

Despite the many problems, there is a great deal that is encouraging in the Turkish picture. Much optimism rests upon a new class of Turk who has a more modern outlook and who is dedicated to moving Turkey forward. Many of these people have been trained in the U.S. and are now bringing to bear much of what they have learned here both in knowledge and in philosophy towards the solving of some of their country’s problems.

XI. CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE U.S. FOREIGN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

To date, a very large percentage of U.S. assistance to Turkey has gone toward the public sector with heavy concentration on the infrastructure, particularly road construction. One was struck by the quality of the modern main roads and the apparent good efficiency of the maintenance program for them.

The largest single project to which the U.S. has contributed has been the Eregli Steel Mill on the Black Sea. This steel mill has recently been placed in operation and is complementary to the older State-owned mill. It is expected that as the market for its products builds up the mill will become self-sustaining and should be making money within two years.

The U.S. has also played a major role in the field of education. Literacy training for military draftees has been a very effective program The U.S. aid program has also been effective in assisting higher education programs. One is the Middle East Technical University in Ankara. Its President, Dr. Kurdas, is building a modern technical university. Interestingly, all courses are taught in English. This university is just getting started but it appears it will do much to upgrade the level of higher technical education.

The second school which Hewlett visited was called The Hacettepe Science Center. Its founder was Dr. Dogramaci. Dr. Dogramaci had been appointed a Professor of Pediatrics and from this position he was able to create a new young staff educated in modern medical practices. From this springboard he was able to build a completely integrated educational institution known as the Hacettepe Science Center. This now includes a College of Arts and Sciences, two Nursing Schools, a School of Dentistry, a School of Physical Medicine and a School of Graduate Studies – all basically supported from private sources.

Hewlett visited four companies in the Istanbul area – two in the private sector, one State owned, and one a branch of a major American company. One of the Turkish-owned companies was in the business of furnishing products extracted from corn, such as starch, corn oil, and corn sugar. The second Turkish company was in the insecticide business, based on chlorine chemistry. The third company was SEKA, a State-owned pulp and paper factory. The final plant was part of the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company, and all the top management was American.

Hewlett sees American training as a strong influence in all these companies. One of the major roles that U.S. aid has played is that of lending assistance to the development of industries in the private sector and to those programs that will improve the management skill of Turkish entrepreneurs and business administrators. A pattern for this is beginning to take form.

XII. RECOMMENDATIONS

Hewlett makes several recommendations:

Every reasonable effort should be made to support the development of the private sector vis-à-vis the State-owned enterprises.
Continue the work with the Forest Service encouraging it to take steps leading toward a more effective utilization of the great forest reserves of Turkey.
Aid funds should be concentrated in relatively few areas, and the U.S. should try to do the best possible job.
One of the most productive long range programs that American assistance can foster is that of education.
The experimental program of the Agriculture Controlled Credit Bank deserves the active support of U.S. assistance.
Hewlett is quite skeptical that tourism will play an important role in the Turkish economy. This must be looked upon as a long term area and any funds expended should be in such areas as developing improved management practices, rather than attracting tourists into an area that currently is limited.

XII. FINAL COMMENT

Hewlett says he was highly impressed with the people administering the U.S. AID Program in Turkey. They showed a great desire to make “each dollar spent in Turkeyachieve the greatest return towards promoting the U.S. policy of making Turkey economically independent and self-sufficient with the next few years.”

Box 1, Folder 69 – General Speeches

November 23, 1965 – Turkey and Afghanistan, EE Faculty Luncheon, Stanford, CA

11/23/65, Outline of talk, handwritten by Hewlett on notebook paper. His date on the paper is 11/8/65 – see above

Hewlett provides a comprehensive review of his travels in both of these countries, covering history, economics, education, agriculture, problems, U.S. assistance….

10/27/65, Letter to Hewlett from Professor John Linville, confirming Hewlett talk to EE faculty on February 23, 1965

11/5/65, Copy of a letter to Professor Linville from Hewlett saying he has been having trouble reaching him.

September 1964, Copy of printed map of Stanford

Box 1, Folder 70 – General Speeches

December 6, 1965, Talk to Medical Sales Seminar, to HP Sales People, Palo Alto, CA

12/6/65, Outline of comments, handwritten by Hewlett on notebook paper

Hewlett talks about the importance of change, HP history, HP concepts of marketing, the outlook for medical instrumentation. He says “We are the right company, in the right place, at the right time.”

11/23/65, Copy of a memo from Carl Mahurin, listing the seminar participants

12/1/65, Copy of a memo from Carl Mahurin listing seminar agenda

Box 1, Folder 71 – General Speeches

January 5, 1966 – Talk to New Marketing MBAs, Palo Alto, CA

1/5/66, Brief notes for talk, handwritten by Hewlett Packard

Speaking about the problems associated with the assimilation of the sales representatives, Hewlett talks about stress saying it means a challenge, means an opportunity.

“A great opportunity for you to contribute to and help in the working of these problems. I hope that you find this interesting and challenging.”

12/23/65, Copy of a memo from Len Gibson to Bill Hewlett inviting him and his wife to a dinner affair.

12/27/65, Copy of a memo from Len Gibson (no addressee) listing the attendees with brief biographical facts.

1964 – Hewlett Speeches

Box 1, Folder 46 – General Speeches

January 10-12, 1964 – Talk at HP Monterey Conference, HP Managers, Monterey, CA

1/10-12/64, Hewlett’s handwritten outline of his remarks at the annual meeting of HP managers.

Hewlett sees HP at a crossroads. HP’s primary customer has been the military and that is going to retrench. Why – stagnant economy, general belief that a tax cut is necessary, which means reduced spending, and the military is an easy target.

He says current HP forecasts may be too optimistic. Need to consider alternate course of action –

Problems with considering new areas

Would be more industrially oriented

HP would have neither the technology, marketing know how and little knowledge of competition

If HP moves into the field of others, others will move into HP’s field

On approaching the problem Hewlett suggests –

We would do better in present areas

Need to expand footholds we have – medical

Set up in house groups to brainstorm ideas

Possibly acquire other companies in new fields

We need the best leadership possible get it from inside or outside. Must make progress

We have led a sheltered life – now entering a new era – must leave shelter – get out into the mainstream – be prepared to slug it out.

Honeymoon is over. Need to get to work –or fail.

1/9/64, Memo from HP economist, Austin Marx, to Hewlett giving some data on government forecasts of business, and HP order history. He includes data on layoffs experienced by some other companies. He also includes a copy of a statement (11/25/63) by F. R. Collbohm, President of Rand Corp. before Select Committee on Government research, House of Representative, and copies of several articles on research projects.

Box 1, Folder 47 – General Speeches

January 20, 1964 – Senior Sales Seminar Breakfast, location not given

1/20/64, Typewritten copy of outline of remarks, as well as a handwritten copy

Hewlett talks about the technical progress of HP, past, present and future

He says HP has led a “slap-happy life,” in an engineering sense. Progress made mainly by fired-up imagination and creative guys who did a great job – analogy of bin of parts which was common to all users.

Discusses the purpose and progress of hpa, a new division of HP – “fascinating” progress, he writes:

High speed light operated switch

Solid state memory devices of thin film type

Really high input impedance transistor devices

Solid state strain gauges

Light sensitive vari-caps

Truly high speed diodes

He writes “This program will really pay off.”

The hpa program very good, but highlights a very important problem now facing HP. A greater sense of responsibility and of control

Corporate-wise we are spending all we can afford

Must reduce duplication without destroying initiative
Must do a better job of selection of projects without becoming stereotyped
Must be willing to move into a new field of instrumentation without undue proliferation of sales effort

HP started as an engineering oriented company; still an engineering and new product oriented company. Plan to maintain these characteristics and push still further into the future.

Reflects on the role of the field sales force with reference to:

caliber of people
training
the fact that they are the eyes and ears of the company

Box 1, Folder 48 – General Speeches

February 11, 1964 – Talk to Engineers at Loveland Plant

2/11/64, Brief outline of remarks handwritten on back of a teletype message he had received regarding hotel accommodations

Hewlett writes that HP is an engineering company, dependent on:

Ingenuity, imagination, creativity, elegance of design

A word about last year:

Sanborn, purchase of sales representatives, R&D expense

A word about current year:

Uncertainties

Some up – some down

People unsettled- move into other fields

Period of reorientation – good progress

Position at Loveland

Some costs high – sales sick

Good leadership, new spirit

Why started, advantages of small company

Box 1, Folder 49 – General Speeches

February 25, 1964 – Annual Shareholders Meeting, at HP Corporate Headquarters, Palo Alto, CA

2/25/64, Handwritten outline of remarks, written by Hewlett

General remarks

International picture continues strong

Orders

Europe largest market, up 10%

Canada up 14%

Rest of world up 5%

Overall corporation up 18% vs. 5% in U.S.

Operation

Three foreign manufacturing plants opened

GmbH production up 10%

Ltd.- Production up 80%, 140 people, tight on space

YEW – HP, 49-51%, start Jan 1964 with 246 people

Sales

Own operation in UK, France, Italy

Japan YHP

Take over Sanborn April 1^st

Box 1, Folder 50 – General Speeches

April, 1964 – Talk at YHP, Tokyo, Japan

4/64, Pencilled outline for remarks, written by Hewlett on YHP stationary

Hewlett lists topic-of-year to date, and outlook for rest of the year.

Market analysis

Only two ways to grow – increase penetration of old field, or operate in a new field

The first means more effective selling, the second means new products

Start from scratch – acquire

Nuclear work, tape transport, temperature, mw spectrum

Mecrolabs

Importance of international organization – domestic off target, international on target

R&D in Europe – tough, needs your help

A word about Japan, Primarily a local market, some items repackaged, produced to HP standards and sold worldwide

Box 1, Folder 51 – General Speeches

May, 1964 – Talk at Bedford, England

The date and place of this speech is not certain. From his notes he appears to be in Bedford, England, and is discussing the possibility of moving the plant to Scotland. Mr. and Mrs. Hewlett had been in Germany at the Boblingen plant and it appears they came to England on the same trip.

May, 1964, Notes for speech handwritten by Hewlett on 3×5” cards. Very similar notes also handwritten on the back of a letter addressed to Hewlett concerning their German itinerary. This draft appears to be an earlier draft for the Bedford remarks.

Hewlett talks about the Company’s operations in the past and what he sees for the future. He apologizes for not getting around more to visit with individual employees – says he will do more if he can. Says he and Mrs. Hewlett wish to have a weekend on their own.

Hewlett talks about the problems of quality – cost of re-work. Says quality is your job.

He talks about bonus – last year 6% through December, possibly 8.6% this year.

The Move

Says they came to Bedford knowing they might have problems. Easy to look back and see what they might have done. Did not appreciate how rapidly we would grow. Analyzes the possibility of moving to another area vs. staying in Bedford. Says they are looking for a new site, possibly Scotland. Would like all to come if they can – HP’s loss if they cannot. Timing 2 years.

Management

Says has high regard for David Simpson as manager and nothing in his inspection over the past couple of days has changed his mind. Plant can have only one manager. If you cannot follow seek employment elsewhere.

2/65 Photocopy of a page from Measure magazine of February, 1965 saying that the plant in Bedford will relocate to South Queensferry, Scotland.

Box 1, Folder 52 – General Speeches

July 13, 1964 – Senior Sales Breakfast, no location given

5/64, Hand written outline of remarks written by Hewlett-Packard

Talking first about corporate performance Hewlett lists these notes:

First five months of year – good

Orders up 9% – but 4% below target

Shipments up 7% but 6% below target

Profits up 23 ½ % up – not good enough

In general performance was fair

Outlook for short term

Hewlett gives several figures covering national economy showing moderate growth. Principle areas of growth were electronic instruments, optics, nuclear, medical, space telemetry, process controls

Hewlett sees a tough year.

Discusses corporate changes

Shift away from military sales

Need new products, sold to new customers.

Structure our selling effort to meet these changes

Box 1, Folder 53 – General Speeches

August 18, 1964 – Remarks to College Engineers Summer Program, Luncheon, Palo Alto, CA

8/18/64, Handwritten notes for remarks, written by Hewlett

Hewlett talks about history of company 25 years ago – first sales to Disney

Talks about the summer program for engineering students

What HP gets out of it

What you get out of it

Where you come from

Where our managers came from

Policy on engineers and management

New areas of interest

R&D

Mecrolab

Mw spectrum

Nuclear physics

Medical

How management decides to go into new areas – or not

Where new ideas come from

Examples of ideas

8/9/65, Copy of a memo to Hewlett from Norm Williams outlining arrangements for the students tour day

8/9/64, Copy of list of student names and colleges represented

Box 1, Folder 54 – General Speeches

August 31, 1964, Finance Seminar, Luncheon, location not given

8/31/64, Handwritten outline of notes for remarks, written by Hewlett

Hewlett says when he talked to the financial people the previous year the title of his speech was “Where the company is going and what it means in terms of Accounting.” He says this year’s talk has the same title – subtitled “Flexibility.”

“Where is the Company going,” he says

He lists some areas of new interest – mag. tape, mw spectroscopy, nuclear instruments, chemical instruments, secondary computer operation, contract medical sales, components, transistors….

He redefines some areas of interest

In the functional – primarily through electronic means, data acquisition, storage, processing and products

More specifically – measurement of physical quantities in the electrical, mechanical and chemical field

Biological quantities primarily for diagnostic use

He talks next about how the company may be put together

He sees some offshoots of present structure

Acquisitions

Policy

Large vs. small

Advantage of small company

Individual initiative and drive

Specific product areas

Republican philosophy

Problems of managing many small shows

Real challenge to management

2+2=5 – synergistic

Must be able to give people something not available to them

Must know how well things are going. This can be achieved through a functional staff organization

Finances make money available . Functional reporting is the glue that holds all together – problem of two bosses, functional manager in corporate and local manager.

Finance is one area where we demand conformance.

Box 1, Folder 55 – General Speeches

September 9, 1964 – Dinner for New Engineers, Corporate cafeteria, Palo Alto, CA

9/9/64, Typewritten page with notes for Hewlett’s remarks, includes handwritten additions

In a slate of speakers Hewlett was scheduled to speak about International Operations. He talks about the importance of overseas operations and their relationship to domestic operations.

He describes the various current international locations and new areas they are looking into.

Hewlett talks about new product areas and growth potential

He talks about where new engineers might fit in, their importance to new product program, importance of self-development.

8/19/64, Copy of a memo from Personnel VP Ray Wilbur to Hewlett and Packard. Wilbur talks about plans for the upcoming dinner for new engineers.

9/4/64, Copy of a memo from Ray Wilbur to Hewlett attaching a list of new engineers hired since July 1963 – coming from all 50 states and 11 foreign countries

9/9/64, Copy of a memo from Ray Wilbur to Packard listing the speakers at the forthcoming dinner for new engineers

Box 1, Folder 56 – General Speeches

September 15, 1964, United Fund Drive Kickoff Luncheon, location not given

9/15/64, Handwritten notes written by Hewlett on the back of a sheet listing the money expected to be allocated to agencies in Santa Clara County

Hewlett lists topics he wishes to cover –

How HP views support to local agencies

Results of last years drive – was down

This year goal –

Company matching

Let’s make HP a “pace setter of pace setters”

Box 1, Folder 57 – General Speeches

October 12, 1964 – New Engineers Luncheon, probably held in Corporate plant, Palo Alto, CA

10/12/64, One notebook page outlining notes for his remarks, handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett says in times past he has talked on Corporate objectives, but concludes these can be read.

Describes the company – appearance of confusion

New definition of areas of interest – product areas

Some internal – some acquisition

What this means to you – Opportunities

Box 1, Folder 58, General Speeches

October 24, 1964 – Colorado Springs Dedication, Colorado Springs, CO

10/24/64, Handwritten outline, (somewhat expanded) of talk by Hewlett

Hewlett says the HP plant was just starting 18 months ago and now it has 364 people working there – 450 by year end. Have 80 professional level people. He says they are all appreciative for all the help received from Colorado Springs people. Soon, he says these people will begin to carry their load in the community – help in the P.T.A., the Chamber of Commerce, United Fund drives,

When they really begin to think of this as their home that is when some may be willing to run for elective office like school board or city council. Representative government is no better than the interest that people take in it and the caliber of citizens elected to office.

These are just a few of the areas where HP and the Community work together…to mutual benefit.

“I think that there is one final point I would like to make and this has to do with how we view the operation in Colorado Springs. We look upon it as a complete self sustained industry. It has its own R & D, its own manufacturing, its own sales department. And its own areas of financial responsibility and it has its own manager. This was done for a reason – to give the advantages of a small company. The local manager, with all the help that we can give him from Palo Alto has the responsibility to make the operation a success – with your continued help and support he can succeed and in turn help in the community.”

“In 1954 the HP company was exactly the size of this operation – not exactly parallel but the thought is certainly worth speculating about.”

Box 1, Folder 59 – General Speeches

November, 1964 – Report on Business International’s Roundtable Conference in Moscow.

(See also speech dated 2/11/65 on USSR trip.)

11/64, Copy of typewritten report Hewlett wrote giving his impressions of his trip to Russia. He explains that BI is a private U.S. profit oriented organization whose business is the dissemination of knowledge to its clientele on matters of international business. He stresses that the purpose of the trip was a study of Russia’s economic system, not political, and he adds that the conference was highly organized and left little room for sightseeing.

11/64, Copy of a handwritten outline of his report.

12/16/64, Copy of a pamphlet titled “The Current Digest of the Soviet Press

Box 1, Folder 60 – General Speeches

November 30, 1964 – Talk to visiting Brigham Young Senior Engineering students

11/30/64, Brief notes, handwritten by Hewlett listing topics he planned to cover when talking to the students.

Hewlett talked about what HP does – what and where – two locations Loveland and Colorado Springs, in additional to Palo Alto.

He lists subsidiaries:

Moseley

Boonton

Harrison

Sanborn

HP GmbH

HP Ltd.

Asking why we are the way we are Hewlett reviews the history of HP, the acquisitions and the divisions:

Microwave

Oscilliscope

Frequency and Time

R&D

Hpa

Talks abut the development of company policy

11/23/64, Memo from Norm Williams to several HP managers outlying plan for the student’s visit. Attached is a list of current HP employees who graduated from BYU, and a list of the visiting students.

1963 – Hewlett Speeches

Box 1, Folder 37 – General Speeches

February 14, 1963 – “The Importance of Being Wrong,” Brigham Young University, Provo, UT

2/14/63, Draft of speech handwritten by Hewlett

Speaking to his audience of students, Hewlett says “the three most difficult statements for people to make are: I don’t know, I don’t understand, and I was wrong.” Saying that while any one of these would be worth considerable discussion, he wants to talk about the subject of being wrong while in the pursuit of truth, first in the context of scientific and engineering endeavors, and, secondly, as it might apply in the field of management.

Looking at the matter of being wrong as it might apply in field of science, Hewlett goes back to the Greek era – and to Aristotle in particular. “Aristotle,…the pupil of Plato, the teacher of Alexander the Great,” he says, “is important because of his profound influence on the scientific thought of the Western world.”

In explaining Aristotle’s approach to science, Hewlett says “…he believed in the natural path of investigation, starting with that which is observed and readily observable and evident, and proceeds to the more self-evident and intrinsically more intelligible. From these intelligible principles observable facts can be predicted and verified by experiment. From such experiments come confirmation or refutation of the applicable intelligible principle, i.e., success or failure – right or wrong. Some conclusion would be reached and action taken. Progress was made by some correct decision, some action.

“Aristotle,” Hewlett says, “is alledged [sic] to have stated that in his work he learned more through a study of his failures than from a review of his successes.” Hewlett notes that while this is a “truism,” it is “more often observed in the breach than in its observance.” But he emphasizes the point that after action comes observation and then analyses.

“Aristotle’s approach, as important as it was scientifically, had certain weaknesses,” Hewlett tells his audience. “…it presupposed a theory and set about to prove it rather than the more wide open theory of investigation that studied general principles, rather than seeking to prove a theory.”

“A second failure of the Aristotelian approach was the acceptance of the ‘self-evident’ or ‘generally accepted’ basis for subsequent theory,” Hewlett says. He tells how Copernicus, in 1530, completed his treatise saying the sun was the center of the solar system. This was a challenge to the commonsense feeling that the solid and immovable earth was at the center, with the sun and other planets rotating around it. And, for the first time, it was a challenge to the authority of Aristotle himself.

“The reaction to Copernicus,” Hewlett says, “was typified by the comment of Francis Bacon who said of Copernicus that he was a man who ‘thinks nothing of introducing fiction of any kind into nature, provided his calculations turn out well.’”

And Hewlett tells how, three-fourths of a century later, Isaac Newton “knocked out theory and created new fiction – gravity. It was only a matter of time before his fiction was accepted as theory and, in turn, was to be modified by the 20^th century fiction of Einstein’s relativity.”

“Therefore,” Hewlett tells the students, “you have a responsibility to question – not that you will all be Newtons or Einsteins – but in the day to day world that surrounds you, you will find many things that ‘always have been done’ – but that does not make them correct. All of this [is] to say that in science man’s progress has been made by the questioning of ‘authority’ by more advanced theory, the proving out of the new theory…with resultant advancements – and in time the now old authority [becomes] challenged by new ‘fiction.’ ”

Hewlett moves on to show how all this has application to the world of management – or, more specifically, decision making.

He says, “In a group your reputation is built by a series of good decisions, large and small. Some mistakes will be tolerated particularly if it is noted that you learn from them. A long series of decisions that have stood up gain you leadership among your associates. Your own success can be judged when more and more people both at your organizational level and above seek advice. When people no longer question why a decision is made but merely accept your views, you are on the road to being an expert (ugh) and have achieved leadership in that field.

“All of which is a long way of saying that personal progress is made in management by your skill in successful decision making and not by not making decisions.”

Dealing with Failure.

“Failure can be a shattering experience. What to do about it.” Hewlett advises maintaining equilibrium, “don’t panic – ask yourself how big was the failure, who thinks it is a failure. Is it indeed a failure – not to be defensive, but self analytic – to learn from experience. One of the hardest things about failure is to recognize it as an opertunity [sic]. One of the hardest questions is ‘Was it me or was it bad luck.’ A time for self-analysis, often an inflated ego, toughest when [failure] comes after a long series of good decisions. A sense of infallibility has been established – all the more reason to get back on beam….Sometimes failure comes from being too much of a perfectionist with a resultant inability to make a key decision, for not making a decision is often as much a decision as making one.”

Hewlett tells the students that as they start out in the world as junior employees they “have a right and a responsibility in your mind to challenge the status quo of your new environment – to ask questions, to listen and to learn. In due course I’m sure you will want to make constructive suggestions. Not all organizations, – not all supervisors, are the same. In a good organization, with a good supervisor, consideration will …be given to thoughtful suggestions and their source noted.” He tells them they may be rebuffed, and he councils moderation in such circumstances; “but above all,” he says, “remember your reaction to this disinterest and vow to be more responsive when you are in an equivalent position.”

Conclusions

Hewlett concludes with a quote from a book ‘The Art of Decisions Making,’ by Joseph D. Cooper:

‘The aftermath of decision is action and the aftermath of action often brings some measure of failure. In a sense, anything short of perfection constitutes a fraction of failure. However failure is to be avoided, when it comes you must learn from it.’

Hewlett continues, saying, “I know of many people who have great ability and good ideas – but who are afraid to act for fear of being wrong. I know of others who are such perfectionists that unless every eye is dotted and T crossed they will make no decision – take no action.”

“In a measure, my being here today is proof of what I say for this is but an imperfect presentation of a very important phylosophical [sic] point. I am willing to be called wrong, but even here I have a hedge, for to those of you who do not agree, who believe I am wrong, at least I am practicing what I am preaching. But to those of you who agree I may have made some small contribution.”

Box 1, Folder 38 – General Speeches

April. 1963 – “The Changing Scene of Engineering,” Tokyo Section of IEEE

4/63, Outline of speech handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett says he has not been active in the IEEE for the last 8-9 years, although one of the HP Vice Presidents is a VP of IEEE.

Therefore, he says he would like to talk about long term trends in science, particularly engineering trends — the recent merger of IEEE and AIEE being one example.

II Background

[Science] is growing exponentially – 90% of scientists are now alive, double every 10-15 years.

Problems of education

Uses and control

Overall growth [of science] consists of whole series of lesser growths – some arrested and now static – some declining like steam locomotives.

As science becomes more complex there are some significant changes taking place that I believe are worthy of noting. One of these is the tendency of all sciences to spread out and overlap related areas.

III Engineering

Military engineering – civil engineering
New fields – specialists, ME, EE
IRE, AIEE,
Educational process follows – how to do courses
Professional consultants
Changing pattern

1. Professional to employee

Some fields peter out – mining engineer
New societies spring up, like IRE – some short lived
Professional group section in IRE
Technical committee AIEE

Significant of new phenomenon
Areas of related interest spreading out
Other areas finding commonality
Concept of team approach
The broader base of science has encouraged companies to speak out on new areas, thus the phenomenon of everyone speaking out on new areas, getting into each others fields. – rubber into petrochemical, petrochemical into plastic, chemical into drugs…

III What to do about it.

Recognize it as it happens
Education as it happens
Develop management skill to cope with it.
Be prepared to adapt marketing, strategize to exploit own ideas and to react to others.
Be as flexible and mobile as possible – both in technical and management sense. A fixed position is just as obsolete as the Maginot Line.
As to the merger of IRE and AIEE, it was the recognition of facts and a symbol of the changing times. It was a wise and courageous move, and one from which we may learn something about the problems of overlapping disciplines.

Box 1, Folder 39 – General Speeches

May, 1963 – “An Executive View of Industrial Planning,” Before the Conference on Planning for Industrial Growth, sponsored by the Stanford Research Institute, Stockholm Sweden

5/63, Typewritten, double-spaced draft of Hewlett’s speech with several notations in his handwritting.

Hewlett says he “looks forward to the opportunity to visit with many of you and to learn of the similarity of problems on both sides of the Atlantic. I hope that later in the day I may have the opportunity to discuss subjects of mutual interest with members of the conference.” For those who come to the western U.S. he extends an invitation to visit HP’s headquarters in Palo Alto, California. He says HP has employed several young men from Scandinavian countries, and, “without exception these young men have been highly regarded by their American colleagues and a number of long lasting friendships have been established.”

In considering what he might say about the subject of industrial planning he wondered what light “an executive from a relatively small electronics firm” might “cast on this subject when there are representatives from so many world famous companies participating in these discussions” He says he concluded that there was one important field of planning “where the experiences of my own company might be of value – the field of planning in a growth company.”

Hewlett says he has seen HP grow ten-fold over the last ten years, growing from “500 employees in a single plant to more than 6000 employees spread through ten plants in the U.S. and two in Europe.”

He says he has had the opportunity to observe “the transition from the highly informal planning which is characteristic of a small company, to the clear recognition of the requirements and advantages to be derived from a more precise corporate planning program.” Saying that the advantages of such a program are “abundantly clear,” he gives one example: “Ten years ago,” he says, “if we wished to expand our production by a ten percent increment, it was relatively easy to find a thousand square meters or so of additional space to house this increment. Now, a ten-percent increment requires more than ten thousand square meters of plant space, and our experience has indicated that to locate, plan, construct and equip such a facility takes almost two years. This single fact alone has forced planning out by at least that length of time. In addition, there must be parallel planning to insure that there will be production workers, supervisors and managers…to staff this addition.”

Hewlett says he would like to continue the discussion on the subject of planning in a growth company, particularly with “the transitional phase that starts with the individual personal planning of the chief executive, [which is] so characteristic of a small company, and carry it through some of the steps that ultimately produce the more formal planning associated with a large corporation.”

He says he would like to do this “by means of a hypothetical company – a company that is a composite of all that I have observed. In discussing this hypothetical company, I would like to postulate that it has certain characteristics – one of the most important of these would be that it has had good management. This good management has been adequate to provide it with the type of product planning necessary for small company growth and further has provided it with financial planning sufficient to solve the fiscal problems associated with growth. The company has been able to establish a marketing organization that is reasonably efficient in the distribution of its products; and finally, and most important, the company has reached a size that taxes the span of control of the chief executive as yet unaided by strong staff support.”

“It is at this point,” Hewlett says, “that the prior skill and foresight of the chief executive in his alter ego as corporate-planner will show up. Does he have the executive material [available inside the company], trained and ready to help him share the increasing administrative load – or must he go outside the company to find such help? To have been ready for this need, he must long ago have anticipated such a requirement and have committed the company to the added expense of hiring junior personnel with less experience than required for the job but with promise of great potential for executive development.”

Hewlett admits that such preparation “takes courage to do, for the horizon of the small growth company is never very far ahead. It is truly difficult without the elaborate planning staff of a large company to predict future growth. All the chief executive can conclude is that the company is doing as well today as yesterday, – that he sees no worse storm clouds ahead than in years past, and that having experienced a certain average growth rate for the past few years he must be prepared for the problems that will arise if such growth continues in the future. In a gross sense, these are the bases on which the additional overhead of executive training must rest.”

Following the further development of this hypothetical company, Hewlett says, “It must have a second echelon of management capable of sharing the responsibilities of administration with the chief executive. This staff was either developed from within the organization in which case the transition can often be made smoothly or it was obtained from outside the company and the transition may be considerably more difficult. Regardless of the source of such personnel, the delegation of responsibility to the staff creates new problems within the organization. One such problem is the need for a clear set of broad corporate objectives – of corporate goals to guide top management. Often these corporate objectives have been locked in the mind of the chief executive and were never clearly expressed or even fully thought out. The formalization of goals and the acceptance of them by all is an important step in …corporate planning. Time may change them in detail or even in some major aspect but these goals, these objectives will ultimately become the backbone of the more formal corporate planning to follow.”

Increasing size brings many problems which, Hewlett says “in a small company may be solved almost on a day-by-day [basis], but which in a large company require much longer lead times and therefore, better long-range planning….Another example of the need for increased lead time with [increasing] size, is related to the necessity to have an adequate supply of trained personnel, [not only] at the management level, [but] at the foreman and supervisory level, to meet the demands of growth. As a small company, such needs are not hard to fill. A large company may find it desirable to establish in-plant training programs to assure the availability of such people as needed.”

The area of “plans and procedures” is another field where Hewlett says, increased planning is required as the company grows larger. “In the small company,” he says, “ where communication is less of a problem, greater flexibility exists with respect to adapting procedures to meet changing requirements. As a company grows, much of this flexibility is lost and much more planning is required in the development of new procedures to insure that they are in themselves flexible enough to adapt to the changing environments without disrupting the normal operation of the company.

“Closely related to this problem is that of internal accounting procedures…to revamp this important phase of accounting to accommodate the greater volume and complexity of the firm. Changes in such procedures are highly critical for they are the standards by which performance is measured. It is important, therefore that when such changes are made that they be made only after the most careful study and planning. Planning to insure that the new accounting procedures will be viable despite the changing patterns of growth.

“A final step towards formal corporate planning must be taken if size and geographical disbursement indicates a move toward management decentralization. Without corporate planning such decentralization can lead to corporate anarchy. The objectives, the goals, the inter-operation of all elements of the decentralized company must be carefully planned if full advantage is to be taken of the inherent assets of a large corporation, yet at the same time capitalize on the flexibility that lies in the smaller operating unit. If I may return to our own company for a moment – our entry into the European market added much to our understanding of the need for better planning, for it forcibly took us out of our domestic environment where many functions and operations had been taken for granted and forced us to look objectively at them for the first time. This look gave us a better insight into such areas as flow of funds, transfer of know-how, market strategy, management rotation and the like. As a result of such planning, we have been able to adapt ourselves to our new environment and, indeed, benefit greatly from our new associations, not only in a technical sense but in the broad area of mutual understanding.”

Hewlett says people in Europe are more accustomed to a multi-country environment and “may fail to realize the truly stimulating effect of moving out of your home country environment, which inevitably tends to be restricted in view, and into other countries of the world where one has the opportunity to observe the many and varied approaches both to the day to day and long term problems that face an industrial concern. For us, the planning that led to our markets in Europe has proved to be an indirect but important key to better international understanding by our entire top staff.”

In closing, Hewlett says he has “just touched on a few highlights of the step-by-step growth of planning that leads to a more mature company. “I have dealt,” he says, “with the structural aspects of this development rather than with the more obvious and more widely recognized need for product planning, for market planning, or for financial planning. Indeed, each of these is a major subject in itself. One of these, product planning, is a subject for discussion during the afternoon session.

“As I look back on our own experiences, I am convinced of the fact that, almost without exception, we have not initiated a given planning program until appreciably after the need was first evident. If I had the ability to relive this phase of our development, one of the aspects on which I would lay the greatest stress would be an earlier recognition of the need for planning. We have lived through this phase but we could have done better.”

5/63, Typewritten, single spaced, copy of Hewlett’s speech. Has no notations added and does not incorporate the handwritten notations he had added on the copy noted above.

Box 1, Folder 40 – General Speeches

May 23, 1963 – Testimony at a hearing of the Senate Committee on Commerce, San Francisco, CA

5/23/63, Copy of typewritten text of Hewlett’s remarks

Hewlett says that he hopes, as a representative of the Western Electronic Manufacturers Association [WEMA], “to give some indication to this Committee about the steps being taken by the electronics industry in the West to increase its share of trade in the Pacific area.”

He says the electronics industry is so diffuse that a detailed analysis of the overall export program could not be given without “a tremendous amount of research. Lacking the time to undertake such a survey he says “I will therefore be forced to deal in either broad generalizations about the industry or by means of specific references to the experience of my own company.”

“Electronics” he says, “ in California is the seventh ranking industry in this State in terms of export.” Behind aircraft, food products, and petroleum, “it is still an important and significant phase of the State economy.” Based on data that he has been able to gather, including various governmental reports, Hewlett reports that “as far back as 1957 (the most current data available), California was the third ranking state in the export of electronic equipment in the U.S. Although it may be very difficult to obtain an exact estimate of the distribution of U.S. electronic products, it is possible to make a reasonable estimate based on the very close correlation that exists between the sale of precision electronic test and measuring equipment and the total electronic market. This is exactly the field in which my company, the Hewlett-Packard Company, is engaged – and thus a study of the U.S. Department of Commerce classifications covering this category of products, as well as our own experience, gives a reasonable clue to the relative importance of various world trade areas for U.S. electronic products. Using the most currently available…that of 1961, one finds the following approximate breakdown of the market areas of the world:

Europe – 50%

Canada – 20%

The Pacific area including India and Pakistan – 15%

The rest of the world – 15%

“A more careful scrutiny of the 15% of the exports that go to the Pacific area reveals that 75% of the product goes to 3 countries – Japan, Australia and India, and the remaining 25% to the 15 other countries listed in the Department of Commerce survey.”

Noting the higher percentage of exports to Europe, Hewlett says “U.S. industry in general has not been particularly export minded. It is really only in the past decade that the full importance and potentialities of the export market are being appreciated by American industry,”

Hewlett inserts a related thought: “In passing, I might comment that the 1962 changes to the Revenue Act as they affect taxation of foreign income were in my opinion most unfortunate. At a time when every effort should be made to encourage trade, these revisions I am afraid, will have exactly the opposite effect. There certainly were certain abuses of the existing law but why try to carve a chicken with a meat cleaver.”

Returning to his primary subject, and referring back to the rather recent recognition of the importance of exports by American industry, he says “It is quite natural that the industry world tend to look first at the most important market areas – Europe and Canada, and only after these markets were reasonably in hand to such secondary markets as the Pacific area.

“From this fact, it an be concluded that reasonable opportunities may exist for expansion of electronic exports to the Pacific area.”

Hewlett says customers for electronic equipment are “generally found in those countries [with] a reasonable degree of sophistication in their industries, or have a large internal military demand. It is for this reason, I believe, that one finds the heavy predominance of electronic exports to such countries as Japan and Australia. Let me discuss …some of the problems of expanding exports to these countries as well as some of the steps that are being taken to overcome them.”

JAPAN

Hewlett says Japan is greatly concerned with its balance of payments and “husbands her reserve of dollars with great care. Thus, U. S. exporters to Japan

face serious limitations on import licenses and dollar exchange available for [imported] products. Unless Japan can export more of its manufactured products, it is unable to increase its imports.” Hewlett feels U. S. policy towards Japan has been “liberal and enlightened.” But Europe, on the other hand, he says, has “…by one means or another managed to restrict seriously the import of Japanese products. He recommends that the U.S., therefore, “continue to push, in the most vigorous fashion possible, for a more enlightened policy by our European allies in this respect.”

Hewlett says “Many American electronic manufacturers are establishing manufacturing operations in Japan in an attempt to increase the sale of products [there.]” He says these operations are usually established in conjunction with a Japanese partner. Hewlett feels these operations will inevitably lead to an increase in exports [from] the U. S. “Part of this increase in exports will come in the form of components whose specialized nature precludes their manufacture in Japan -part [will come] in the form of fabricated items which can be more economically manufactured in the U. S., and part through improving the reputation of American made products, thus increasing the share of import dollars made available for their purchase. Part [of the increased exports from the U.S will come] from the export of U.S. production machinery which may be necessary to support local manufacturing. Our own experience with the establishment of manufacturing operations in Europe has borne out these factors. We have found that our total export of manufactured items to Europe has increased at a rate substantially larger than our domestic market, and further, that it is necessary to import almost 70% of our components and materials from the U.S. to support these foreign manufacturing plants.”

“Up until recently it was not possible for products of foreign manufacturers to be displayed at…trade shows in Japan,” Hewlett says. On the other hand, he points out that Japanese products are regularly displayed at trade shows in the U.S.

He says some progress is being made for U. S. products to be shown in Japan, saying that “two booths may be assigned to the Scientific Apparatus Makers Association at a show later in the year.”

And Hewlett adds that at HP they “have found that some of the steps taken by the U.S. government to promote the sale of U.S. manufactured products in Japan have been most successful. In 1961,” he says, “we had an exhibit at the U.S. Department of Commerce exhibit at the Tokyo trade fair and found this to be a most valuable means to make known to the Japanese on a broad base the character of our products.”

AUSTRALIA

“Australia, like Japan, has a serious shortage of dollar exchange,” Hewlett says. And he adds that the discovery of oil in Australia may help alleviate this problem.

Australia has a high import duty regulations on electronic products, Hewlett says. He suggests that it would be helpful if the U. S. government urged Australia to ease this problem, although he doubts they would be receptive to any such requests “as long as there are equivalent clauses in the ‘Buy America’ act.”

INDIA

Hewlett feels that India, with its large population, should be a prime target for U.S. products, although he says they, too, have a difficult currency exchange problem. He says, “The long range policy of lending every assistance to India to facilitate a limited degree of industrialization will do much to hasten the day when India’s balance of payments problems will be lessened, and it will be in a position to import, on a freer base, manufactured products from the U.S.”

Hewlett says other countries such as Taiwan, Indonesia, Malaysia may become important export markets for U.S. electronics, but the “primitive state” of their industry limits imports now.

“In conclusion,” Hewlett says, “it can be said that to date the Pacific area has represented only a small fraction of the world export market for U.S. electronic products, and that only most recently has increased attention been focused on this market area.

“Sales penetration of the market will undoubtedly take the form of local manufacturing coupled with more aggressive sales effort. U.S. help to date through the media of trade fairs and trade centers at least in the more developed countries has been of value.

“Finally, any factors which improve the balance of payments position of customer nations will have a direct and beneficial effect on U.S. exports of electronic equipment.”

8/28-29/62, Booklet titled “Pacific Trade Patterns” containing the hearings before the Senate Committee on Commerce in August 1962, which Hewlett no doubt obtained as background for his remarks.

5/31/63, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Senator Clair Engle in which he requests a copy of the proceedings of the Senate Committee on Commerce in San Francisco in May, 1963

5/23/63, Copy of a statement by George L. Mehren on the subject of agricultural exports given at the Senate hearing in 1963

Box 1, Folder 41 – General Speeches

July 15, 1963, Talk to HP Senior Sales Seminar

For years, HP had sold its products through independent sales representatives. In late 1962, HP completed negotiations with all sales representatives to acquire them, most through the exchange of stock. These remarks by Hewlett appear to be given at the first meeting of all of the senior sales people, including those overseas, as HP people rather than as independent representatives.

7/15/63, Handwritten speech written by Hewlett on notebook lined paper

Hewlett says this is the first “Full Sales Group” meeting and the 1962 meeting was the last sales representative seminar. He says he knows there is much apprehension among those attending as to the details of the new organization and how it all will work – apprehension about “change.” He says “I would like to single out this question of “change” and look at it carefully – pick it up by its heels, turn it around, examine it top and bottom.

“There are going to be changes,” he says, underlining it twice in his notes.

And saying that there will be many types of change, he starts with “Changes in Conformity.”

Using the analogy of gears, he says not all gears of their new organization are yet meshing. “And,” he says, “usually [where gears don’t mesh] it isn’t the ‘bull’ gear that does the changing – specifically, there will be some areas where conformity is both necessary and desirable. He enumerates these

One obvious field is accounting and accountants
Not all changes to conform to parent sales organization. Different than manufacturing – desirable that there be some similarity between sales organization in different parts of the country.
Why conformity when in the next breath we will talk about the advantages of decentralization….Effective management is a complex mixture of likeness and differences. From differences spring new ideas, new techniques. From likeness can come true comparison of results, flexibility that will allow transfer of a man from one job to a more promising and challenging one in another area – the ability of the whole organization to work together as an effective unit.
Change, because now we can do some things in an integrated fashion which were not possible when our organizations were separate. Changes that will allow us to more effectively present our wares to the customer – more effectively give him the service and backing that spells future sales.

Order processing
Area stocking
More effective transportation

Change because we must adapt to changing environments

Competition
Government regulation
New technologies

Change is not necessarily bad

A. Tendency to resist change – no one likes it

Good changes bad changes, no changes
We do not want change for change’s sake – we do want no change for no change’s sake
Deep responsibility for those who cause change – results not always evident

Living with Change

Do not want to give the impression that we are going to change the hell out of everything – far from it. You were all successful in your [business] – why change more than absolutely necessary. Will not be capricious, worked out with principle.
No point in looking back at the ‘good old days’…
We are all part of one organization. Let’s all get our shoulders to the wheel and push.”

Conclusion

“There may be change in form and detail, but not in basic principle.

HP is in the business of developing, manufacturing and selling quality measuring equipment – when possible, of making a contribution to the art, at the lowest possible cost consistent with long range picture.

We are in business for the long haul and not for the quick buck. This means that in field of selling we must know as much as possible about the equipment we are selling so that we can intelligently recommend the proper equipment for the proper job. This is a relentless and unending job – to the extent that you are successful at this task you will be welcomed back – next week, or next year.

It is our continuing desire to make it as easy as possible for the customer to procure maintenance and receive the finest possible follow up service for his HP products you people are selling and have the unique responsibility to see that these objectives are met. You stand between the customer and the plants. You are a spokesman from the company to the customer is obvious – that you are a spokesman for the customer to the plant is, however, equally important. If you overlook this aspect of your job your long range effectiveness will be greatly impaired and never forget it.”

“So let’s get in and make this the best senior sales seminar ever – let’s quit worrying about the past and think about the future.”

Box 1, Folder 42 – General Speeches

August 12, 1963 – Talk at Scope Plant Ground Breaking Ceremony, Colorado Springs, CO

8/12/63, Handwritten notes by Hewlett for his remarks at this ceremony.

8/12/63, Typewritten copy of same, somewhat expanded.

Hewlett says that when he and Packard first started thinking about starting up a company in 1934, they had tentatively planned on doing so in Denver, Colorado. But by 1939 they “were well established in Palo Alto.”

“[This new plant] is a good deal – one in which both parties feel that they attain value received from the transaction.

“HP wanted :

(1) A stable, intelligent, hard working labor force, because of the type of products we make

(2) A community that was intellectually interesting and stimulating

(3) A community that was attractive and an interesting place to live.”

(4) A stable and responsible community that could understand our problems and work with us in resolving them – [we] do not expect special treatment, just a willingness to work out problems;

(5) And most important, a community that wanted us.”

He says these points are important because “…we need to bring in certain technical and managerial people into the community and these conditions make it more acceptable.”

“I need not tell you people of Colorado Springs that one would find these conditions here. I can tell you that we have indeed found these characteristics here

He says he cannot speak for the city of Colorado Springs, but he can do a little selling on behalf of HP –

“Colorado Springs will be getting:

(1) A company that is dedicated to a responsible labor policy – stable employment, even sometimes at the expense of short term dollars

(2) HP will bring technical and managerial personnel into the community that will complement and fit in well with the quality of the community

(3) [The technical nature of HP’s products] will encourage technical training in the area, as well as a general endeavor to continue to improve education at all levels

(4) Tax income and general benefits to the area to be derived from a 10 to 15 million dollar business

(5) A company that really wants to make a permanent establishment in your community”

Box 1, Folder 43 – General Speeches

September 10, 1963 – Acceptance of Honorary Lifetime Membership in the Instrument Society of America, Chicago, IL

9/10/63, Handwritten notes for his speech, written by Hewlett

With some interpretation of his notes:

Hewlett says he has been interested in ISA activities and their important leadership – he is sorry he has not been able to participate more fully.

ISA is like other organizations – “you have to sing for your supper,” and they “tell you what to talk about – technical contributions Dave and I have made – damn few.”

“Our contributions are really a product of the whole staff. All Dave and I can do is get the best people and provide a good environment.”

As for the environment, he says this includes physical, educational, intellectual, administrative

Problem getting people to move to Palo Alto

Stanford is a source of students, higher education, consultants, intellectual stimuli, interplay with good technical staff in shops

Company environment most important:

Top management deeply convinced that the future of the company depends on the quality and contribution of the technical effort.

Encourage people’s ideas that may lead to technical breakthroughs and support work

Pays off

Importance of forward effort leads to balanced program

Breakthrough that work contribute to measurement science

Opportunity of people to develop to fullest

Same horizons we had when we started – reserve for our people

It is the effort of all the people who make the people in the front office look good

9/10/63, Copy of the program for the ISA Honors and Awards Ceremony

Box 1, Folder 44, General Speeches

October 2, 1963 – Indoctrination Seminar for New Field Engineers, Palo Alto, CA

10/2/63, Handwritten notes by Hewlett for his talk

Most of you will be concerned about selling HP products: what policies, what background, what precedents of the company influence our products, our policies

To understand us you must know about our background and how it affects the company and its people.

Did better on general purpose than on special purpose instruments

Thought when we made a truly basic contribution we were repaid

As a young company we could not afford frills

The Company Today

Appearance of confusion (maybe there is)

Acquisition of sales organization

Some divisions, some subsidiaries, sales new territories

In foreign field same patterns – some are our offices, some are independent representatives

As far as you people are concerned a great confusion of products

Birth pains of a new company – an important new company in the making

You are in part also seeing the working of free enterprise system – the willingness to tolerate some degree of confusion and overlap so that the spark of creativity and innovation may have a chance to be exercised.

What this means to you

A company in motion is a company where excellent advancement of the able is possible, vis-a-vis the stable company

Finally, the idea of the sales engineers as the front door of the company

Corporate Objectives

9/27/63, Memo from Ed Winn to Hewlett confirming arrangements for the seminar and attaching list of field attendees

9/30/64, Memo from Ed Winn to Madelen Schneider, Hewlett’s Secretary, listing other attendees at the seminar

Box 1, Folder 45 – General Speeches

December 2, 1963 – Fred Jones Dinner, Mills College, Oklahoma City OK

12/2/63, Outline of remarks handwritten by Hewlett in pencil on notebook paper

Hewlett discusses the “Case for Private Colleges, ”and Private education as a national asset. His conclusions are:

1) U. S. education has developed and prospered because of the important balance between private and public education

2) Private education is a national asset for students and a source of future faculty

3) Face a crisis

4) Mills College

1962 – Hewlett Speeches

Box 1, Folder 28 – General Speeches

March 5-6, 1962 – Background of HP Development Program, HP R&D engineers

This was a general training program for engineers – and over 400 attended the day at a local hotel. Several managers spoke, including both Hewlett and Packard. There are two speech outlines in this folder. The first is clearly for the conference on March 5 – the second may have been prepared for another training seminar at an earlier date. Both are covered below.

3/5/62, Outline of first speech handwritten by Hewlett on notepaper

I Introduction

Will talk about the R&D programs in general terms – its importance to the Company, what it costs, and return on investment. Source of projects and where ideas come from. How projects are scheduled.

II The Vintage Chart – based on HP parent – instruments only

A) Comparison of 1954 products to 1961

1) Same items 13 mil, now 18 mil

2) In 7 years new products have added 30 mil – 2 ½ times larger

B) Life History of a product

1) Fast start – peak – tail off

2) Considering products in production in 1954

a) 1955 – 100%

b) 1958 – 81%

c) 1961 – 56%

C) How is HP doing – Comparison-wise?

1) HP 14.5 in 1955 to 49 in 1961 = 3.4 : 1

2) U.S. Mil. & Ind. 3.25 in 1955 to 8.19 in 1961 = 2.5 : 1

3) In six years have increased penetration 35%, or 5%/year

4) Validity of U.S. Mil.-Ind. 1954 to 1960

a) U.S. 2.44

b) Electronics market data 2.27

D) Return on Engineering $

1) Cost of Engineering 1955 thru 1961: $16M

2) Increased sales 1955 thru 1961: 92 ½ M

3) Assume pre-tax profit to be 17%, profit would be $16M

4) Run down 5 year life 4:1, 10 year life 7:1

E) Effect on Development Policy

1) Engineering one of greatest assets – must use wisely

2) Specials uneconomical – Dymec

3) Effect of military contracts – policy

F) Factors determining proper level of R & D

1) Conservation practices – payout in three years, 3/4 of growth is from industry [?], ¼ from penetration. If doubled engineers effort would require 5 fold increase in penetration rate.

2) Rate at which we can assimilate new people and train leaders from within – also space

3) Mention a balanced staff

4) A level that we might maintain even if the industry took a turn for the worst

III Source and Selection of Products

A) Basic policy: Make a contribution to art: scopes

B) Obvious field requirement 606 sig. gen., 560 printer, scopes

C) Logical extension of line: 614-616-618 sig. gen.

D) Matching requirements and techniques: 650, 202A, 428, 524, 185 sampler scope

E) “Redesigns”: 400D, 400H, 400L, 96G, 80G, 110G, 100G,

F) External Sources: 803 bridge, 415 USWR, noise factor, 721 power supply, sampling recorder

G) Project Selection

1) Seat of pants – own best judge – basic contribution

2) Factor of merit – modifying factors

3) Support of total line

IV Character of recent projects and instruments

A) Reliance on proprietary components

1) Better performance

2) Protection

3) 40% of equipment now use proprietary components

B) Integrated Electro-mechanical design

Microwave – sig, gen, recorders, clock

C) Vast increase in sophistication

1) More performance – simpler operation

2) Requirement to work as part of system

3) Greater reliability – customer should not field test

V Problems

“What are the most pressing problems facing HP? In the case of R&D it is organization.

“How can we set up so that we may have all the advantages of flexibility of a small company, and still capitalize on advantages of large one?

“How can we provide an environment in which you can contribute both to the individual engineer…and also stimulate the basic thinking that leads to technical breakthrus that lead to new families of instruments?

“How can we organize so that all the steps necessary to carry a project from conception to production can be planned and executed so that this total cycle will take a minimum of time thus reducing costs and guarantee maximum mileage out of new ideas?

“When Warner of BTL [Bell labs?] was out here last month he commented to Dave that ‘It was generally understood that HP had the best capability in circuit design of any organization in the country.’ We intend to retain the reputation.”

Undated, outline of second talk to engineers

I) Professional Judgement

A) New trend in Eng. Education

B) Corollary in industry

C) [?]

D) Means open for professional development

1) Formal

a) Honors Coop

b) College extension

c) HP policy not to give [training] material that is available on outside

2) Informal

a) Technical reading, Stoft program, discussion with colleagues

b) Technical talks

E) Application of knowledge

Collection of knowledge for collection sake is fruitless and stupid. The important element is application of knowledge. Application leads to more creative work – better and more creative work leads to advancement. I would like to point out there is a great deal of lateral movement.

II) Personal Development

A) Professional Societies

1) Make contacts that are so important later on

2) Gives experience in working with diverse group

3) Forced feeding by listening to papers

4) Is a responsibility to support anyway

B) Community Activities – Church, government, charities

1) These are important functions and deserve support – it is company policy

2) How does it help you

a) Get engineer out of his shell

b) Provide an opportunity to develop a broader base of thinking – to develop the necessary logic for conviction and vital experience selling and putting over your position – this is essential as a good supervisor both up and down

c) You learn to work with people

C) Reading

1) Business related

Organization Man

Management Theory

Technical Manager

3) Non-Business, Non-Fiction – U.S. and World around

Ugly American, Nation of Sheep

Rise and Fall of the German Reich

How much history have you read since school?

What do you read in the newspapers each day?

What do you think is the solution to the segregation problem – to unemployment?

Should the U.S. work towards a general dismantling of tariffs?

Become interested in some special subject of great personal satisfaction

4) Theater, opera, symphony, folk dance – take season seats

“It all comes down to the question of motivation. You can become a happy, uninformed, obsolete vegetable, or you can be a creative productive engineer or manager with a keen interest in the world around you and what makes it tick.

“One requires nothing more than an 8 hour day at the plant, and a TV at home. The other requires a dedication to self-improvement and a willingness to allocate and schedule time and effort for this purpose.

“One leads to stagnation, one leads to advancement.”

3/5/62, Copy of a sheet containing charts of operations data

2/23/62, Copy of a memo from Lee Seligson to Barney Oliver discussing arrangements for the conference

2/27/62, Copy of a memo from Ray Wilbur to various managers outlining arrangements and the program for the engineering conference

February, 1962, Several lists and pages of questions submitted by engineers for the conference

Undated, copy of several pages of notes handwritten by Packard for an engineering development session

Box 1, Folder 29 – General Speeches

March 8, 1962 – “European Integration and the Industrial Electronic Industry,” World Affairs Council, San Francisco

(See also speeches dated September 13, 1960, April 14, 1961, and June 16, 1962)

3/8/62, Typewritten copy of Hewlett’s speech

Hewlett says he is like a “homespun economist” [one] “who develops basic ways of thinking on certain broad problems. It is in this context that I would like to comment about my views on the industrial strength of the U.S. and the factors that have affected it.”

Hewlett feels Americans may not be any more creative or smarter than people in other countries, nor work any harder. But he says the big advantage we have had “has been the tremendous mass market that exists within the U. S. The U. S. has tailored its economy to serve this mass market and as a result found itself in recent years with a considerable competitive superiority over other nations of the world who were denied this advantage….If the basic national requirements for a commodity are large enough in a given country to justify mass production and distribution techniques, it is pretty obvious that someone in that country will take advantage of this situation. In such cases, mass produced U.S. products will have greater difficulty in successfully penetrating such a market. A case in point as far as the electronic industry is concerned is that part related to consumer goods such as radios, TV, phonographs, and the like. As a group, these products have not kept pace with the rest of U.S. electronic exports.”

Hewlett explains that, in contrast to the radio and TV group, American industry finds its greatest advantage where its market in the U.S. is large enough to warrant mass production techniques, but the market in other major countries is below that threshold. “An example,” he says, “is in another major sector of the electronic industry, the fields of industrial, scientific and military related electronics. In addition, domestic industry in this sector has full advantage of the very large Government expenditures resulting from our space and defense activities.” Taken as a whole, Hewlett points out that in the field of military and industrial electronics, the U.S. has had a commanding lead over practically any other country in the world. This is the area where HP operates.

Thus, when the Treaty of Rome was signed, and when the countries of Europe supported its provisions, “…it became pretty evident,” Hewlett says, “that the great advantage the American economy had had in the past, that of its mass market, would soon be shared with those countries within the European Common Market. To assess the situation Hewlett made a trip to Europe in 1958. “As a result of this visit,” he reports, “ I became strongly convinced that we should establish a manufacturing operation abroad, and at that time Germany appeared to be the logical country.”

Hewlett recalls the days after World War II when the U.S. put Europe “back on its feet. We taught them all we knew about production techniques and about modern management methods and they were very good students. In addition, due to war damage many of the plants abroad had much more modern equipment than their U.S. counterparts….In one area, however, either we did not teach them or they did not listen carefully, and this was in the field of marketing. I feel very strongly, and many people share this view, that American marketing practices are considerably ahead of those in Europe.” This encouraged HP to establish an “aggressive marketing organization in Europe in addition to the more obviously needed manufacturing unit,” according to Hewlett. So, implementing this course of action, a marketing centered organization was established in Geneva in the Spring of 1959 – with the first products “out the door” from the new European plant in the fall of 1959.

To show how successful the European venture was Hewlett cites some before and after figures. He says “In 1958, the year before we made our European move, we sold about 1.75 million dollars worth of equipment in Europe. Three years later, we sold 5.6 million or about a three-fold increase.”

Looking back, after 18 months of operation, Hewlett says the new plant “produced about $800,000 worth of equipment and is operating at a profit level which is quite comparable to our costs here despite the fact that due to unavailability of proper materials and components we have found it necessary to import almost 75% of such items from the U.S….All in all, I would say we are very pleased with the total program in Germany.

Moving on to discuss activities in England, Hewlett says that in 1961 they became “greatly concerned about the trend of our business in England. This was primarily due to the very strong protective tariff that exists for our type of products.” As a result, he says they decided to establish a plant near London. “It is really too early to comment on the success of this program but I think it is interesting to note that we felt it necessary to take this step.”

Concluding his remarks, Hewlett says “I would like to say that in the consumer electronics field, the rise of the ECM probably will have very little effect upon U.S. based industry. For the section of the electronic industry in the industrial and scientific fields, the ECM will continue to be a strong market for U.S. exports. Where production quantities are large enough to warrant, it will probably be desirable for many companies to establish their own manufacturing facilities abroad. I am bullish about the effect of the ECM on the electronics industry – at least for the next five years.”

3/8/62, Two pages of handwritten notes by Hewlett which appear to be the start of outline for this speech.

Box 1, Folder 30 – General Speeches

March 27, 1962 – “The Reciprocal Trade Agreements Program,” The House Ways and Means Committee, Washington D. C.

3/27/62, Copy of a typewritten text of Hewlett’s speech before the Committee

HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY

Hewlett says he appears before the Committee as a representative of the Hewlett-Packard Company, which he says “is a concern specializing in the development and manufacture of precision electronic test and measuring apparatus. In size, we are one of the largest firms in the United States concentrating in its field. We employ somewhat over 5000 people and our gross sales last year were about 85 million.” And he goes on to tell where the major plants are, both in the U.S. and abroad. He says “Foreign sales are an important element of our operation as they account for approximately 14% of our total sales, or reduced to people, represent jobs for about 650 Americans.

THE ELECTRONIC INDUSTRY

Hewlett explains that HP’s principal customer “is the electronic industry itself, specifically those firms operating in the industrial, military and scientific fields….A realistic evaluation of the segment of the industry we serve, indicates that the United States is substantially ahead of the rest of the world in both technology and production practices.”

Hewlett mentions two major reasons why this is so. “Perhaps the first…is the increasingly large percentage of the military budget which is being spent in the electronics field. Much of the technology so derived becomes an important and exportable by-product of such spending and serves to give U.S. industry a great competitive advantage.…A second important source of technological competence is the very high general level of industrial research maintained by U.S. firms, specifically those in electronics. These factors combined with the increasing domestic demand for electronic products throughout industry, give every indication that U.S. electronics is going to maintain its superiority for a number of years ahead. What I am saying is that in a field like electronics, superior technology will demonstrate and that should tariff restrictions be reduced or eliminated, the U.S. would be in a position to increase substantially its balance of exports over imports.

HEWLETT-PACKARD EXPERIENCES ABROAD

Hewlett tells what two things HP did when it became apparent that the European Common Market would be a reality – “establish a manufacturing operation within the Common Market to protect against the adverse effects of foreign tariffs, and [secondly], …mount a major European sales program. The results since 1958 are of interest for total sales in Europe have increased four fold even though there is an average effective tariff against our products of about 20%. Had this tariff been lower, there is every indication that our exports from this country would have increased even more sharply. A corresponding reduction in U.S. tariff, we feel, would have had little effect upon our domestic sales. If we can compete successfully with foreign competitors in their own country we are certainly not going to worry about competition from them on our own home ground.

“Our experiences in the manufacturing field were equally interesting. Contrary to expectation, we found that by-and-large the quality of foreign electronic components, the basic building blocks of our assembly operation, were inferior to those of U.S. manufacture. To maintain comparable performance standards for our equipment, we have been forced to procure almost three quarters of such items from U.S. sources. I am sure that should European tariffs be reduced on such items there would be a substantial increase in their export from the U.S.

Hewlett says he wants to give another example of the adverse effect of foreign tariffs. “Most of the equipment we manufacture,” he says, “is classified by the United Kingdom as equipment that may enter duty free if there is no comparable product in the UK. If, however, such a product is available from local sources, then our product carries a 33 1/3% tariff. We enjoyed a sizeable and growing business with a certain class of instruments in England for which there was no local counterpart. Two years ago, a well known British firm introduced what appeared to be an almost identical copy of our instrument. We lost our preferred tariff rating and the sales on this instrument were reduced by fifty percent -–a dramatic indication of how U.S. exports can be affected adversely by foreign tariffs. Our only course was to either give up our position in the market or to set up a subsidiary to produce this item in England. We chose the latter course and I am happy to report the latest figures indicate that we have recaptured our position in this field, but it was done at the expense of setting up a second manufacturing facility in Europe long before we would have normally chosen to do so.

SUPPORT OF PROPOSAL

“The Hewlett-Packard Company is strongly convinced that House Resolution 9900 is a major and important step in liberalizing world trade. Should it be passed and implemented by the President, there is every indication that our exports would increase even further. We are not fearful of the effect of competition from foreign imports.”

Box 1, Folder 31 – General Speeches

April 2, 1962 – Boblingen Plant Dedication

4/2/62, Typewritten text of Hewlett’s talk

Hewlett says “It is with great pleasure that he and Mr. Packard take part in the dedication of this plant, our company’s first permanent home in Boblingen, indeed our first permanent plant outside the United States.”

He indicates they started negotiating for this site some two and a half years ago. “In the intervening period we have moved from temporary quarters in an old building on Karlstrasse to more modern quarters on Konigsbergerstrasse, and now to this fine building.” He thanks the many “fine people” who made the move possible.

“Many of you may not realize,” Hewlett says, “that not only was this our first foreign endeavor but that it was our first plant located away from our home city, Palo Alto. In establishing this operation we had much to learn, not only how to live and work in your country as good corporate citizens but also how to operate a truly independent manufacturing operation.”

He says about a hundred people are employed at this plant now, and “we are really proud of their skills and achievements. The production per employee has been rising steadily and is now equal to, or better than, several of our operations in the United States. [This], despite the fact that the production quantities are smaller than those common in the United States, making it more difficult to achieve a high degree of efficiency.” Hewlett says the plant is now making over twenty-eight standard HP products, and more are coming.

An R & D operation has been authorized for the plant, he says. “We feel that by drawing on the fine engineering and technical schools of this country we will be able to set up a research and development program, that not only will design equipment for the European Market but will also form an important part of our total corporate engineering program.” He adds that they have enough land here to build three more buildings, and he sees the possibility of the first in “not too many years.”

Hewlett says that [Ray] Demere, an HP manager from the U.S., will be leaving shortly. He announces that Mr. Schroeder has been appointed as plant manager. “I am sure,” Hewlett says, “ that under his directorship this company will continue to prosper and grow as it did under Mr. Demere and will develop into one of the major plants in the Hewlett-Packard family.”

In closing, Hewlett says that they “have recognized the importance of the establishment of this plant by including a comment about it in our most recent ‘Quarterly Report of Earnings’ sent to all our shareholders as well as a picture of this building.”

Box 1, Folder 32 – General Speeches

May 7, 1962 – ”Electronics and Medicine,” Hewlett Club, San Francisco, CA

5/7/62, Outline of speech, handwritten by Hewlett

The following is a summary of topics listed in this outline.

Hewlett starts with a review of electronics and electronics in medicine. He mentions Galvani, Waller EKG in 1880, Eindhoven, Roentgen, X-Ray 1895.

Hewlett discusses various electronic applications in medicine:

Diagnosis:

EKG, X-ray, EEG, endoradiosona…?

Treatment:

X-ray, isotope, electronic bombardment, diathermy, defibrillator, coherent light

Monitoring Equipment

Operating room, recovery room, ICO

Automatic processing

Automated blood testing, blood cell counter, cancer cell studies

Data storage

EEG, group statistics – analysis and retrieval

Scientific and Instrumentation uses

Brain process, theory of vision, medical engineering and physician team, blood flow, circulation studies, reaction studies, muscle studies

Under Economic aspects of Medical Electronics, Hewlett lists return on engineering dollars, and the effect of hardware, computer people, bio-medical engineers

Some basic problems

Diagnosis and monitoring

How to get what is needed for data acquisition – fetal heart beat, blood flow, continuous blood pressure

How to determine if medical correlation exists between what we can measure and medical needs

Treatment

Hewlett discusses the economics of medicine in modern society. He says “More and more people will have the right and the means for better medical care. The supply of doctors is limited – must find a way of utilizing M.D. more effectively.

“It is through education and people who are trained to see both sides of the problem.

“It is through research both within and without the university.

“It is through government support where the cost or the scope is too great for industry or the university to carry alone.

“HP has no interest [in this area], but this is where the government can really help in giving more medical care to more people.”

Box 1, Folder 33 – General Speeches

June 14, 1962 – Talk to University of California School of Business Administration, Berkeley, CA

6/14/62, Typewritten draft of speech with many handwritten notes by Hewlett-Packard

This speech is very similar to speeches dated March 8, 1960, September 13, 1960, and June 14, 1962. In this speech Hewlett again describes the HP organization, its products and the events that led to the decision to expand to Europe. He discusses some of the difficulties in integrating into the European world. We will up pick the story here with their decision to expand further into England.

Hewlett says the decision to establish a plant in England was “partially forced by economic developments. Most of our products are classed by the UK as essential items and essential items of our type carry an import duty of 33% if there is a comparable item made in the country. If not, they come in duty free. On a major class of equipment, we had enjoyed this duty free status for several years, but a well known and reputable British manufacturer chose to produce an almost Chinese copy of our product, and thus impose on our imports a very heavy duty.”

“Our choice,” Hewlett says, “…was to [leave] the market or try to set up a manufacturing operation and compete there. We chose the latter course and I am pleased to report that the sales trend has now been reversed.”

In conclusion, Hewlett says that “it is certainly evident that we have benefited greatly from this expansion program. This year we will probably sell about $9,000,000 worth of corporate products in Europe.” He says “…that this program of ours in its own small way has contributed in a helpful sense to the U.S. balance of payment problem. Further, it is certainly not exporting jobs, on the contrary, it has generated more jobs at home.”

He says the U.S. Government’s policy on taxing foreign earnings really “bugs” him. “We must look forward to the country drawing ever closer to a community of free nations. We must be prepared to accept changing trade patterns throughout the world. For every dollar we lose in foreign trade balance in one area we must be picking up two in some other area. The people of U.S. must understand this. The industry of U.S. must understand this. The government of the U.S. must understand this and support it not by just words but by its actions.

“We are at a critical time in the economy.”

Box 1, Folder 34 – General Speeches

August 13, 1962 – Statement to Palo Alto City Council re Palo Alto Hospital

8/13/62, Very cryptic outline of comments prepared by Hewlett for his remarks, all in his handwriting. He discusses the needs for medical care in the Palo Alto area and the facilities available to furnish it. [See also his speech to the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce on the same subject, dated January 4, 1959.]

Box 1, Folder 35 – General Speeches

October 10, 1962 – Role of R & D in Future Profits, IRE National Electronics Conference Panel, Chicago IL

Hewlett was invited to be a member of this panel, the objective of which was stated to be ‘…to stimulate research and development in electronics and to create a better understanding between industry and the universities in regard to the advancement of the electronics science….’

10/10/62, Outline of speech handwritten by Hewlett.

Hewlett’s outline starts with a section on the role of R & D in past profits. He lists these topics:

Analysis of past return on R & D

Effect on present policy

Contribution of new products to growth

Under a section on the Role of R & D in future profits

Proper level relative to one’s industry

$ established by industrial patterns

The third section is titled Getting the most out of your R & D

Quality of people

More R & D demands highest quality of people – best minds, best training, most creative
Proximity to centers of learning is important
Rapid tempo of change in our technical world demands sound fundamental training in sciences
No “all chiefs and no indians” setup, must have full spectrum of personnel for advanced research of top technical and production engineering staff.

Motivation

One of the finest motivations is the personal intellectual challenge – the selection of projects, the assignment of people
Conviction of the value of the program and what they as individuals can contribute
Recognition. A job well done, association with a successful product, pay

Program Selection

Importance of a device that does an old job a better way, or that does a brand new job
The importance of leading, vis-a-vis capitalizing on a breakthrough

Project Administration

Flexible administration
Discontentment reflects NIH [not invented here] factor

Conclusion

R&D is important and can pay off

There will be a practical limit to how many $ can be spent

If these two facts are true – then the laurels will go to those companies who can select and attract the best people, and who can stimulate and direct these people in the most effective and efficient fashion.

It is a challenge to management.

10/5/62, One typewritten page listing product and production data evidently put together by Hewlett

10/9/62, Copy of a one page typewritten program describing the panel discussion and listing the panelists

6/5/62, Letter to Hewlett from Frank Waterfall, HP’s sales representative in Chicago. He asks if Hewlett would be interested in participating in the IRE panel discussion, and mentions having panelists who could tell of “success stories” emphasizing the importance of R & D.

6/19/62, Copy of a letter from Hewlett responding to Frank Waterfall’s letter above. Hewlett says: “Every time someone wants me to talk about a success story I shudder. I feel this subject is so overworked that I simply can’t develop any enthusiasm to expound on the incredible foresight that Dave and I had some 234 years ago about the future of the electronic industry. Nor to get up before a crowd of people and publicly acclaim that I am one of the smartest guys you have ever seen.”

6/21/62, Letter to Hewlett from Angus A. MacDonald of IRE Asking if Hewlett will participate in their panel discussion.

7/2/62, Letter to Hewlett from Cletus Wiley asking if Hewlett plans to submit an abstract of his remarks ahead of time

7/17/62, Copy of a note from Hewlett to MacDonald saying: “If I run true to form on this one, I won’t have a draft copy until the night before. I’m sorry I can’t accommodate you further on this point

8/24/62, Copy of a letter to panel participants from the Panel organizing committee discussing approaches to the subject of R & D

8/28/62, Letter to Hewlett from Jean Paul Mather of the Purdue Research Foundation extending an invitation to join other panelists for lunch on October 9

9/21/62, Letter to Hewlett from Jean Paul Mather saying the proposed luncheon on October 9 has been cancelled.

Box 1, Folder 36 – General Speeches

October 13, 1962 – Talk at the Dedication of the Loveland Plant, Loveland, CO

10/13/62, Outline of remarks handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett says HP has a partnership with the State of Colorado, the County and the Loveland community. He expands on this partnership theme under three headings:

Common objectives

Cooperation and understanding

Both partners receive a share of the benefits

Common Objectives – HP

to build a sound autonomous division of parent company in a community that could grow and develop with it. Sometimes have to go slowly so will not have to step back
To build as a firm foundation for long-term growth and not just for profit
To provide stable employment

Cooperation and Understanding

Mostly what HP has received
Reason we came because you wanted us not because of concessions
Understanding – Problems that our being here may cause – growth and expansion

Value Received

HP
1. Everything that a friendly understanding government can give – not just the big things, but the little things too
2. Some of the hardest working and most concerned employees have been associated with the feeling of being a part of something new and growing and important
3. You have taught us the great advantages associated with an independently run geographically separated operation

Community
1. Balance of payments
2. Opportunity for citizens of this growing community to find stable long-term job opportunity both for themselves and for children who wish to remain here
3. Taxes

1961 – Hewlett Speeches

Box 1, Folder 25 – General Speeches

April 14, 1961 – “International Expansion – A Case Study” 2^nd Annual Conference, Western Division, Academy of Management, Naval Post Graduate School, Monterey, CA

4/14/61, This speech is the same as that given on September 13, 1960, with the same subject, so it is not repeated here. See also speeches given on April 14, 1961, March 8, 1962, and June 14, 1962.

4/25/61, Copy of a typewritten case study entitled “Hewlett-Packard Company,”

evidently prepared for use by the Stanford Graduate School of Business

Undated, one typewritten page titled “Shipments to Europe”

Undated, map of Monterey area

3/24/61, Letter to Hewlett from Carlton A. Pederson, Associate Dean, Stanford University, enclosing a copy of the program for the conference, and discussing arrangements

3/38/61 [sic], Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Carlton Pederson, saying he will arrange his own travel

6/10/61, Letter to Hewlett from C. Mark Thomas of the Mark Thomas Inn where he stayed. Thomas encloses a copy of a letter from the Academy of Management to the Thomas Inn returning the statement for Hewlett’s stay saying they could not pay because they did not have any record of Hewlett having attended the conference. Hewlett evidently sent this to the Academy with a handwritten note saying “I was your dinner speaker. The bill has been paid.”

Box 1, Folder 26 – General Speeches

September 25, 1961 – Indoctrination Seminar, New Engineers, Palo Alto, CA

9/25/61, One handwritten page outlining notes for his remarks to the new engineers

Hewlett describes the company as it is today

60 M sales this year

2500 in Palo Alto, 3500 in all

two Palo Alto plants, plus Loveland

Basic business is standard instruments

How we got here

Hewlett and Packard both engineers

Growth determined by contribution of new products

Our people are the most important thing we sell

Management by Objective

9/5/61, Memo to Hewlett from Ted Anderson attaching the schedule for the seminar

9/22/61, Copy of formal, typed statement of Corporate Objectives

Box 1, Folder 27 – General Speeches

December 19, 1961 – Review of Trip to India for The Executive Roundtable and Research Advisory Council, San Francisco, CA

12/19/61, Outline of speech handwritten by Hewlett on lined notebook paper

The following is a copy of this outline

I Background for Interest

A. Original plan – no basic wish for Indian partner

B. Result of visit – feel that Indian partner necessary

II Operating Problem {dominated by foreign exchange)

Materials – Need high inventory

Transportation

Rail

Air

Sea

Availability

Crude industrial economy

Import Controls

Red tape at point of entry

Labor – See comment in conclusion

Facilities

Five plants going up – quality of fixtures

Problem of housing

Favorable depreciation

Operations and Management

Not too many experienced managers

Shortage of foremen and supervisors

Requirement to train labor

Importance of development of entrepreneur

Dealing with Indian government

Difficult at best – red tape, large, complex

Freight, customs, permits, labor

Problems of a “Closed Economy”

Hi internal prices

Price control

Pressure to export vs. high prices

Leverage of import controls and [?] for expansion

Conclusion

1) India is making remarkable strides and some day will solve its most pressing problems.

2) It is a country with a population of 438 million, not counting two provinces which were too unsettled to bother with.

3) For many products it is a good market today – for other products a good market for tomorrow. Because of foreign exchange problem and concessions tend to limit number of competitors in a field, therefore, some advantage in being a little ahead of time.

4) Good profits can be made.

12/1/61, Copy of a memo to members of the Executive Roundtable and Research Council from Richard P. Conlon announcing the forthcoming meeting, listing speakers

who will give their observations on India from their week long trip there. Hewlett is listed as one of the speakers.

12/19/61, Copy of the typewritten program of the meeting

11/29/61, Letter to Hewlett from Richard P. Conlon, Business International, discussing arrangements for the meeting

1960 – Hewlett Speeches

Box 1, Folder 23 – General Speeches

September 13, 1960 – “International Expansion – A Case Study” Stanford Conference titled “American Business Looks Abroad”

(See also Hewlett speeches dated April 14, 1961, March 8, 1962 and June 14, 1962 on this general subject.)

12/13/60, Typewritten text of Hewlett’s speech

This Conference is titled “American Business Looks abroad”, and Hewlett says “I interpret my role at this session as follows: To report on a moderately sized company’s international expansion program in Europe. The fact that this expansion program was stimulated by the signing of the Treaty of Rome, and the reality of a European Common Market, is pertinent to the theme of this meeting.

DESCRIPTION OF HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY

Hewlett starts with a brief description of HP, saying that “We are a manufacturer of precision electronic test and measuring equipment. Our instruments are characterized by a high engineering content, and by high quality and reliability of operation. We manufacture about 300 to 400 standard catalog items most of which would be classed as off-the-shelf capital goods.” He gives the location of the main plant in Palo Alto and adds that “…we have three domestic subsidiaries, one on the East Coast, two on the West coast, and we have recently started another manufacturing branch in Colorado.” He says 2500 people are employed in Palo Alto, 3500 in total.

Hewlett says products are marketed in the United States through independent representatives who also handle “compatible lines of equipment” for other manufacturers.

FOREIGN SALES

Hewlett says that foreign sales were initially handled by a “local export agent” from the U.S. These agents had representatives in various countries throughout the world. As the Company grew they found it “appropriate,” to take over the direct contact with the representatives in the foreign countries. “By and large,” he says,” these same representatives now form the backbone of our present international marketing organization.”

Hewlett tells the audience that exports have traditionally been about 10 to 15% of total sales – but currently running about 15%. “To understand the character of our foreign market,” he says, “it should be realized that broad scale use of electronics is almost exclusively confined to the more technically advanced countries of the world….About 66% of our foreign sales traditionally go to Europe, about 15% to Canada, about 9% to Japan, and the remaining 10% is spread throughout the world.”

PRODUCTS

Hewlett classifies HP’s products into two broad groups: “One group of products,” he says, “is represented by fairly sophisticated engineering designs, but is basically an assembly of standard component parts. Another group of products is equally sophisticated in design, but requires a great many special and precision parts for which expensive and extensive tooling is required. In the former group we have found that our competitors abroad have had no difficulty in duplicating or paralleling our designs, and thus we find that sales of this class of product have been small in foreign markets. In the latter group, however, our heavy tooling and production expenses may be liquidated against the large mass market which exists in the United states, and this gives us a clear advantage over our foreign competitors who do not have such a mass market. As a result our sales have been almost exclusively in this latter classification.”

DECISION TO EXPAND FOREIGN OPERATIONS

It was against this background that Hewlett says they evaluated the long range effect of the Treaty of Rome which was signed in March of 1957. “It was our conclusion,” Hewlett says, “that the coming of the Common Market would provide Europe with a true mass market, unrestricted by tariff walls. This would give them the same advantage that the United States has enjoyed for so long on almost an exclusive basis. To the Hewlett-Packard Company this would mean a potential loss of its present competitive advantage and a consequent reduction of sales in Europe. On the other hand, if we were to enter the European Common Market with a manufacturing facility, we would be in a position to protect our existing market and in addition to compete in the assembly type of operation from which we were almost completely excluded at the present time. The choice was obvious, we had to move at once to develop a manufacturing operation somewhere in the Common Market. The question was, what type of operation – joint endeavor or 100% owned subsidiary – and where should this operation be located?

Hewlett says the first question was easy – they definitely felt that a 100% owned subsidiary was the most desirable way to go. The choice of what country to locate in was more difficult. By studying informational material from such sources as the U.S. Department of Commerce, and from individual countries, they were able to evaluate factors like general character of the countries, tax structures, labor situations and so forth. “By studying such sources,” Hewlett says, “we were able to narrow the selection to the Netherlands, Belgium, and Germany.” So, in the spring of 1958 Hewlett went to Europe to try and determine which country would be the best country for their manufacturing plant – and, if possible, just where in that country it would be best to locate their plant.

While visiting each country Hewlett would visit U.S. Counselor officials, as well as local government people. He had letters of introduction to local manufacturing executives as well. And he also talked to local Americans who represented U.S companies. He says local banks were “one of the most important sources of information.”

GERMANY AS A BASE FOR MANUFACTURING

“As a result of this survey,” Hewlett says, “it was decided to establish an operation in the Stuttgart area of southwest Germany. The basic advantages of Germany were many. First, it had a large internal market. Second, one of our toughest competitors in Europe was located in Germany and we felt that the best way to compete was to be in the same country and not interpose an artificial tariff wall between the two of us. Thirdly, Germany has long had a strong and aggressive export policy and as we planned to export over 80% of the products manufactured there this was an important factor. Fourthly, Germany traditionally has had a supply of skilled and experienced labor, particularly at the foreman and supervisory level. Finally, Germany has had a fine record of a stable economy since the war.”

They did see some disadvantages to locating in Germany: no governmental aid, high employment, tax structure not as favorable as elsewhere.

To sum up Hewlett says “Our selection of Stuttgart was primarily based on the fact that it was an excellent light manufacturing area and that the people in the community were noted for their industry and hard work”

NEED FOR CORPORATE OFFICE IN EUROPE

Hewlett says they found some problems in considering the implementation of their decision to locate a plant in Germany. “One such problem was that of order distribution,“ he says. An example would be a situation where a local representative receives a composite order from a customer. He would have no way to find out what part of the order should be sent to the HP plant in Germany, and what part should be sent to the U.S. “Thus, some decision making agency was needed abroad to cope with this type of problem,” he says.

Hewlett tells of another problem they ran into, — the matter of a “Travel Lab.”

He explains that a Travel Lab is a large bus in which are set up various operating displays of HP equipment. This bus needed a home base in Europe.

They also needed a way to carry out training programs in Europe for sales personnel.

“All of these problems,” Hewlett says, “ suggested that we needed a corporate office of some nature in Europe, and the decision was made to establish a primary subsidiary company in Switzerland to perform all of these various functions and, in addition, act as a holding company for our German operation. Switzerland was selected for several reasons. In the first place, it is centrally located. Secondly, the Swiss are generally accepted throughout most countries of Europe, and indeed through most countries of the world. Switzerland has one of the most stable currencies of the world. It has tax treaties with Germany which would facilitate the holding company operation which we envisioned. Finally, the tax laws in Switzerland are favorable to the type of operation that we wished to establish.”

ESTABLISHMENT OF OPERATIONS

So Hewlett says he went back to Europe in the fall of 1958 with three objectives in mind, – the first being to select a canton in Switzerland, negotiate a favorable tax agreement with the authorities, and set up a basic corporate structure. Secondly, he wanted to establish the ground work for the German manufacturing plant. Thirdly, he needed to recruit key personnel for both the German manufacturing operation and the German sales organization. He says he took with him on this trip HP’s Export Sales Manager (who was to be the manager of the German manufacturing plant until a German national could be trained for this spot), and HP’s U.S. attorney.

Hewlett says they “…were successful in completing all three objectives and, in looking back, it is apparent that in two areas local contacts were most important; good bank connections and the best possible legal advice. Without either of these, it would have been infinitely more difficult to have obtained our objectives.

“By February 1959,” he says, “nearly all preliminary steps had been completed. By April, 1959, we had actually opened our Swiss office with two months inventory in a bonded warehouse in Basel under its control, and by the first of July our sales operation in Germany had commenced. Our manufacturing operation near Stuttgart did not start, however, until September of that year.

OPERATIONS IN SWITZERLAND

Hewlett says he wants to “summarize” operations in both Switzerland and Germany. In Switzerland He says the first step was to start a training program. “To understand the importance of this training…,”he says, “one must understand the character of our products. Our products are those which are sold at a technical level. That is, they are sold well down in an organization. This means that our representative group must have an adequate and well trained sales force that can work directly with the customer’s engineers, and scientists. This sales force must understand the customers’ technical problems and must be able to make intelligent suggestions as to what type of equipment will be helpful. Domestically we had found that to achieve this competence, we had to have intensive training programs for our representatives’ sales engineers. In Europe we had never had the opportunity to furnish this type of sales training. At best, we were fortunate if the principals visited us once every two or three years, and when they did they were usually more interested in matters of policy than in technical questions.

“The first training program was so successful that we repeated it again the following year with Mr. Packard and myself in attendance. I think it is interesting to note that at this second sales training conference we had representatives from every nation of Western Europe with the exception of Ireland, Portugal and Luxembourg. We even had a representative from Yugoslavia.”

After starting a training program, the next task was to find local warehousing for their equipment. Hewlett says, “This program has proved to be of great value. Customers like the idea of being able to get delivery of equipment on short notice and not wait for it to be shipped from a foreign country 8000 miles away. In a sense, the fact that stock is maintained locally is a symbol that you are really interested in helping them and they react accordingly.

“The Travel Lab, too, has been a most effective sales tool. In the first place, our customers in Europe have been able to see operating displays of our most recently developed equipment without having to wait for the next International Trade fair, and without having to leave their own local community. This program has been welcomed by management for it keeps engineers current on modern instrumentation without the expense and inconvenience of travel.”

MANUFACTURING OPERATION IN GERMANY

Hewlett says progress on the manufacturing operation in Germany “has made headway, but at a slower pace than the Swiss sales company for it is a much more complex operation to establish. After about a year of operation it had recovered initial start-up expenses and was operating at a slight profit. We currently employ about 60 people and, according to plan, are manufacturing the assembly type of products referred to earlier.”

Hewlett says they found local community people more interested in helping their operation than were those in the federal government. “We were fortunate in finding …the town of Boblingen , just outside of Stuttgart. The town was most helpful for it was willing to purchase a site and lease it to us at a nominal rate. Further, if at a later date we wished to acquire the land, the town would sell it at a price that was roughly one-third of what it had originally payed [sic]for it. In a number of ways also, the town has shown a great willingness to help. This all proves the value of selecting a community that has a genuine interest in the welfare and prosperity of your facility.”

Communications, “the problem of establishing understanding with an operation some 8000 miles away,” was a serious problem Hewlett says. “It has been with great difficulty and several trips of Hewlett-Packard people to Germany that we have been able to reestablish …understanding.”

Getting component parts from local suppliers was also been a problem. “This is due in part” he says, “to the booming Germany economy, but it is also due to the presence of traditional patterns that often exist between supplier and consumer in many countries of Europe. These trade patterns pose real problems to a new concern when it endeavors to develop its own sources of supply, particularly during a period of booming economy.”

“[A related problem has] arisen in trying to find suppliers who will furnish equipment or who will make special items for us and also have a realistic delivery schedule. This, coupled with the component parts problem, has made it extremely difficult to develop a flexible production schedule; one key to efficient and economical operation.”

Hewlett says they also have had some problems with unsatisfactory quality of workmanship. “I feel that this can be accounted for primarily by the inexperience of the employees in the particular type of assembly work that we were asking them to perform, for Germany, as is most of Europe, is changing from a craftsman approach to production, to an assembly line approach. This problem of quality became so severe that we found it necessary to send over a third level supervisor from Palo Alto to help train the employees and to establish better quality control procedures. We sent over one of our young Stanford Business School graduates to work out some of the practical problems of integrating local procedures with U.S. procedures in such areas as inventory control, scheduling, record keeping and the like. Both of these moves have helped substantially to improve the effectiveness of the German subsidiary.”

CONCLUSION

Hewlett concludes that “…our original objectives have been met successfully. A sales development and coordination program has been established and is now operating more effectively than was anticipated. A manufacturing operation has been set up within the European Common Market and is now producing satisfactory equipment. These two operations have generated capital outside of the U.S. which may be used effectively for the next logical step – a manufacturing plant within the European Free Trade Area (EFTA). [In a handwritten note Hewlett added]: This we plan to do starting this fall in England, where it can serve both the EFTA group and the Commonwealth nations. With our experiences now behind us [in startups in both Germany and Colorado], I look for a much smoother startup than we experienced in Germany.

“In all, I think we as a company should be deeply grateful for the Treaty of Rome and for the European Common Market which developed from it. Its establishment has forced us into an international expansion program that was long overdue and, judging from results to date, gives every indication of becoming a vital part of our total corporate operation.”

Undated, Three handwritten drafts of a speech on this same subject (that is the considerations given to HP’s movement into Europe). A typed page outlining these notes is also enclosed.

Box 1, Folder 24 – General Speeches

Late 1960 or early 1961 – Speech on HP organization, no location

Speech, Written in outline form and handwritten by Hewlett

Hewlett titles the first section, ”Origin in Engineering,” with the following sub titles:

Company founded on engineering
Method of product selection at start
Developed into “development of opertunity [sic]
Expansion with Engineering Div. Concept
Change in Microwave div.

Discussion of each division:

Counters
Oscilloscopes
Audio-Visual
Microwave
Other Supporting Areas

Conclusions

HP reputation has been built on quality of engineering and responsibility of its production
Trend towards more research with growing decentralization – with engineering in each division
This does not represent movement away from organization principles – rather a division of work that will guarantee maximum yield.