Box 1, Folder 18 – General Speeches

 

January 4, 1959 – Talk to Palo Alto Chamber Of Commerce on Medical Center

 

1/4/59, Outline of speech, handwritten by Hewlett, in ink, on lined notebook paper

 

I Introduction

1. Aims and Goals
2. Problems

 

II A Major Medical Center

1. What makes a major medical center
   1. Teaching – Research – Practice of medicine
   2. All strongly based on a first class hospital

 

1. Elements of the Hospital Center
   1. Stanford Pavilion
   2. Palo Alto Pavilion
   3. Core facility
   4. Stanford outpatient
   5. Stanford Rehabilitation
   6. Existing P. A. hospital

 

1. Responsibilities
   1. Teach – Stanford
   2. Residents – Stanford
   3. Practice at P.A. and Stanford

 

D. Have been divergences – aim will be to pull together

 

III  Problem – Money

1. Background Planning
2. Change of Plans
   1. Report of last year: over bedded, OB the worst
   2. Place OB in new building
   3. Old hospital plans

 

IV  Status

1. Set by July
2. Closing Old hospital will help shake down
3. Should be pretty well shaken down by this time next year

 

 

Box 1, Folder 19 – General Speeches

 

April 9, 1959 – “The Development of a Medical Center,” Palo Alto Hospital Employee Award

 

4/9/59, Outline of speech, handwritten by Hewlett on lined notebook paper. [See also speeches June 18, 1959 and December 2, 1959, on this subject.]

 

I  Past History

 

A  Student Guild Hospital – 1909

Litton and Cowper

First students the Palo Alto residents

 

 

B  Private Hospital

Reynolds, Williams, Kirk, Black

Built own hospital, 3 story frame at Cowper and Embarcadero     1910-1917 – old fire trap

Fell on poor days during World War I

Palo Alto bought in 1917/1918

 

C  Palo Alto Hospital

Asked Stanford to run

Ran a tight ship, made money

One of first X-ray

By 1928 was inadequate for size and real fire trap.

1926 fire had caused roof to fall into operating room

 

D  New Hospital

Some funds were made available by philanthropists …for the establishment of a non-profit hospital. Because of the experience of the old private hospital, Dr. Leary [?] sought to interest Palo Alto and Stanford in starting another hospital. In 1929 Roth got Stanford to give money, and Ed Thorts [?] got Palo Alto to match funds:

Palo Alto – 200,000

Fund [?] – 160,000

Built hospital in 1929 and 1930 for about $3000 a bed. Filled up at once. Still managed by Stanford.

 

II Problems of Joint Operation

 

A  Two things obvious

1. Great advantages

2.   Great problems

B  Problems

1. Having greatness thrust upon us – Must reorganize and reorient our thinking
2. Suspicion springs from lack of understanding
3. This last improved by having doctors getting together. Palo Alto people do not have new concept of Medical Center

 

C  Advantages

1      Tell what I think will happen

2      Tell why

Major western University Medical Schools few

Privately endowed have certain advantages

Palo Alto an ideal community – people understanding and far sighted, climate and physical location

 

“I saw again that this area was destined to become the major medical center of the West and to be one of the foremost in the Nation. That is if we thought of this operation in lesser terms we are doing ourselves a disservice and, like Esau, selling our potential for a pot of porridge.

 

“All of you have a major stake in the future.”

 

 

Box 1, Folder 20 – General Speeches

 

June 4, 1959 – Address to Third National Conference of IRE Professional Group on Production Techniques, San Mateo, CA

 

6/4/59, Outline for speech written by Hewlett on notebook paper. Hewlett was the Keynote Speaker.

 

Hewlett says he is “not so stupid as to speak on electronic production” – will present a broader discussion of production techniques

 

Background

For background Hewlett goes back to the Industrial Revolution, starting in England. He says it started with Richard Onwright [?] and the cotton spinner.

 

He says a Frenchman named Vaucanson [?] developed a silk factory in 1756, but France was not ready – a luxury product.

 

In England cotton mass produced, needed for export. Could not do in new locations isolated away from old guilds and monopolies of ruling class.

 

In Europe the emphasis was on simple crafts – weaving, spinning, iron making.

 

Situation in the U.S.

 

The situation was quite different in the United States Hewlett says. Large country, large problems, large solutions needed. Shortage of labor, high labor costs, national independence – not cluttered with traditional ideas.

 

He says the U. S. turned to the mechanization of complete crafts – and he gives a few examples:

 

Oliver Evans, at the end of the Revolution built a completely automatic flour mill.

 

Eli Whitney and the cotton gin

 

In 1836 a complete threshing machine was available that would thresh, clean and sack.

 

Farm equipment, with a long list of replacement parts, was available by 1866 – 50 years before Ford.

 

By 1860 an assembly line was used in a meat packing plant in Cincinnati.

 

Developed on the basis of creative concepts – not hardware.

 

Role of Production Management

 

Long history of pioneering in this field. In the 1880s Fredrick Taylor, father of Production Management:

 

Set production norms by scientific method – broke away from old apprentice system.

Study led to shorter hours and rest periods – resulted in increased production at same pay

Introduced incentive pay

Established scientific job training

Developed status of foreman and supervisor

 

Followed by Frank Gilbert with Time and Motion Studies, and

Henry Gantt, ideas on incentive pay and cost accounting. Charts still bear his name.

 

Willingness to invest Capital

 

10 fold investment/worker in last 75 to 80 years

4-5 fold increase in physical product/worker

Made U.S. the greatest producing country in the world – turning out twice as much per worker compared to any other country.

 

What this means today

 

“The U.S. is no longer an isolated self sufficient country. It is a major factor in the world today. As such it has a dual challenge to its productive capabilities and resources.

 

“The secret of U.S. production is well known and understood. Other nations of the world are making concerted efforts to catch up. On the whole this is good for it lifts the general standard of living, but for the American manufacturers it spells real competition.

 

“The U.S. has the real responsibility to fight the economic war with Russia. The Russians are smart, capable people who are in a position to capitalize on the best in our system. This is where the real challenge is. The battle lines will be drawn in the long run on the basis of production ability.

 

“I think it is particularly significant that the leading engineering society in the country today has seen fit to establish a major group dedicated to the improvement of production techniques. The character of the speakers and the quality of the papers to be presented at this the 3rdConference on Production techniques indicated that the electronic industry is ready and able to meet and take up this challenge.”

 

6/4/59, Copy of the printed program for the conference

5/22/59, Letter to Hewlett from Emmet G. Cameron, Program Chairman, reminding him of the program schedule and sending a copy of all technical presentations

6/5/59, Letter from F. K. Shallenberger enclosing some material that may be helpful to Hewlett in preparing this speech

 

 

Box 1, Folder 21 – General Speeches

 

June 18, 1959 – Presentation to Finance Committee, Stanford Board of Trustees

 

6/18/59, Outline of speech, handwritten by Hewlett on notebook paper

 

I  Definition of Palo Alto – Stanford Hospital

 

A   By agreement of 29 May 1956, Palo Alto and Stanford agreed to form a non-profit organization to manage and run the following:

 

1. Palo Alto Pavilion
2. Existing Palo Alto Hospital
3.  Stanford Pavilion
4. Stanford Outpatient Clinic
5. Stanford Rehabilitation Clinic
6. Core facilities

 

B  Board of Management is Responsible to:

 

1. Manage, control and set general policies
2. To prepare budget and submit to owner:
3. Make recommendations to owners as necessary

 

C  Board of Management General Views of the Operation

 

1. Run a top level and tight show in a business-like manner, make clear to owner the proper proceeds, true costs of the operation.

 

II Areas of Discussion

 

“A  Hospital Budget –2 Pavilions and core

1. As carefully worked out as possible
2. Review by Palo Alto and approved
3. General review by Stanford staff
4. Discuss allocation of income and expense
5. Will ask approval

 

B   Requirement for Working Capital

And other medical cash outlays – will ask approval

 

C   Clinic Budget

1. Preliminary draft – information only

 

D   Rehabilitation and Old Hospital

Nothing

 

III   Hospital Budget

 

A   Summarize Letter

1. [?]
2. Expense comparisons
3. Rate structure
4. Budgeted surplus of $52,000
5. Method billing to Stanford

 

B    Discuss Fixed Costs

1. Ordinarily educational institutions do not amortize plant
2. Equipment replacement fund

 

C   Capital Costs

1. Capital items
2. Contingent [?]
3. Balance against equipment sinking fund

 

D   Allocations

1      Method

2      Result

3      Cash reconciliation…$6,107 short

4      Payments to Stanford staff of almost $150,000 for professional services

 

E   Working Capital

1. Total estimated 609,000
2. Allocation 1/3 Stanford, 2/3 Palo Alto
3. Palo Alto prepared to turn over present working capital in hospital, less $90,000 needed for  [?] payments
4. Ask that Stanford furnish before July 1:

 

1. 100,000 now
2. Estimated Stanford payments

50,000 August

50,000 September

48,000 October

1. Palo Alto make final payment @ 21,000 in fall

 

 

IV  Clinic Budget

A. Preliminary only

B.   Estimate 677,570, or 13.55 a visit

C.   Offset with Proper Rates – structure to show deficit of 64,134

D.  Discussion of rate structure

 

V   Rehabilitation – Old Hospital –discussion

 

VI  Action Required

A   Approve Budget

1. Approve use of $100,000 sinking fund
2. Approve method of allocation
3. Approve principle of Working Capital allocation
4. Agree to schedule of payments

 

 

Box 1,  Folder 22 – General Speeches

 

December 2, 1959 – On Palo Alto Medical Center, Palo Alto Residents Association

 

12/2/59, Outline of speech handwritten by Hewlett on lined notepaper

 

I   Hospital Center like Iceberg

A)    Have been working on budget

B)     What most people see is plant

C)     In case of Center what is behind is important

D)    Therefore, would like to talk about:

1)     Background

2)     Plant

3)     Finances

 

II   Discussion of Medical Education

A)   Background

B)    Flexner [?] report of 1910

C)    Rise of great leaders of clinical medicine

D)    Recognition of trend towards science promoted move of Stanford to Palo Alto

E)     Comparison with Engineering

F)     New connection at Stanford

 

 

III   Development of Medical Center

A)     Reason to move catalyst [for] other action

1)     V.A. Hospital – 1000 beds

2)     Palo Alto became partner plans

 

B)     Relations between Palo alto and Stanford Medical School

C)     Ultimate role of Center

 

IV   Physical Plant

 

A)     Basic Elements of Plant

1)     Core plus 2 Pavilions

2)     Old Palo Alto Hospital

3)     Outpatient Clinic

4)     Rehabilitation Center

5)     Edward Building

6)     Center Building

 

B)     Description of Plant

1)     Location – 56 acres

2)     General layout

3)     Architect – Ed Stone

4)     Tie in with Stanford style

5)     Cost: Stanford – $16.9M

Palo Alto – $4.1M

V   Operation

A)    Administration

B)     Opening

C)     Professional staff

D)    Finances

1)     Competition for tax support hospital

2)     Importance of occupancy

3)     Importance of attracting patients

4)     Basic costs

5)     Working capital $1600/active bed

6)     Budget balance for year

 

VI   Summary

A)    Wonderful Plant

B)     Outstanding medical staffs

C)     Real challenge is the degree to which staffs can work together

D)    If they do we should have the finest medical center west of Mississippi, or one of the finest in the country

 

Undated, Outline, written by Hewlett, covering  background of hospital development in Palo Alto. Similar to speech given April 9, 1959.

11//23/59, Letter to Hewlett from Robert J. Debs of the Palo Alto Residents Association inviting him to come and speak to their group about local medical facilities

6/22/59, Handwritten note to “Bill” from “Lyle” giving some facts about hospital operations

Undated, typewritten sheet giving dates of events in hospital development in Palo Alto

Box 1, Folder 17 – General Speeches

 

December 8, 1958 – “U. S. Businessman Looks at European Common Market,” Palo Alto, Rotary Club

 

12/8/58, Outline of speech handwritten by Hewlett, in pencil on lined notebook paper

 

The major points in this outline are:

 

What is the ECM?

Three wars in 100 years, it was basically a move to stop the causes of war

 

Post War

Marshall Plan, from 1948 –1952 GNP up 25%, trade up 73%

 

ECM

General objective more political than commercial

Treaty of Rome, March 25, 1957

Plan will

Eliminate internal tariffs and quotas

Provide anti-trust laws

Eliminate restrictions on flow of capital and labor

 

Importance of ECM to the U.S.

 

U.S. exports to Europe

40% raw materials and fuel

25% manufactured goods

How U.S. competes

Low labor rate

Effect of ECM on U.S. manufacturing

GNP 1/3 of U.S. – but increasing rapidly

 

HP Plans

 

Trip this spring – discussion of countries

Trip this fall – down to details

Points of interest

Law by decree

Hidden reserves – no C.P.A.

Labor’s role

Social security

Basic problems

How to join U.S. production and sales ideas with older and different traditions of Europe

 

General

 

Will be a rough 10-15 years, particularly for Europe

May be hard on U.S.

Exports to Europe

Compete in 3^rd markets

A strong Europe will be a major U.S. ally and a major defense against Communism, both internal and external

Box 1, Folder 13 – General Speeches

 

January 11, 1957 – Management Conference, Sonoma, CA

 

1/11/57 –  Four pages of notes for his remarks handwritten by Hewlett on accounting type paper.

 

Hewlett says 1956 has been the best year for sales, good start on oscilloscopes, good performance across the board.

 

Sold 2.5 million more than produced. Problem was that we prophesized a sales drop off to be filled by scopes.

 

Reviewing HP’s corporate objectives Hewlett says these are a sense of where we have been, and also an indication of where we are going.

 

1. To make a profit of about 20% on sales before taxes.
   1. Enables us to meet other objectives
   2. Best measure of all as to how well we are doing
2. Develop, manufacture and sell electronic measuring instruments and techniques that will contribute to the advancement of the science and practical application of electronic and electrical engineering.
3. Make available to industry instruments which have inexpensive quality.
4. Provide employment opportunities for HP people which includes:
   1. Good standard of living
   2. Security
   3. Personal satisfaction
5. Meet the obligation of good citizenship to the community and to the institutions in our society which generate the environment in which we operate.
6. To let our growth be determined by our performance in meeting our other objectives.
7. Build sufficient strength into our organization so it is not dependent on any one or two or three people.

 

Relative to Sales organization Hewlett says they were neither committed, or not committed to sales reps. The objective of sales reps organization is to prove that the concept of a true partnership between a group of representatives and a strong manufacturing organization will work to the benefit of all.

 

Proposed objectives for reps:

 

1. Sales to help us meet our objectives
2. Service and follow-up
3. Communication with development and production
4. Growth – keep up with us, all the better if you can stay ahead. We are going to go through some rough times. If you are just hanging on you are sure to fall off sooner or later.
5. Opportunity – to make history

 

Box 1, Folder 14 – General Speeches

 

January 28, 1957 – “Why California will Continue its Leadership in Electronics,” Electrical Club of San Francisco

 

1/28/57, Copy of typewritten outline of Hewlett’s speech, no transcript in folder

 

The following lists some of the points Hewlett lists on the outline

 

Why California will continue its leadership in electronics

1. Leadership does not mean just greater numbers
2. What standards to judge by – IRE membership?

States with largest IRE membership: NY,CA, NJ, PA

During period 1950-55 IRE membership increases:

NY – 58%

NJ – 67%

PA – 55%

National ave. – 14.7%

CA 112%

1. Employment.

During 18 months from March 1950 to Sept. 1951 (Korean War) national employment in electronics rose 18%; in CA 117%

1. Areas in which California leads
   1. Military electronics
   2. Specialized products
   3. CA lacks in consumer items – too far from center of population

 

Drawing on his notes from his speech “Why Electronics Grows in the West” Hewlett briefly reviews the background of electronics in California.

 

Bay Area is seeing expansion because

1. Overflow from Los Angeles

Example – Lockheed

 

2.   Eastern firms attracted to California because:

Example – IBM liked “livability, labor supply,  excellent highways, rail and air transportation, social, cultural and educational facilities

 

Others – Sperry, Federal Telegraph, Philco, Sylvania

GE said Stanford was big attraction

 

Hewlett’s  outline continues with a look at the future

 

He sees:

Expansion of basic industry which is built on a sound fundamental basis

New products through advanced engineering

Good management

Expanding market for the types of items they produced

Outstanding scientific leadership in our universities

 

“Electronics is a dynamic and rapidly growing industry, but most important is that it is growing in the direction that the West Coast industries have chosen to follow. Maybe this is foresight or maybe it is luck, but it is none the less true. I am convinced that the upswing and advancement of electronics in California will continue and that California will maintain its leadership in electronics. The truth of the matter is that electronics is a natural for California, and California is a natural for electronics.”

 

1/28/57, Outline of speech printed by Hewlett on 3×5 inch cards

1/28/57, Two handwritten pages in Hewlett’s handwriting as a start on notes for his speech

1/28/57, Printed announcement of speech “The San Francisco Electric Club invites all members of the Electronics Industry in the Bay Area to join in celebrating Electronics Day”

1/21/57, Copy of typewritten flyer from the West Coast Electronic Manufacturers Association saying they have joined with the Electrical [?] Club of San Francisco to sponsor this event

12/5/56, Letter to Hewlett from Calvin K. Townsend WCEMA, SF Council Program Chairman, thanking him for agreeing to speak at their event

12/14/56, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Calvin Townsend confirming his commitment and agreeing to send a title shortly

Undated, Several pages handwritten by Hewlett with notes for a speech to the Upsilon Club of the Eta Kappa Mu [spelling?] Fraternity where he spoke on the growth of electronics in the West

 

The folder also contains many reports, papers and miscellaneous documents with information and statistics relative to his speech subject

 

 

Box 1, Folder 15 – General Speeches

 

July 23, 1957 – “The Challenge of Technology in Electronics,” Stanford Business Conference, Stanford University

 

7/23/57, Copy of typewritten text of Hewlett’s speech

 

Saying that it is really the “new technology” that is the challenge, Hewlett divides this into two categories, challenges to industry and challenges to the consumer. First he defines the field of electronics as “anything that has in it a vacuum tube, or its counter-part, a solid state device such as a transistor.”

 

In 1956 he says the field of electronics amounted to 11 ½ billion dollars worth of business – 55% in manufacturing, 45% in non-manufacturing fields such as broadcasting and services. “…the industry is dominated,” he says, “by large companies with annual sales in excess of 100 million, twenty-two of which produce over 70% of all electronic equipment.

 

“One of the salient characteristics of the industry is that it is definitely research and development oriented. It is estimated that of the 500,000 engineers in this country 20% of them are engaged in the field of electronics.”

 

Hewlett says the most serious problem facing the electronics industry is that “fully half its manufacturing effort is supported directly by the government….Any appraisal of the future of the electronic industry must obviously start with the study of the Department of Defense uses of electronics.”

 

Hewlett refers to a study made by RCA on the subject of defense spending from 1956 to 1961, which forecast that “defense spending for electronics over this period would increase about 50%.” He sees spending for electronics for missiles growing much more rapidly than spending for aircraft or communications electronics.

 

“Non-military spending is divided rather equally between consumer and industrial applications. The consumer field is an old one and one that has somewhat leveled off. We have gone through our ‘boom and bust’ on TV and things are stable enough that the long range market can be fairly well predicted.”

 

“It is in the area of industrial uses of electronics that the greatest expansion, exclusive of the military, will probably be seen. A recent study estimated that industrial spending for electronics would increase 25% between 1956 and 1957,” Hewlett says.

 

“The real up-and-comer is the computer field which has shown an incredible rise in the past few years. From almost nothing in 1952 it has risen so that it is now estimated that in 1957 there will be about 350 million dollars spent for computers, and that this will rise to about one billion in 1960 and about two billion in 1965. It does not look as though any other field of industrial electronics has a chance to match this growth rate. The computer field, however, has many built-in problems – education of the consumer, obsolescences through rapid technological advances and high capital costs (about $1.00 of capital to $1.00 of sales).”

 

Automation and control is another area which Hewlett says has received “considerable attention…representing about 18% of the industrial electronics dollar [in 1956]…..Increased labor costs, shortages of adequate labor supply and requirements for increased precision all spell a long-range growth for this field – [one which] also has its own built-in problems. Two of the most serious of these are the high initial cost of the equipment and the basic difficulty of two independent industries, the machine tool and the electronic, trying to sit down and work out a joint program.

 

“The final area I would like to mention is that of medical electronics. This represents about 15% of the industrial electronics dollars – almost half of which is in X-Ray and radiological equipment. Again, the potential in this field is tremendous – but there is a serious problem of communications between the doctor or the medical scientist on one hand, and electronic engineer on the other. Thus, I would like to point out that of the 4 broad divisions of industrial electronics, 3 of them have a basic problem of trying to work with another discipline – this is an example of a major challenge of technology.”

 

Looking at the probable effects of a major reduction in government defense spending upon the electronics industry, Hewlett says,  “There can be no question of the seriousness of any substantial cutback program. In all probability, however, the cutback would be somewhat gradual, not only for the sake of the electronics industry alone, but for the national economy as a whole. There are some indications that a reduction in defense spending would be accompanied by an increase in spending by some of the other governmental agencies….Obviously, however, only a fraction of the slack would be taken up in this manner. Basically, there would have to be a tremendous re-organization of the electronics industry, and in all probability this re-organization would take the form of a vigorous and concerted attack upon the problems of industry’s uses of electronics.

 

“This brings up the question as to why these problems are not strongly attacked now. Well, basically, it is because it is not economically profitable for the moment. When all is said and done, defense business can be profitable. The selling costs are not great, for you are dealing with relatively few customers. The problems are challenging, and up to now there has been ample money. A major move of the industry into industrial electronics would pose many problems on education, distribution and maintenance, but basically the potentialities are there. It  would be the real challenge of technology.”

 

Hewlett returns to his statement that the challenge of electronics takes two forms – one to the manufacturer, and the other to the consumer. “To the manufacturer,” he says, “the challenge demands that he keep abreast of all major technical developments in his field, while continually monitoring related technologies, with an eye to borrowing from them when applicable. To the manufacturer this is a critical job, for as new technologies develop he must time his entry so as to be neither too early nor too late. Perhaps the effect of the introduction of the transistor is a good example. The first rather quiet announcement of the transistor was followed shortly with tremendous enthusiasm by potential users. It was the answer to all problems – it had infinite life – it was shock and vibration proof – it was infinitely stable, etc. Some manufacturers were lured into producing equipment taking advantage of these alleged assets of the transistor. But they found that many of these claims were not true, at least as of that time, and that, in addition, there were many difficulties that no one had anticipated. The result was obvious – the products failed. Yet, on the other hand, a company that is now not doing some work on the uses of transistors, where they are applicable to its field, is just asking to be scooped by its competition.”

 

Looking at the situation for the consumer, Hewlett says he, too, must “maintain his competitive edge in his own field, and he must continually monitor those products or techniques that will improve his production efficiency or his degree of management control. If this represents radical departures from standard practices, he must insure that he has adequate technical competence within his organization to exploit to the fullest the new equipment. The introduction of the electronic computer emphasized this point in the strongest terms. When the first Remington Rand Univac 1 was delivered to General Electric in Louisville it turned out that no one knew how to use it. It was a useless tool. The measure of success of the computer in its introduction into business has been marked by the adequacy of preparation for its intelligent use.

 

“The eventual introduction of automation will face the same kind of problems – and yet come it must…..Members of the manufacturing industry must follow closely activities in this field so as to time their entry for maximum effectiveness. Similarly, they must  be prepared to handle the increased technical complexity of a very sophisticated system.

 

“The challenge of technology is to keep abreast of the products of sciences applicable to your business – to choose carefully the time of entry – and to be internally qualified to fully exploit the equipment or technique so as to insure maximum return of the investment.”

 

7/26/57, Telegram to Hewlett from Herbert Seibert, Editor of “The Commercial and Financial Chronicle” asking for a copy of his speech, along with a photo

8/14/57, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Herbert Seibert sending a copy of his speech

8/14/57, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Russell Robins, Vice President L. A. Young Spring & Wire Corporation, sending a copy of his speech in response to his request

8/30/57, Letter to Hewlett from R. Robins’ secretary thanking him for the copy

8/28/57, Article clipped from “The Commercial and Financial Chronicle” printing his speech and photo

 

 

Box 1, Folder 16 – General Speeches

 

December 4, 1957, “Growth Industries in the West – Electronics,” Stanford Business School

 

12/4/57, Copy of a two page typewritten outline of Hewlett’s speech

 

From this outline we see that he discussed “pre-war” electronics, particularly in the Bay Area,  mentioning such companies as H & K, Eimac, Lenkurt, Dalmo Victor, Remler, Fisher, Kaar, Litton, and, of course, HP. During the war the Bay Area produced vacuum tubes and general commercial systems; the Los Angeles area, aircraft. All this pulled people to California – who liked it.

 

Post War growth saw electronics established as a general purpose tool, and an increase in the technical abilities of personnel, stemming from training received during the War. California universities became strong in the field of electronics. All this providing a favorable climate for engineering firms.

 

Korea created a big increase in demand for electronic equipment by the military – G.E., Sylvania, IBM, aircraft.

 

Currently Hewlett says military spending is cutting back – this is recognized by the industry which is broadening its product lines. In the long run military spending must taper off, but not suddenly.

 

He says the “Long range outlook is extremely dependent on how non-military product development programs proceed. I am no prophet” he says, “but—

 

1. There is the non-military business – untapped
2. It will entail clever imaginative engineers
3. W. C. [?] has what it takes
4. Management young enough and energetic enough to grab their share”

Box 1, Folder 11 – General Speeches

 

March 6, 1956 – “What’s wrong with the IRE and What You Can Do About It”

 

3/6/56, Copy of typewritten text of Hewlett’s speech

 

Addressing his audience of senior engineering students Hewlett says he was “somewhat coerced into selecting a title, and in desperation I chose a title under which I could say most anything. Actually, I’ll be fair, I’ll discuss the subject ‘What’s wrong with the IRE’ – it’s very simple, many of you are not members. What can you do about it – join!”

 

Having said that much, Hewlett says what he really wants to talk about is “you- your prospects and…incidentally, the extent to which the IRE may help you in the next few years, the years that are probably some of the most formative in your life.” He talks about the growing job opportunities in research and development, although reminding them they will start at the “bottom rung of the engineering ladder.”

 

And he adds that “you are entering probably the most productive ten years of your life. And I intend to prove this.” He gives some specific examples:

 

Marconi – age 21 when he first established the principle of radio transmission.

Newton – 23 when he proposed his three basic laws.

Maxwell – 15 when he read his first paper before the Royal Society in Edinburgh, and was only 26 when he presented his paper on lines of force which was really the basis of his theory of electricity and magnetism.

Madam Curie – only 31

Edison – only 30 when he developed the incandescent light and the carbon microphone.

 

And to be fair, he cites Laplace who he says was about 79 when he finished his treatise on celestial mechanics.

 

Hewlett refers to a book titled ‘Age and Achievement,’ by Lehman, who said that ‘for each field of endeavor there is an age at which you arrive at the maximum rate of highly superior production.’ Hewlett gives examples from this book: “In the field of chemistry this maximum rate is in the age group of 26 to 30. In our own field of electronics, and incidentally of physics and mathematics, the age group is 30 to 34. So you see,” he says, “that you are entering one of your most productive age brackets”

 

This all leads to Hewlett’s punch line: “Now I don’t want this to sound like a graduation address, or even like a sermon, but I think it is important for what I propose to say now and this is – how the IRE, or any other technical society, can be of assistance to you in developing you to your greatest potentiality.”

 

Hewlett says he has a “soft spot” in his heart for the IRE. And he goes on to tell how, in about the year 1938, he attended his first IRE convention where he was scheduled to speak, although he had never spoken in public before. He says “I put something I had made into my car, something I was supposed to talk about, and drove up [to Portland]. When I got up before the microphone I was so nervous that I could hardly speak. But I got up there and I talked about this project which, interestingly enough, was a new type of oscillator. It was an RC oscillator, and since that time we have built something over 60,000 of these oscillators. So here’s an example of the facility that the IRE furnished a young man just starting out. What better chance could you offer. Here was a chance for him to really sell his wares, his ideas. This, however, is just one example of how a professional society can help the engineer who is just starting out.”

 

Hewlett goes on to tell of other ways in which the IRE society can be of assistance, an important one being technical publications. Here at college you have, for the most part, been following “a prescribed course,” he says. “From now on you must strike forward, and it is really here that the professional society and its publications are of major importance. It would be a catastrophe if your education and learning were to stop upon graduation. If you are to be successful you must continue to learn, and it is through the publications of a technical society that you have one of the best opportunities to do this.”

 

Hewlett adds other ways IRE membership may help with career advancement: Professional Group specialized “Proceedings” which offer specialized tutoring, and seminars at field meetings and conventions.

 

“There is one additional phase of a professional society that I would like to mention,” he says, “and that is taking an active part in the committees and panels of the society. Now I’m perfectly willing to admit that this doesn’t sound like a very fascinating occupation and, true enough, there are many of these committees that would not interest you, many of them don’t interest me, but I think that if you investigate, for each one of you there is some particular phase of a professional society where you can make a contribution.”

 

Hewlett returns to his original question – “What’s Wrong with the IRE?”  And he provides some answers: “Well, the principle thing that’s wrong with the IRE is the fact that it’s had to increase seven fold in the past fifteen years. Before the war it was an organization of about 6,000 people, now it’s well over 40,000. In addition to this, it’s undergone a major subdivision program for professional groups that would have wrecked, I think, a less vigorous society. There’s nothing wrong with the IRE that a little understanding, that a little imagination and a lot of hard work isn’t going to help. And these are just the things that a youthful membership can give the organization. They are the same vitality and energy that you will bring to a professional organization that you join….The professional society can certainly be no stronger than the outlook of the majority of the members who form it. What’s wrong with the IRE – we need your membership, and we don’t just need the $10.00, because that $10 will just barely pay for the cost of publications. What we do need is your interest and your activity and your support, both in its publications, in its meetings and in its professional panels and committees. What does all this gain you – by building a strong, young and vigorous institute you guarantee yourself that there will be an adequate professional society to guide you in your professional development during the next five or ten years, the most critical and the most productive years of your life.”

 

3/6/56, Outline of speech handwritten by Hewlett on 3×5” cards and on notebook paper

3/6/56, several typewritten pages of drafted sections of the speech

3/6/56, Typewritten sheet with what appears to be a short introduction of Hewlett by John O’Halloran, Chairman of the IRE Student relations Committee

12/8/55, Letter to Hewlett from John F. O’Halloran, confirming their previous conversation about the IRE meeting and a possible topic for Hewlett’s talk to the students

1/17/56, Copy of a letter from Mickie Ayres, Hewlett’s secretary, to John O’Halloran enclosing a biographical sketch and photograph

1/27/56, Copy of a letter from Mickie Ayres to Joseph Sodaro saying Mr. Hewlett does not yet have his talk sufficiently prepared to send an abstract

3/2/56, Note from John O’Halloran enclosing minutes from January 27 meeting of the IRE student relations committee

3/7/56, Letter to Hewlett from Alois W. Graf saying he missed Hewlett’s speech on what is wrong with the IRE and asking for a copy so he would know more about this subject

4//3/56, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Alois Graf saying the title, What’s Wrong With the IRE,” was actually a “gag” and the talk was actually intended to be inspirational for the students

4/10/56, Letter to Hewlett from John O’Halloran expressing appreciation for his talk and enclosing a copy typed from a tape

4/17/56, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to John O’Halloran thanking him for the copy and asking if he could send more so they could answer requests

4/30/56, Letter to Mickie Ayres from John O’Halloran sending more copies of the talk

3/12/56, Letter from A. N. Curtiss asking for a copy of his talk

4/3/56, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to A. N. Curtiss saying no typed copies were made of this talk and offering to have the transcript typed

4/10/56, Letter from A. N. Curtiss saying he would appreciate a copy if it becomes available

5/3/56, Copy of a letter to A. N. Curtiss from Mickie Ayres sending  a typed copy of the talk

5/10/56, Letter to Hewlett from A. N. Curtiss thanking him for the copy of his talk

 

 

Box 1, Folder 12 – General Speeches

 

August, 1956 – Talk on HP’s Engineering Program, Palo Alto, CA

 

8/56, Copy of pages from the August, 1956 issue of Watt’s Current magazine

 

The magazine appears to have printed a transcript of Hewlett’s talk to HP engineering personnel.

 

Hewlett says he wants to talk about “…the importance of an effective research and development program to our company and about the plans we have made and the steps we are taking to augment our engineering activities.

 

“Importance of the HP engineering program”

 

He says “from the very beginning,” they wanted to develop a reputation for quality, in their engineering and in the quality of their products. Having once built such a reputation they “had a bear by the tail,” as he put it. “We had the reputation, and we didn’t want to lose it.”

 

Hewlett says HP’s engineering force remained fairly stable for several years, when they were making a limited variety of instruments. They were able to satisfy their modest needs for new engineering people through their contacts with professors and others they knew throughout the country.

 

“Today, however,” he says, “the need for expanding our engineering force has increased.” With sales running 20 to 30 million dollars a year, Hewlett says, “Our customers have come to expect forward engineering ideas in hp equipment. If we don’t produce equipment embodying these forward ideas, someone else will and, quite frankly, we intend to discourage competition – not through price wars and restrictive trade practices but by doing such a damn fine job of engineering there will be little opportunity for anyone else.”

 

“Expansion of the hp Engineering Program.”

 

Hewlett says there are three factors forcing an expansion of the laboratory group:

 

“First, there are ideas from our customers and our sales representatives as to the various things we can and should manufacture.” He sites the Dynac Variable Time-Base Counter as an example of a general purpose test product they probably never would have thought of building had it not been for receiving a “number of requests from the field.”

 

“Secondly, our own laboratory staff, as they have become more versed in the field of electronic measurements, …have generated ideas for the extension and improvement of our product lines.”

 

And Hewlett says the third factor has been the impact of new techniques and methods. “It is absolutely imperative that we work on new techniques and methods to keep our position in the field.” He gives the transistor as an example.

 

“Recruiting of Engineering Personnel”

 

Hewlett describes their first effort to launch a college recruiting program which took place this year. They thought candidates would sign up ”in droves,” and were much surprised that only a couple of students showed up. But following this “eye-opening” he says they came home and put together good material about HP and its engineering activities. They visited universities across the country and the results were dramatic: “…we made about 40 offers,” he says, “ and got about 20 people…. We intend to continue this engineering recruiting program and I think the experience we have gained will allow us to do an even better job next year.”

 

Another step Hewlett says they have taken to “back up their engineering program is to expand our summer help program. We employ a large number of college students during the summer and, in general, we have been giving preference to the students who will probably go into engineering.”

 

The employment of high-school students during the summer is another program Hewlett describes. He says it is not simply a way to help them earn money over the summer, but they try to put the “boys” to work on actual projects doing something useful to HP. He sees this program as a general effort to encourage more young people to become interested in a science career – not limited to electronic engineering.

 

Hewlett closes by saying that the important point of these programs to increase their engineering staff is that “…we recognize the significance of engineering in our product line and that we are going to put on the best engineering program you have ever seen. If you think we have done well so far, just wait until two or three years from now when we get all of our new lab people producing and all of the supervisors rolling. You’ll see some real progress then!”

Box 1, Folder 5 – General Speeches

 

April 28, 1954 – “The Importance of Mechanical Design in Electronic Equipment,” Iowa State College, Ames [A1] Iowa,

 

Hewlett was invited to address EE students at Iowa State in the hope of acquainting them with the importance of mechanical design in electrical engineering projects, and to give them some knowledge of the IRE.

 

4/28/54, Two pages of handwritten notes by Hewlett, outlining what he intends to cover in his remarks. Hewlett says to the students that “I can’t hope to tell you all about mechanical engineering as applied to electronics. I can only give you a broad summary and cite a few examples of changes that have come up in our own work. I do this with the hope that it may encourage you to take a greater interest in ME  in college and to prevent you from becoming a ‘let Charlie do it’ with respect to ME, once you become a practicing engineer.”

 

He provides some specific examples of the importance of electro-mechanical design, knowledge of materials, and awareness of the production process, and concludes with these remarks:

 

1. “Recognize the importance of ME in electronic design.
2. Avail yourself of  courses in characteristics of materials and light fabrication methods while in college
3. In your practice of engineering remember that no matter how good the electronic design may be, if it can’t be produced and maintained in the field the design is not acceptable. I would say that this is one of the most important reasons for failure of modern equipment.
4. That good mechanical design must be built in from the beginning and not after the electrical design is completed – this is too late.”

 

Undated, Typewritten outline of what could be a speech on the selection of materials, and layout of electronic equipment,  Not clear where or how Hewlett might have used this. No heading is provided to identify the paper.

2/25/54, Letter to Hewlett from Ted Hunter inviting him to come to Iowa State College to talk about the importance of mechanical design – and to better acquaint them with someone from the IRE

3/10/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Ted Hunter accepting his invitation

4/6/54, Copy of a telegram to Hewlett from Hunter asking date he can meet students

4/13/54, Copy of a telegram from Hewlett to Hunter saying he could meet on April 28^th

4/22/54, Handwritten letter to Hewlett from Ted Hunter, advising him of changes in flight schedules.

4/23/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett’s secretary, Mickie Ayres, to Ted Hunter advising of Hewlett’s arrival time

4/23/54, Letter to Hewlett from George R. Town, Associate Director, Iowa State College, giving some history about the head of the Mormon Church

4/26/54, Letter to Hewlett from Alvin A. Read of IRE, Iowa Section, thanking him for visiting

8/29/56, Letter to Hewlett from Alfred R. Gray, Editor, POPT Transactions asking for a copy of the speech he gave at Iowa State College in 1954 on the importance of learning Mechanical engineering.

9/12/56, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Gray saying this speech was never prepared for publication

8/13/59, Letter to Hewlett from E. K. Gannett asking what progress is being made on the “mechanical design of electronic gears project”

Undated, internal HP memo with addressee unnamed, from “Lorna” saying she had talked to “Gail” about Hewlett’s speech on mechanical design

Undated, Typewritten note from “Gail” to “Lee” attaching a copy of Hewlett’s speech titled “The Importance of Mechanical Design in Electronic Equipment.” She says this is the only copy and asks for its return.

3/13/54, Copy of article from Business Week about Arthur A. Collins

 

 

Box 1, Folder 6 – General Speeches

 

May 6, 1954 – “A Look at Our Electronic Industry,” IRE Section Seven Technical Conference, Portland, OR

 

5/6/54, Outline of speech, handwritten by Hewlett on notebook paper

 

Hewlett talks about the changes in the industry since he was last in Portland in 1938, IRE membership going from over 5000 to 38000. He says electronics is now about a 8 billion dollar industry: 1/3 military, 1/3 radio, and 1/3 rest. “It emerged from the war as the general tool of science and industry.”

 

Hewlett looks at the activities of various areas, radio and TV, non-TV fields, business and industrial applications.

 

Among his conclusions are:

“In the long run and as military spending slacks off electronics will not just be relegated to the field of mass entertainment, important as it may be, but will render service to business, science and industry in an ever increasing and indispensable fashion.

 

“It is worthy of note that in this rapidly expanding industry called Electronics, the West is taking a leading role. If  one can judge by IRE membership, it is now the most rapidly developing area in the country.

 

“I feel my election to the Presidency of IRE was a direct tribute to Western electronics.

 

“I am proud to represent you at the national level and hope that my visits to Portland and the NW may continue under such pleasant circumstances as they have in the past.”

 

5/6/54, Outline of speech printed by Hewlett on 3×5” cards

5/5-6-7/54 Copy of printed program of conference

 

 

Box 1, Folder 7 – General Speeches

 

May 9-12, 1954, National Conference on Airborne Electronics, Dayton Section IRE, Dayton OH

 

5/9-12/54, Outline of speech handwritten on notebook paper by Hewlett.

As President of the IRE Hewlett discusses various policies, aims and procedures of the Institute.

5/9-12/54, Same outline as above hand-printed by Hewlett on 3×5” cards.

5/9-12/54, Copy of typewritten comments, presumably by Hewlett, on the conference – the papers to be presented, the exhibits, as well as the future of aviation. He says “The National Conference on airborne Electronics is dedicated to aiding in the transfer of knowledge of significant electronics  progress, and we hope that you will find our three-day conference both interesting and entertaining.”

4/26/54, Letter to Hewlett from Robert J. Doran giving details of conference schedule

5/3/54, Copy of a letter from Mickie Ayres, Secretary to Hewlett, giving information on his flight schedule

Undated, Handwritten page which appears to state a policy on the aims of an organization, possibly the Engineers Joint Council named below

1953, Copy of a page from the Institute News and Radio News. Apparently the question had arisen as to whether the IRE should affiliate with the Engineers Joint council. This article cites several conflicts between the way the EJC and the IRE operate, and says that the Board of IRE has concluded that “…it is not desirable to reverse these policies at this time in order to permit affiliation with the Engineers Joint Council;” and “The Institute must regretfully decline the invitation to join the Engineers Joint Council.”

 

 

Box 1, Folder 8 – General Speeches

 

August 27, 1954 – “Why Electronics Grows in the West,” WESCON Show and Convention, Los Angeles, CA

 

8/27/54, Copy of typewritten speech presented at the Convention by Hewlett

 

In searching for a subject for his speech, Hewlett says he had for some time been interested in “making a study of our West Coast electronic industry with the objective of analyzing its characteristics and its reasons for growth.” In making his study he admits that the data is primarily from California – because this was the most readily available – but he says he believes the conclusions are equally true of all the West Coast electronics Industry.

 

Electronics got off to an early start on the West Coast Hewlett says and he lists some of the contributions: the Poulson Arc, the first important source of high-powered continuous wave radio frequency energy, Lee DeForest’s work on the three-element tube , the dynamic loud speaker, aircraft and marine communications. A first in radio broadcasting was achieved at the Pan-Pacific Expedition in 1915 with broadcasts from San Jose to San Francisco.

 

“…other influences stimulated the growth of Western electronic activity,” Hewlett  says. “One of the most important of these…was the introduction of talking pictures….In a similar fashion the Los Angeles area was an early center of oil developments.”

 

These “seeds” of West Coast electronics activity fell on fertile ground, he says, and he mentions such assets as favorable climate, space for plant growth, and colleges and universities which have “furnished an important reservoir of engineers.”

 

As to liabilities, Hewlett sees the distance that separates the Coast from sources of components and materials, and which, similarly, separates the Coast from its market areas.”

 

Next, Hewlett looks at “the peculiar properties of the electronic industry that seem to adapt it to this location.” He says he would like “to postulate two important characteristics and then demonstrate that my postulates are correct. First, I say that electronic equipment requires more than the average amount of research and development to obtain a marketable product. Second, I say that the production costs and investment per dollar produced are far less in the electronic industry than in industry as a whole. Some careful research was required,” he says, “to prove these postulates.”

 

On the first point, the high engineering content of electronic equipment, Hewlett says he found a survey from Harvard Business School which “showed that in the field of industrial research the national average for spending was 2% of net sales; for the electronic industry it was 5.4%.”

 

Since data were not available to prove that production costs were low in the electronic industry, Hewlett conducted his own survey. “…I made a survey of some 14 West Coast electronic concerns,” he says. He did not include companies associated with the aircraft industry.

 

“The survey indicated,” he says, “that the average investment in machinery and equipment of these 14 concerns was approximately 9% of sales.” He found comparable cost data from a survey made by the Machinery and Allied Products Institute. “This study showed that the national average for the investment in machinery and equipment as a percentage of sales was 70%; thus per dollar of sales, the electronics industry has only about one-eighth as much money invested in machinery and equipment as the national average.”

 

As to research and development costs, Hewlett found that this was 5.4% of sales revenue for the electronics industry  – 2% for all industry. Another factor included in Hewlett’s survey was working capital per employee. “A typical national figure would be approximately $4,000 per employee. The average for the 14 concerns surveyed was about $2,500 per employee; thus, again, less investment required per dollars produced.”

 

Hewlett describes a typical West Coast electronics company. “…in general it is not a particularly large company and its market tends to break down into one of two classifications. Either it is a concern which has a specialized product and a national distribution or it is a concern which builds high quality consumer items primarily designed for local consumption. Thus, we see that both types of products are designed to minimize the liabilities of freight differentials, for the specialized product is usually relatively non-competitive and contains a high engineering content whereas the product of consumer consumption is not seriously affected by the adverse freight rates. The typical West Coast concern has usually been built on a firm financial foundation. In general the original founders are still closely associated with management.

 

Looking at the future Hewlett says “I would be safe in making a general prediction about the future of the western electronic industry. I would make this prediction in the form of a paraphrase of the theme of this year’s WESCON. I would predict that ‘Electronics will Continue to Grow Faster than the West.’ I would justify this prediction on the basis that I cannot convince myself that there will be any major reduction in the aircraft electronics industry in the foreseeable future; on the basis that the population will continue to increase in California, resulting in continued expansion of the local consumer market. I would justify it on the basis that our colleges and universities have kept abreast of the growth of the West and are turning out well-trained engineers at a high rate. And finally, I would justify it on the basis that high research and development expenditures are always a precursor of high production in the years to come. Yes, I think I would be safe in saying that ‘Electronics will continue to Grow Faster than the West.”

 

7/54, Copy of the IRE publication “The Bulletin” which announces the WESCON show.

8/25-26-27/54,  Copy of the printed program for the WESCON show

8/25-26-27/54, Printed list of registrants for the technical sessions

5/5/54, Letter to Hewlett from Walter E. Peterson, WESCON Chairman of the Luncheon Committee confirming Hewlett’s acceptance of their invitation to speak at the Convention

5/5/54, Copy of a similar letter from Peterson to Dr. W. D. Hershberger, Chairman WESCON Board of Directors

6/18,21/54  Copies of fourteen letters written to West Coast electronics companies seeking information for his survey

6/18/54, Letter to Hewlett from Walter Peterson asking for the title of his intended speech at the Convention

6/21/54, Letter to Hewlett from Mal Mobley, Jr. WESCON Business Manager, asking for a message from the IRE President for the IRE Bulletin announcing the WESCON Convention

6/23/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Walter Peterson saying he is awaiting replies of letters sent to several West Coast electronics companies and will be in a position to decide on a title after he receives these replies

6/23/65, Letter to Hewlett from H. L. Hoffman of Hoffman Radio Corporation giving some information in response to his request for data.

6/22/54 and 6/23/54, Letters to Hewlett from E. P. Gertsch of Gertsch sending information for the survey

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to E. P. Gertsch thanking him for the information and sending copy of his speech

6/24/54, Letter to Hewlett from A. A. Ward of Altec Lansing Corporation giving some information in response to his request.

6/25/54, Memo by Hewlett to his file on this speech saying he had visited Eitel-McCullough and collected data for his survey

9/2/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Mssrs. Eitel and McCullough thanking them for their cooperation in the survey, and enclosing some figures from the survey

6/30/54, Copies of seven letters sent to various organization and government agencies seeking information for his survey

7/1/54, Copies of four letters written by Hewlett to respondents of his survey thanking him for their replies

7/1/54, Letter to Hewlett from Andrew Orrick of the SEC saying they do not publish data of the type he desires, but information along the line he requested is available for review at their office in San Francisco.

7/1/54, Letter to Hewlett from Dorothy Brooks of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in San Francisco saying they do not have the information he requested, but they have referred the matter on to the Chamber office in Washington D.C.

7/1/54, Letter to Hewlett from Frank S. Schaumburg of Advance Electric and Relay Co. saying they will send the information he requested shortly

7/1/54, Letter to Hewlett from W. H. Moore of Packard-Bell Company giving some information for the survey

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to William Moore of Packard-Bell thanking him for the information which he sent, and giving some data from the survey results

7/7/54 and 7/12/54, Letters from Kenneth Anderson of the Scientific Apparatus Makers Assn. sending information for the survey

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Kenneth Anderson of the Scientific Apparatus Makers Assn. thanking him for the information he sent and sending him a copy of his speech with survey results

7/7/54, Letter to Hewlett from J. R. Bradburn  of ElectroData Corp. giving information for the survey

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to J. R. Bradburn of ElectroData Corp. thanking him for the information he sent, and enclosing a copy of his speech

7/8/54, Letter to Hewlett from E. W. Robertson of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce giving some references for information for the survey

7/21/54, Another letter to Hewlett from the U.S. Chamber giving another reference for data

9/1/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Fred Lindsey of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce thanking him for his help

7/9/54, Letter to Hewlett from Frank S. Schaumburg of Advance Electric and Relay Co. providing information for the survey

9/1/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Frank S. Schaumburg thanking him for the information he sent and noting that he thought it was interesting that whereas the national investment of machinery and equipment as a ration of sales was 70%, for the fourteen West Coast electronic concerns surveyed this same ratio was only 9%

6/25/54, Letter to Hewlett from L. G. Erickson of Lenkurt Electric Company sending information in response to his request

9/1/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to L. G. Erickson thanking him sending information for his survey

6/29/54, Letter to Hewlett from George Long of Ampex saying it may be a week or ten days before they can send the information requested

7/1/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to George Long saying he will be putting his data together the last week of July.

8/4/54, Letter to Hewlett from James E. Brown of Ampex enclosing information for the survey

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to George Long of Ampex thanking him for the information they sent, and sending a copy of his speech

7/8/54, Letter to Hewlett from John F. Byrne of Motorola in Corona, CA responding to his request for information for his talk, and saying that they located in Southern California because of the availability of engineering personnel

7/13/54, Letter to Hewlett from L. W. Holland, San Francisco Chamber of Commerce giving some information in response to his request.

7/14/54, Copy of a letter to Mrs. Marilyn Porter of the National Association of Manufacturers in Palo Alto, CA from K. E. Cook, Ass’t Secretary at HP, thanking her for the information sent to Mr. Hewlett for his survey

7/14/54, Copy of a letter sent by K. E. Cook to Merrill Woodruff of the U.S. Department of Commerce thanking him for the information requested and returning it as requested

7/20/54 and 7/26/54, letters from Merrill F. Woodruff of the U. S. Chamber of Commerce giving more references and information for the survey

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett  to Merrill Woodruff thanking him for his help and enclosing a copy of his speech

7/15/54, Letter to Hewlett from Jo Emmett Jennings, President of Jennings Radio Mfg. Corp. providing information in response to his request.

9/1/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to J. E. Jennings saying he appreciated the information he sent.

8/1/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Charles Stewart of the Machinery & Allied Products Institute asking for information

8/4/54, Letter to Hewlett from Charles Stewart of MAPI  sending some information for the survey

9/3/54, Copy of a  letter from Hewlett to Charles Stewart of MAPI thanking him for his help and enclosing a copy of his speech

8/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Howard Vollum of Tektronix asking for data

8/23/54, Copy of a letter to Hewlett from Howard Vollum of Tektronix, Inc. giving some information for the survey

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Howard Vollum thanking him for the information and sending him a copy of his speech

8/12/54, Letter to Hewlett from W. D. Hershberger, Chair of WESCON Board of Directors, inviting him to a press conference in Los Angeles on 8/25/54

8/16/54, Copy of a letter to W. D. Hershberger from Hewlett’s Secretary, Mickie Ayres, saying Hewlett is away and she cannot say whether or not he will attend the press conference

8/24/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Hershberger saying he will  attend the press conference

8/23/54, Letter to Hewlett from Christian J. Matthew of Arthur D. Little, Inc. giving information for the survey

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Christian J. Matthew thanking him for his help and sending a copy of his speech

9/1/54, Letter to Hewlett from John F. Byrne of Motorola saying that “in spite of Motorola’s non-cooperation” he thought Hewlett gave “a very good speech”

9/2/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Thomas P. Walker of Triad Transformer Corp. saying he appreciated his help with the Convention

9/2/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to W. D. Hershberger thanking him for his work putting on the WESCON show

9/2/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Walter Peterson thanking him for what was done for him at WESCON

9/1/54, Letter to Hewlett from D. C. Duncan of Helipot, saying Beckman Instruments had been moving and his letter requesting information had been misplaced. He says Dr. Beckman offers his apologies

9/2/54, Copy of a letter to D. C. Duncan saying he completely understands the reason he received no reply from Beckman instruments and asking that he pass this along to Dr. Beckman

8/30/54, Letter to Hewlett from S. E. Howse of Technicolor  Motion Picture Corp. asking for a copy of Hewlett’s speech

9/3/54, Copy of a letter to S. E. Howse from Hewlett’s Secretary sending a copy of his speech

9/3/54, Letter to Hewlett from Merritt Cutten sending a clipping from the L.A. Times

7/8/54, Letter to Hewlett from Weldon B. Gibson of SRI giving some suggestions on gathering data for his speech

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Weldon Gibson thanking him for the suggestions and sending a copy of his speech

9/3/54, Letter to Hewlett from Audrey Carlson  saying Mr. Gibson is away and she will give him the copy of Hewlett’s speech when he returns

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to L. M. Holland of the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce thanking him for his help in gather data for his speech

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to H. L., Hoffman of Hoffman Radio sending a copy of his speech and thanking him for his help

9/13/54, Letter to Hewlett from Kenneth Anderson of Scientific Apparatus Makers Association, thanking him for sending a copy of his speech

9/14/54, Letter to Hewlett from H. L. Hoffman congratulating him on his “fine talk”

9/3/54, Letter to Hewlett from Walter Peterson of WESCON, thanking for his speech, and asking for a copy

9/16/54, Letter to Hewlett from George Long of Ampex Corp. thanking him for the copy of his speech

9/23/54, Letter to Hewlett from E. P. Gertsch, President of Gertsch Products, thanking him for the copy of his speech, which he says he gave to an interested visitor – he asks for another copy

9/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to George Bailey expressing appreciation for his help in finding needed statistics

9/13/54, Letter to Hewlett from George Bailey saying he read the speech with interest and passed it on

9/29/54, Copy of a letter to George Bailey urging him to visit next time he is in California

9/28/54, Letter to Hewlett from Fred W. Morris, Jr. of Gray Scientific Division, asking for a copy of his speech

9/29/54, Copy of a letter to Fred Morris from Mickie Ayres, sending a copy of Hewlett’s speech

10/4/54, Letter to Hewlett from A. C. Prendergast asking for a copy of his speech

10/5/54, Copy of a letter to A. C. Prendergast from Mickie Ayres, sending a copy of his speech

11/5/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to John S. Morgan sending a copy of his survey speech in response to a request from A. M. Zarem of the Stanford Research Institute in Los Angeles

12/9/54, Letter to Hewlett from A. M. Zarem, of SRI, sending some information and asking for a copy of Hewlett’s speech

12/13/54, Copy of a letter from Mickie Ayres to A. M. Zarem sending a copy of Hewlett’s speech

12/2/54, Letter to Hewlett from David Goodman asking for a copy of his speech

12/13/54, Copy of a letter to David Goodman from Mickie Ayres sending a copy

12/8/54, Letter to Hewlett from W. P. Von Behren of General Electric, asking for a copy of Hewlett’s speech

12/15/54, Copy of a letter to W. P. Von Behren sending a copy of Hewlett’s speech

12/26/54, Letter to Hewlett from Norman H. Kalson asking for a copy of his speech

12/28/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Norman H. Kalson enclosing a copy of his speech

10/7/55, Letter to Hewlett from Ellis F. King asking for a copy of Hewlett’s speech

10/17/55, Copy of a letter from Mickie Ayres sending a copy of the speech to Ellis King

Undated, copy of an article from the Atlantic titled “The Prospects are Bright”

Undated, Typewritten page of data on several companies, listing Sales, Profit, Net Worth – HP is included

Undated, Typewritten note with some data from the Electronics Industry Conference, published by the U.S. Department of Commerce

Undated, Listed several companies in the survey showing the sources of some of the published data about them

12/7/56, Letter to Hewlett from David M. Goodman requesting a copy of his 1954 speech  on electronics growth in the West.

12/28/56, Copy of a letter from Mickie Ayres, Hewlett’s Secretary, to David Goodman sending the requested copy

 

 

Box 1, Folder 9 – General Speeches

 

September 10, 1954 – A Radio Engineer Looks at Radio Physics, National Bureau of Standards Boulder, Colorado

 

9/10/54, Hewlett’s speech, in outline form, handwritten by him on notebook paper

 

Hewlett says he was “taken aback” to be asked to speak on radio physics. His field, radio engineering is “remote” from radio physics,” he says, “but it might be interesting” to take a look at radio physics from that viewpoint.

 

He says he wants to develop the idea of the importance of radio physics to radio engineering. To do this he follows the contributions made by such people as Faraday, James Clerk Maxwell, Heinrich Hertz, He says that these three were probably the first radio physicists.

 

He goes on to explore the development of the “Ionosphere Theory.”

This started he says  with Marconi in 1901 with transatlantic transmission. He mentions the Heavyside Theory, a reflecting layer, and  Kennelly and J. J. Thompson in 1902

 

He says, “One is impressed by the slow but steady accumulation of evidence that eventually led to proof of layer existence.” A 23 year period followed, and he mentions the contributions of many people during this period: Watson, Eckersley, Appleton and Barnett, Breit and Tuve.

 

Since 1925 “there has been continual improvement in methods of measurement of height – methods of prediction and methods of use.”

 

He discusses studies into the troposphere saying its “Importance for the radio engineer  was that it might  provide a means of communications when the ionosphere was not reliable.”

 

Hewlett discusses meteors and says that there is a strong belief “among many that meteors may be the real cause of major forward scattering [?] in the ionosphere.”

 

In summarizing his conclusions Hewlett says that “It is easy to see an indispensable role played by radio physics in the development of what is now the whole field of radio engineering.

 

“We have seen how the experimental work of Faraday, backed by the theoretical work of Maxwell layed [sic] the foundation for the whole field of Electrical Engineering.

 

“How the experimental work of Hertz placed scientific props under radio and paved the way for the works of Marconi and others.

 

“How the theories of Kennelly and [?] …culminated in the demonstration of Tuve and Breit, Appleton and Bernett that the ionosphere did exist.

 

“And how through continued work by radio physicists, reliable ionospheric data is now available in useable form to the radio engineer.

 

“How systemic investigation of the troposphere has given the radio engineer valuable information on what he may expect in the VHF and UHF regions.

 

“And how the study of meteor reflections may open up new fields of communications.”

 

As a radio engineer Hewlett says he must point out that the contributions have not been “one-sided, and that without the parallel development in engineering the work of the physicist  would have been much more difficult if not impossible.”

 

He concludes with the thought that now that his research into these two fields, and his talk given, “I can look back and see how much I as a radio engineer have enjoyed my look at radio physics. I hope that you as physicists or engineers have also enjoyed this look.”

 

9/10/54, Several pages handwritten by Hewlett which appear to be earlier drafts of his talk

8/8-14/54, Copy of a printed program for the dedication ceremonies for the new National Bureau of Standards Laboratory in Boulder, Colorado.

6/16/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Dr. Alan Schockley of the National Bureau of Standards saying he would be “most pleased” to participate in the dedication ceremonies of the new central Radio Propagation Laboratory of the National Bureau of Standards….

6/24/54, Letter to Hewlett from F. W. Brown of the NBS discussing details of the program

8/3/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Dr. Brown suggesting the title of his talk as “A Radio Engineer Looks at Radio Physics.”

8/18/54, Letter to Hewlett from F. W. Brown offering to reimburse him for travel expenses

8/24/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Dr. Brown saying he will not need travel expense reimbursement

8/19/54, Letter to Hewlett from Ronald G. Bowen , an electronic manufacturers’ representative, offering to be of service in any way while Hewlett is at the dedication.

8/24/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Ronald Brown saying he has not yet firmed up his schedule and will see Brown there in Boulder

8/27/54, Letter to Hewlett from Wayne D, Phipps of the Boulder Chamber of Commerce inviting to him attend a luncheon while he is there.

9/3/54, Copy of a letter to Wayne Phipps from Hewlett accepting his invitation

 

 

Box 1, Folder 10 – General Speeches

 

November 16, 1954 – “Is There a Future in Electronics,” Kansas City, MO, IRE Section Conference

 

Hewlett, as President of the IRE, was invited to speak at the sixth Annual Electronics Conference of the Kansas City Section of the IRE

 

11/16/54, Copy of  a double spaced typewritten draft of Hewlett’s speech with many handwritten changes/additions by Hewlett.

 

Hewlett’s one-year tenure as IRE president is drawing to a close, and he says that  his travels of over 75,000 miles during the past ten months have given him “a much better appreciation of the tremendous scope and potential of this electronic industry of ours.”

 

“Today,” he says, “I would like to discuss briefly the tremendous opportunity that is available to those of us who have elected to earn our living in this field of electronics.”

 

He says electronics is a big business – eight billion dollars a year – and it can be divided into three rough categories: radio and TV, (three billion in sales); military spending (2.7 billion); and the remainder (2.3 billion). He looks at each of these areas separately.

 

Although “there has been some slump in [the radio and TV] market,” he says, “…there is every indication that when color television sets become generally available there will be a resurgence in this whole field.” He says he has confidence that the cost of a color TV set will “be beaten down” to where it is “only” 30-40% higher than a comparable black and white set.

 

As to the military arena, he says trying to estimate growth here is a difficult problem. “One can, however, bound the problem. If peace continues and the cold war becomes de-emphasized, there can be no doubt that there will be a reduction in total military spending. Of course, if our cold war should flame into full scale conflict the whole electronic industry would be drafted to meet the tremendous wartime requirements of full scale military mobilization.”

 

“I would hate to feel,” Hewlett says, “that the future of the electronic industry was dependent solely upon these two components, for, important as they are, their potentials, except in case of war, have obvious limits. It is really to the segment which I classified as ‘other’ that I feel our future depends.” Trying to describe all the activities would be impractical he notes, but he says he would like to mention a  few which appear “destined to assume roles of increasing importance.”

 

“Let me take, for example, the field of data processing (computers). Today this represents about a 25 million dollar business. A recent survey of this field indicated that by 1960 this would probably be a 500 million dollar industry.

 

“Another field, closely associated with the first, is that of industrial application of electronics. I don’t suppose that you can pick up a paper today without reading some new or amazing job that electronics is performing. The fact of the matter is that prior to World War II electronics was simply the tool of a small group of engineers who were specialized in the field of communications. Today electronics is rapidly being recognized as a basic and important tool for all industry. I can’t say that the day of the automatic factory is here, but certainly many elements of it are well on the way. I feel it is particularly interesting to note that the entrance of electronics into this field has not been necessarily at the expense of the older methods –hydraulic, pneumatic, mechanical, etc. –but it is primarily to supplement them and to intelligently direct them. But if we do not now have the automatic factory I think we will have it within the next ten years. Even today many important operations are being carried out through the assistance of electronics. This can range all the way from controlling the amount of beer in a beer can down to the guiding of an intricate milling operation for jet aircraft skin structures.”

 

Another area which Hewlett thinks will undergo rapid growth is medical electronics. Including X-rays, Hewlett says estimates are that this field has about one billion dollars of electronic equipment in use. He says “the IRE as an organization is vitally concerned with the contributions that electronics may be able to make to the general field of medicine, and is planning an all out effort to develop every facility at its disposal to help the medical profession use and understand this new tool.”

 

Hewlett concludes saying that “…the electronic engineer as a group has one, if not the most, promising future of any field in the engineering profession.” He discusses four factors favoring this point: electronics is a rapidly expanding field; secondly, there is a serious shortage of all types of engineers; third is the high percentage of engineering that is required in electronic gear; and finally, the vitality resulting from the relatively low investment costs that are required in the field of electronics.

 

Concluding his remarks, Hewlett says that as he looks back on his year in office as President of IRE, he may have undersold the promise of electronic engineering as a field. “After some eleven months in traveling around the country I certainly have raised my sights and now feel that the opportunity it affords the engineer, either as an employee or as an entrepreneur, is without match in the engineering profession.”

 

11/28/54, Several pages of Hewlett’s handwriting and mathematical formulas apparently made as he drafted his talk

3/11/54, Letter to Hewlett from William H. Ashley, Jr. of the IRE Kansas City Section inviting him to their annual conference – and asking for a copy of his remarks

4/20/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to W. H. Ashley accepting his invitation

7/9/54, Letter to Hewlett from William Ashley listing speakers and their topics – and asking for a copy of Hewlett’s manuscript by Oct. 22. He also asks for suggestions for a speaker at one of the conference dinners

8/2/54, Copy of a letter to W. H. Ashley from Hewlett saying he has not come up with any suggestions for a dinner speaker

9/29/54, Handwritten letter to Hewlett from Bill Walters, inviting him to stay with them during his stay in Kansas City

10/4/54, Copy of a letter to William Walters for Mickie Ayres, Hewlett’s Secretary, saying Hewlett is away and will return on October 24^th

10/24/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to William Walters saying his schedule is not yet firm, but when it is he will let him know and maybe they can get together

10/4/54, Letter to Hewlett from W. H. Ashley asking if Hewlett will be able to submit a manuscript by October 22

10/7/54, Copy of a letter to W. H. Ashley from Mickie Ayres, Hewlett’s Secretary, saying Hewlett will not be able to submit an abstract of his talk before Oct 22

10/12/54, Letter from W. H. Ashley saying they are printing a booklet on November 10 and would be able to include his material then if he is able to submit it by that time

11/8/54, Letter to Hewlett from W. H. Ashley sending a copy of the program for the conference

11/23/54, Letter to Hewlett from K. V. Newton, Kansas City, IRE Section, thanking him for his visit and his talk

11/30/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to K. V. Newton saying he enjoyed his visit

11/29/54, Letter to Hewlett from W. H. Ashley thanking him for coming to their conference

12/6/54, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to W. H. Ashley saying he enjoyed his visit

Box 1, Folder 1 – General Speeches

March 23, 1953 – “An Evaluation of the I.R.E. Professional Group Plan,” 4^th Annual I.R.E. meeting, New York, New York

3/23/53, Printed copy of Hewlett’s remarks

Hewlett says he would like to take a “critical look at what is happening to our own Institute of Radio Engineers through the formation and expanding program of our Professional Group system.”

He explains that these Professional Groups were started about five years prior by individual members of I.R.E. interested in seeing that “their field or branch of scientific or technical endeavor is adequately covered by Institute activities….There are now no less than 19 Professional Groups with a paid up membership of approximately 12,500,” Hewlett says.

Going back in history, Hewlett explains that the I.R.E was formed in 1913 concerned with the science of radio engineering. He contrasts some of the early papers published by the Institute which were of interest to all “Radio Engineers,” with recent articles representing “the high degree of sophistication the art has assumed.”

Hewlett says that World War II “had a tremendous impact on the entire field and electronics immerged from the war as a basic tool of industry as a whole and not just the bread and butter item of a small group of engineers in the field of radio communications.”

Hewlett refers to an article by Dr. William Everitt, titled “Let Us Re-Define Electronics.” And quotes a definition for electronics which Dr. Everitt proposed:

‘Electronics is the science and technology which deals primarily with the supplementing of man’s senses and his brain power by devices which collect and process information, transmit it to the point needed, and there either control machines or present the processed information to human beings for their direct use.’

“An acceptance of this definition and a tacit assumption that the I.R.E. is the professional society primarily responsible for the field of electronics immediately indicates,” Hewlett says, “the enormous scope of the I.R.E.’s responsibility.”

“The diversity of interest  represented by this definition,” He says, “offers a …challenge to the Institute, a challenge which must be accepted if the Institute is to live up to its basic objectives as set forth …in its constitution, here quoted in part:

‘Its objectives shall be scientific, literary, and educational. Its aims shall include advancement of the theory and practice of radio and allied branches of engineering and of the related arts and sciences, their application to human needs, and the maintenance of a high professional standing among its members.’

“The Institute’s answer to this challenge,” he says, “ has been the Professional Group system.”

Pointing to the increasing role played by the Professional Groups in conferences and symposia, Hewlett likens the Institute to a parent with 19 vigorous children  who are rapidly approaching maturity.

“We are probably entering one of the most critical phases in the development of our Group System,” Hewlett says. “We have gone too far to turn back, and must make the system work or see the Institute shatter into small pieces, the total of which would never be as strong as the whole, nor as capable of serving the interests of the profession.”

“The Groups have become large enough and sufficiently well defined that basic questions are arising with respect to the relation of Groups to each other and of Groups to the Institute itself. It is imperative that these and similar problems as they arise be faced squarely and considered honestly by the Professional Groups and the Institute alike….The basic yardstick must be ‘What is best for the Institute and the profession as a whole?’ I for one am convinced that …the service performed to our members and profession will be even better, and that the Institute of Radio Engineers and its Professional Group system will be a model of how a professional society can meet the demanding requirements of an ever increasing technical field.”

3/23/53, Copy of typewritten draft of speech

3/23/53, Another copy of a typewritten draft

Undated, Copy of printed article  titled ‘The IRE Professional Group System –A Status Report,’ from an Institute publication

12/31/52, Copy of typewritten pages listing IRE members by product areas

9/26/52, Letter to Hewlett from George W. Bailey, Chairman, 1953 IRE National Convention Committee, inviting him to be the principal speaker at the IRE annual meeting

2/13/53, Letter to Hewlett from George W. Bailey, enclosing a memorandum from Mrs. Evelyn Davis giving dates pertaining to the development of the Professional Group system

2/16/53, Letter to Hewlett from George Bailey giving details on the meeting arrangements

2/19/53, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to George Bailey saying he will be at the speaker’s platform at the prescribed time

2/16/53, Letter to Hewlett from E. E. Gannett, IRE Administrative Editor, Asking for the title of his talk

4/10/53, Letter to Hewlett from E. E. Gannett, saying he got a copy of his speech and would like his permission to publish it

4/22/53, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to E. E. Gannett giving permission to publish his speech

Box 1, Folder 2 – General Speeches

November 3 & 4, 1953 – “Impedance Measurements in the Microwave Frequency Range,” IRE Sections in Los Angeles and San Diego

11/3/53, Typewritten text of Hewlett’s speech. The same speech was given in Los Angeles and San Diego. His speech was a technical discussion which is not included here, but the following is an abstract of  his speech which he sent to the organizers of the meetings in advance:

“The paper is basically a correlation and review of basic techniques for impedence [sic] measurements at microwave frequencies. The discussion will cover both coaxial and waveguide sources. The principle sources of error and their relative importance will be outlined and methods of minimizing these errors suggested. The discussion is confined primarily to techniques based on existing commercial equipment now in common use in the field.”

11/3/53, Copy of the cover of the Los Angeles IRE publication, “The Bulletin,” announcing Hewlett’s talk, a biographical sketch is attached

11/4/53, Copy of San Diego IRE Section publication with an article announcing Hewlett’s talk

9/10/53, Letter to Hewlett from B. S. Angwin of Los Angeles Section IRE inviting him to speak at their monthly meeting in November.

9/25/53, Typewritten note, possibly by Hewlett’s secretary, Mickie Ayres, saying that, in answer to the above letter, he had telephoned Mr. Angwin  agreeing to speak

10/1/53, Copy of a letter to B. S. Angwin from Mickie Ayres, sending an abstract of Hewlett’s talk and a biographical sketch

10/7/53, Letter to Hewlett from B. S, Angwin discussing arrangements for the meeting

9/23/53, Letter to Cort Van Rensselaer at HP, from Edward J. Moore of Neely San Diego, asking his help in arranging to have someone speak to a meeting of the San Diego Section of the IRE on Nov. 3, 1953

9/28/53, Copy of a telegram from Ed Moore to Cort Van Rensselaer, saying the date of Nov. 4 for San Diego would be OK

10/1/53, Copy of a letter to Edward Moore from Mickie Ayres sending an abstract of Hewlett’s speech which he will give to the IRE meeting in San Diego on Nov. 4^th

10/16/53, Memo to Cort Van Rensselaer from Edward Moore offering to arrange a hotel reservation for Hewlett

10/19/53, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Edward Moore saying he will need a slide projector for his talk

11/4/53, Letter to Hewlett from Ellis F. King, IRE Chairman, thanking him for his “very interesting” talk

11/6/53, Letter to Hewlett from B. S. Angwin of Los Angeles IRE Section, thanking him for presenting his paper to them at their meeting

11/9/53, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Professor Ellis F. King, University of California, saying he enjoyed visiting the meeting in Los Angeles

Undated, Handwritten page by Hewlett addressed to “Ellis” discussing what he intends to speak about at the meeting – appears it might have been a draft for his secretary to type

Box 1, Folder 3 – General Speeches

December 4, 1953 – “Engineering as a Career;” to engineering students at San Jose State, San Jose, CA

12/4/54, Copy of typewritten speech, including outline

Hewlett was asked to speak on development engineering as a career, and electronic engineering in particular. He begins by examining what electronics is. “In simplest terms,” he says, “it is the field that deals with vacuum tubes and their use.” He broadens this to include transistors, and gives a few examples of practical electronics:

He describes telephone circuits that span the United States, with repeater stations along the line to strengthen the signal. “These repeater stations are completely dependent upon electronics for their operation,” he says  Without electronics he says you could “put all of the energy from the universe …into a line in New York and only six electrons would roll out in San Francisco each year.”

He gives examples of using computers for stock control, keeping track of 13,000 types of items.  He says the designation of this computer is the 140 GP – because it replaced 140 girls – i.e.140 Girl Power.

Hewlett talks about engineering in general. “There are simply not enough engineers,” adding that the greatest demand will be for aeronautical and electrical engineers.

“Who is using these engineers?” he asks. The U.S. Government for one he says, giving the example of the B-36 airplane which uses 2100 vacuum tubes , and a battleship using 9000 tubes. Television is a growing field, but he admits he does not have one in his house, and makes it sound like he is waiting for color to appear. He says his field is instrumentation and he gives an example of instruments used to test cement being manufactured. By measuring the vibration of a bar of concrete poured from the cement they could determine its strength. Previously the bars had to be crushed with heavy equipment to determine the strength. He gives other examples such as monitoring remote and hazardous industrial processes via closed loop TV circuits.

Hewlett talks about the types of electronic engineering work – development, production, sales – describing how these each work together to build and sell a final product, giving the percentage of engineers engaged in each function. Next he provides some figures on salaries people in this line of work can expect to receive. He describes the beginning assignments a hypothetical new development engineer might do upon joining the Hewlett-Packard Company.

In his closing remarks Hewlett says that he has tried to stress the following points: “That there is and will continue to be for some time a serious shortage of trained engineers; that engineers trained in the field of electronics are at present and will probably continue to be some of the most critical and difficult to obtain; and that by and large the compensation for those engineers that remain in their technical field has been good. As far as education is concerned, I personally lay a great stress upon the student gaining all the technical information he can in the few short years of his college education. In general he will not expand on the technical tools given him by his college education. And finally, that the decision whether a student should plan for a career in development, in contrast to sales and production, should in part be determined by his temperament and his personal interest as well as his technical capabilities.”

12/4/53,  Outline of speech typewritten on 3×5” cards

10/26/53, Letter to Hewlett from Ralph J. Smith, Head, Engineering Department, San Jose State College, inviting him to speak to their freshmen engineering students on career opportunities in this field

10/28/53, Copy of a letter from Hewlett to Professor Smith accepting his invitation

11/9/53, Letter to Hewlett from Ralph Smith enclosing descriptions of the various engineering specialties as used in their classes

11/12/53, Copy of a letter from Hewlett’s Secretary, Mickie Ayres, to Professor Smith saying the enclosure mentioned in his letter of Nov. 9 didn’t arrive, and asking for another copy

12/1/53, Letter to Hewlett from Prof. Smith giving instructions for parking

Undated, Copy of a pamphlet from the College describing their Aeronautical Engineering curriculum