1958 – Packard Speeches

Box 2, Folder 29 – General Speeches

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


Box 2, Folder 30 – General Speeches


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


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

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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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

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

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

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

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

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

Box 2, Folder 31 – General Speeches


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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



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


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


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


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


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


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

Box 2, Folder 32 – General Speeches


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

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

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

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


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


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


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


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


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

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


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


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


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

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


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


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

Program indicates Packard’s participation in the Electronics Forum.

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




Box 2, Folder 33 – General Speeches


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

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

Contains some handwritten notes by Packard.

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


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

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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


1. Provide National Leadership

2. Are pace setters for all higher education

3. Are centers for advancement of knowledge

4. Are chief suppliers of teachers

5. Offer advanced training for Public Affairs

6. They provide most advanced training in the professions.

7. They are outgrowing their sources of support.

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


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


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

Box 1, Folder 3 – Stanford


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

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

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


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

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

– The ability to decide what to do.

– The ability to get it done.”

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


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


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


Packard continues saying managers must have:

– Imagination

– Judgment

– Drive

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


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


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


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


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


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

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

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

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

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


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


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

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

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

Box 1, Folder 7Stanford

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

Box 1, Folder 14 – HP Management


January 31, 1958, Second Annual Management Conference, Sonoma

Handwritten notes in Packard’s handwriting:

                        Meeting at Sonoma

Financial Reports

How we stand in market

Future growth

Clarify responsibilities

Special interest to employees

Importance of human factor

Think first of the other fellow

How to encourage creativeness – not from suggestion system

Development of people – training and educational opportunities

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

Conference for 1958

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


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

from higher authority.


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


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


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


“Eleven Simple Rules”


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


And the second handout:




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


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


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


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


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


Am I growing in emotional maturity and stability?

Am I sensitive to the feelings of others?

Do I show work interest? Drive? Staying power?

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

Do I seek to improve my technical competence?

Do I set high standards of work performance for myself?

Do I take active measures to profit by my mistakes?


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


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

Inspire confidence, loyalty, and acceptance in others?

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

Organize, build, and maintain an effective group activity?

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

Motivate and stimulate men to do their best?


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


Set and reach objectives and goals through other people?

Plan and organize my work and that of my group?

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

Measure and evaluate results?

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

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

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

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

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

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