Box 2, Folder 61 – General Speeches

 

March 1, 1964, Address at 100th Anniversary of the University of Denver, Alumnae of U. of Denver, Denver

 

3/1/64, Typewritten copy of text of Packard’s address on the above occasion.

 

Packard congratulates all on their “exiting new plans you have prepared and on the successful completion of the first stage of your program for New Resources….I hope it will come as no surprise to you when I suggest that your success in this great job is only the beginning. It is, indeed, only the beginning because Denver University has a unique opportunity for leadership, and is therefore in a position of great responsibility, and you as its Alumni and friends share that responsibility”

 

Packard says “We look to Denver along with our other great Universities for many things. We expect them to provide a good education for our youth, an education in breadth and depth beyond the level of common knowledge.”

 

“We expect our Universities to push forward the frontiers of knowledge, scientific knowledge by research and investigation, knowledge of human relations and human affairs by research and objective scholarly discussion. We expect them to disseminate this knowledge through graduate study and publications.

 

“We expect our Universities to train practitioners in law, in medicine, in engineering, in business administration, and in all of the other professions necessary for the proper working of our society.

 

“We expect them to be involved in public service, not only in local and national affairs, but in international affairs, as well.

 

“Above all we want our Universities to develop for us responsible and capable men and women who will match the demands of citizenship and leadership for the future of America.”

 

Referring to the New Goals and New Tasks prepared by Chancellor Alter and the faculty, Packard says “They are clearly the commitment of a great University to meet some of the challenges which have been placed at its door by a changing world – by an expanding universe.”

 

Packard feels the University of Denver has “a special reason to meet this challenge…because you have here the only great privately supported University in the Rocky Mountain Region. This is important not because your school, or any other privately supported school, is or should be better than the State supported institutions, but rather because it has turned out in education , as in other affairs, diversity is the key to freedom and to excellence for all.

 

“Our privately supported, and therefore hopefully independent, Universities provide this diversity with the State supported schools, They have a flexibility undertake new programs, to provide leadership in areas new and old, often not available to schools which must look to the legislatures for their support, and unfortunately sometimes, for their guidance.”

 

Packard takes on a brief history of the development of the University of Denver and of Universities in general. “Denver University began as the Colorado Seminary on March 5, 1864. Its founders stated that it was to be a “school of high grade – an ornament to our City and a fitting monument to her liberality”. Its first classes were limited to academic subjects, ancient and modern language and music. How then did it develop from this modest beginning to the great multi-faceted institution that it is today.

 

“There were many influences, local and national, that have moulded [sic] the development of your University. From the local community came the desire to nurture a great private school. The need of hour community for professional people, doctors, lawyers, had its influence. More recently, recognition by the community of the value of research – belief that an important research center here would be a great asset in the economic life of the community has been a factor. Beyond the needs of the community, and the vision of the leaders of Denver and of Colorado, your University has been profoundly influenced by the same factors which have influenced the University as an institution throughout America.”

 

”Harvard College was founded in 1636 “to advance learning and perpetuate it to posterity; dreading to leave an illiterate ministry to the churches”. William and Mary 1793, Yale 1701, Columbia in 1754 and others, have been founded early. All of these early schools were built on the pattern of the English colleges at Oxford and Cambridge. These early American Colleges were all influenced by the Christian humanism of the Seventeenth Century. They taught a relatively fixed body of knowledge, believed in the discipline of mental faculties, and had a strong undergirding of Christian moral philosophy, The virility of these influences was such that they can be clearly recognized in all of our Universities of today, and have a strong influence in the discussions as to what our Universities should be tomorrow.”

 

”The institution which has become the University of today, as contrasted with the college or professional school, can trace its antecedents back to Greece. It can find roots from the Middle Ages, was highly influenced, and still is, by the English pattern. But the essential characteristics which make a school a University came from Germany. The establishment of the University of Berlin in 1809, with emphasis on philosophy and science, on research and graduate instruction, and on the freedom of professors and students, was the beginning. The emphasis on research and graduate instruction was a clear break from the theological influence of the English pattern This broke the bonds of stagnation in the body of knowledge taught and preserved by the Universities, and opened the door to modern scientific progress.”

 

“There were also two unique and immensely important characteristics of our modern Universities which were developed here at home in America.

 

“The first was the concept that every young man or young woman of ability should have the opportunity for a higher education, regardless of his social standing or his financial ability”

 

Packard mentions the Morrill Act, passed two years before the Colorado Seminary was founded, and says that “This was the land grant act designed to support colleges to teach agricultural and industrial arts. This provided the foundation of engineering schools, agricultural schools, extension services, and a vast range of activities directed toward practical usefulness, and toward involvement with the community at large. It is a typically American development in education, and one which has enabled our institutions of higher education to contribute greatly in specific ways to the economic growth of our Country.

 

“[These] influences, the British, the German, and the American, have brought forth the University as we know it today, largely in the 100 year period between the founding of the Colorado Seminary of 1864 and the Denver University of 1964….As Clark Kerr, Chancellor of the University of California, puts it, “A University anywhere can aim no higher than to be as British as possible for the sake of the undergraduate, as German as possible for the sake of the graduates and the research personnel, as American as possible for the sake of the public at large, and then he goes on to add, “and as confused as possible for the sake of the preservation of the whole uneasy balance”.

 

Saying that “the desire to pursue this multiplicity of aims has brought about considerable confusion in all of our Universities”, Packard explains that the confusion exists “as to whether teaching or research is more important, …whether science or the humanities is the more worthy goal, …[and] whether learning should be pursued for its own sake or for the practical benefits which may derive to the student or the public at large.”

 

Regarding the “question of whether the four year undergraduate program belongs in the University”, Packard says that “[it] remains an integral part of the American University because of the Alumnae” who fondly remember “our four years at old U, our fraternity brothers, our classmates, our team. We have not been willing to let these educators corrupt our school with nothing but graduate study and research, even though this might, in fact, be a more effective utilization of the capability and resources of our University.”

 

Packard feels “There are bound to be some changes in the traditional structure of our Universities simply because there are so many things going on in the educational scene of today which are stretching the capacity of the traditional patterns. For one thing, there is just so much new knowledge being generated that a student can hardly obtain an education adequate for much of anything in just  four years. This problem has been solved in part by pushing down on the lower years. In science and engineering many subjects which used to be taught in graduate classes are now covered in the junior and senior years. Most high school students in the better high schools are ahead in many areas of the freshmen and sophomores of two or three decades ago.

 

“Another trend comes from the desire to reduce the old compartmentalization of subjects, to bring various areas of learning in a closer relationship with each other.”

 

“Everywhere we hear of a desire for more emphasis on liberal studies and humanities. This desire is not without merit. It comes on top of a clearly defined need for more education in science, engineering, law, medicine, and every other subject in the catalogue of courses. The need for more and better education is so great, we just should not allow ourselves to be limited to the same old packages we have been using for the last century.

 

“…we have large waves of new students clamoring for an education, knocking at the doors of all of our schools. Every private University is facing this problem in the same way – limit the size of the undergraduate college, let it seek excellence as its goal – and turn the rest of the youngsters over to the Governor. We should have some concern as to what will happen as our private Universities upgrade their admission standards in their search for excellence, turning increasing numbers of the sons and daughters of their friends and alumnae sway, while they look to these friends and alumnae to help pay for this excellence….how long it will continue to bear this strain remains to be seen.”

 

Packard expresses the opinion that “our past and present fixation on the importance of the undergraduate program and the Baccalaureate degree will eventually break down. Four years of college is no longer adequate to educate a “Responsible Individual” which your Chancellor has properly defined as one of your goals, for the complexities of modern society. The concept that one must become a Bachelor first, in order to proceed with advanced studies, stems from the 13th Century. It seems possible that it might eventually outlive its usefulness, if it has not already done so.”

 

“ Research is rapidly becoming a more important function of the American University. This trend has been accelerated during the past two decades by the rapidly expanding allocation of Federal funds for research….Funds for research, I presume, a good share from the Federal Government, are the largest single source of financial support for Denver University. This is true also for most other Universities today.”

 

…“So far the arguments are strong for a continual high level funding of research at our Universities but the growth of funds is likely to be slower in the future.

 

“Strangely enough there is a division of opinion among University people as to whether support of research at Universities by business and industry is a good thing for the University.  Where a University has an associated Research Institute, as you have here at Denver, or as we have at Stanford, industrial support seems to be preferred – although an examination of the research budgets often indicates this preference is frequently honored by its breach, rather than its observance.”

 

Packard speaks of the increasingly high cost of doing research and says that, “This almost malignant growth of research has generated active concern among many faculty, administrators, trustees, and alumni, who would like to see more emphasis placed on education in general, and the humanities in particular. This concern will certainly generate more effort to develop the non-research functions of the American University, but whether there will be any significant change in balance remains to be seen.

 

“And, finally, there has been a substantial increase in the involvement of Universities in public affairs. The increasing number of professors in Washington is one evidence. The increasing involvement in International problems is another which includes the involvement of both faculty and students. The University is no longer the Ivory Tower where learning is sought only for its own sake, but rather is squarely in the main stream of the practical affairs of the world.

 

“And to the local scene the University has also become a great asset. New industrial complexes have sprung up around our Universities. Industries have moved to the area of Universities, attracted by the new knowledge being generated by research. New businesses have been founded by young men educated in new fields of science and technology, In an era where industry is often based on ideas, rather than on transportation and the localities of markets, Universities become much more of a mainspring of economic growth than ever in the past.”

 

“But, as important as these structural patterns and utilitarian uses of a University may seem, these structural patterns and utilitarian uses must never be allowed to overshadow the fact that a University is primarily an institution where independent inquiry and independent teaching must prevail. The University will continue to be a vital institution in our society only so long as it remains a place where truth can be pursued, wherever it may lead. Utilitarian benefits can, at best, be only by-products.

 

“It is for this reason that the bulwark of any University which seeks excellence is Academic Freedom. If we are to preserve Academic Freedom we must accept the fact that our professors will sometimes teach something with which we don’t agree. They may take positions on subjects which will offend some of us. Their students, too, may make statements, write editorials in their papers, or do other things which will seem to be at odds  with the conventional wisdom of their elders. Nothing can be more damaging to the public-at-large, to take restrictive action on anything less than the most irresponsible abuse of Academic Freedom. And, they must be overly generous in their definition of irresponsibility.”

 

In closing, Packard says “I would encourage you to remember that the University is an immensely complex and an immensely important institution. Is faculty and its administrators face an almost impossible task as they strive to find the proper balance among the many things which are expected of them. In undertaking to meet the “New Goals and New Tasks” they have established for your University, they have accepted the challenge as they should. They need and they deserve your devoted and most understanding support. I salute your vision, and I wish you well.”

 

11/13/63, Letter to Packard from John A. Love, Governor of  Colorado, inviting Packard to speak at a dinner meeting the following March observing the 100th Anniversary of the University of Denver.

12/3/63, Copy of letter from Packard to Governor Love accepting the invitation to speak.

12/16/63, Letter to Packard from Gov. Love saying he would write later with more background and ideas.

2/26/64, Note from “lmn” at Stanford enclosing a copy of an article from the Denver Post discussing the protests from college and university administrators about Gov. Love’s budget for education.

3/4/64, Letter to Packard from Robert S. McCollum, Vice Chancellor, thanking Packard for participating in the dinner.

3/26/64, Letter to Packard from Chester M. Alter Chancellor, thanking Packard for his participation in the dinner.

3/30/64, Copy of letter from Packard to Chancellor Alter thinking him for his note and enclosing a copy of his address.

Undated, Clipping from Rocky Mountain News about Packard’s talk at Denver University.

January/February 1964, Publication from Colorado National Bank on research at Denver University.

Pamphlet of general information about Denver University.

 

Box 2, Folder 62 – General Speeches

 

June 1, 1964 – Self Enlightenment, The Key to Progress, Colorado College Commencement Address, Colorado Springs

 

Packard tells his audience that both of his parents graduated from Colorado College about the turn of the century, and he describes differences in living conditions between then and now – six decades later. Packard says the “America of sixty years ago was very primitive.

 

“The horse was the main means of private locomotion. There was no radio, no television. There were few telephones—about one for every one hundred people.  Considerable progress had been made medicine, but typhoid fever, diphtheria, pneumonia, tuberculosis, and other serious diseases would take their toll of the graduating class before its members reached their prime in life. Many of their children would not survive to college age. Just a few examples will serve to emphasize what vast changes have been effected by the advance of scientific knowledge.”

 

To draw the contrast with current living standards Packard says “Today you are able to fly to almost any city in the world in less time and much more comfort than your granPackardarents could travel to New York or San Francisco.

Radio and television bring important events to your living room, and the best entertainment and music, too…You can dial directly to nearly every telephone in the country, and there are nearly as many telephones in the nation now as there are people your age or older to use them. Progress in medicine has given your generation at least fifteen more years life expectancy than the generation of your granPackardarents.”

 

Having described these changes Packard goes on to say that “The quality of civilization is not measured, however, by science and its products alone, but rather by the vast range of social and political relationships between people and between groups of people. Science may be used to improve or degrade social and political relationships, or these may be improved or degraded quite apart from science and its products.  I believe there has been very substantial social and political progress, as well as scientific progress, during the period we are considering today, and I would like to review an example or two for you.”

 

In describing the quality of life at the beginning of the century Packard say “…life was not so bad ….Family life on the better farms throughout America was comfortable and satisfying, even though it did involve a good deal of hard work. Merchants and professional people had ample opportunity to enjoy a good life….

But life for the working man in the mines, and in most industries, was certainly unattractive. One dollar a day was a typical wage for vast numbers of people in America They and their families had no security against sickness or other misfortune. The prevailing attitude of business management was that labor was a commodity to be bought and sold on the open market, and at the lowest price that would produce the strong backs necessary for the job. These conditions had spawned the labor union movement and contributed to its growing strength.

 

“The first four decades of the twentieth century were filled with bitter strife and violence as the working man sought a wage on which he could raise his family and could maintain his dignity as a human being.”

 

Packard says that “In the thirties the federal government increased its participation in the labor problem, and progress was more rapid. Finally, a revolution in the attitude of management people has accelerated the progress so that the laboring man in this country eventually won his rightful place in our society. From $1 a day to $20 a day is about the measure of the average economic gain of this social revolution. To this has been added a large package of other benefits—compensation for accidents, sickness and unemployment insurance, retirement pay, and similar innovations which are now the accepted rights of the working man.

While these changes have come about largely through the pressure of the labor unions, and the intervention of the federal government, they have also been stimulated by a far—reaching revolution in management philosophy. I believe this philosophical revolution may in the end represent as important a chapter in social progress as the gains which have been achieved for the working people.”

 

Packard says that he believes “this revolution in labor and management attitudes is at least one example of social progress which is as important as some of the scientific progress which has been achieved since the time of your granPackardarents.

 

“This is also a good example of how social progress is achieved. We see three mechanisms which can hasten the evolutionary process. Under the first mechanism, the people who are aggrieved react to build up a countervailing force of power….I our example, the countervailing power was the union movement. The second mechanism is that a super authority can intervene, as the federal government has done in labor affairs. The third and best mechanism is that the people in a position to improve the situation can do so by a process of self-enlightening action This is the best mechanism because it is the method of reason rather than the method of emotion or tyranny. This mechanism is most likely to provide permanent progress, for it implies that what is done is considered right by all concerned.”

 

“We can already see these three mechanisms at work in the civil rights problem. The militant leadership of the minority groups is building up its countervailing power in an attempt to correct the aggrievement. The government, as a super authority, has intervened. Fortunately there is already considerable self-enlightenment of those who are in a position to improve the situation by their own actions. I am confident this third, and most important, mechanism will come into play more rapidly and more effectively in the civil rights problem than it did in the labor problem. If so, we can indeed credit these times with important social progress.

 

“It would be fortunate if those in the best position to do so were always able to bring about the correction of social injustice through their own enlightened action. Much strife would be avo8ded, and things would be easier for our governments. I do not think this is likely to happen—even with small problems. I am afraid force will continue to be an important corrective action in social problems for some time to come.”

 

Packard turns to international affairs saying that “During the first half of this century there was no evidence whatever of any progress in the relationships between nations, nor reduction in the brutality of dictatorship rule. Two of the most extensive and bloody wars the world has ever seen have occurred. The leadership of communism has murdered millions of people in cold blood, simply because these people cherished their freedom, or because they wanted to own the land that was their heritage. Fascist leaders murdered mullions of people simply because of their ancestors. And millions of people have continued to die of starvation. One cannot consider progress to have been made in any sense of the word. In fact, it would be hard to find a time of comparable length in the history of mankind when as may lives have been brutally and uselessly sacrificed. Reading the day-to-day headlines does not show much evidence that the situation is likely to improve.”

 

Self-enlightenment, or reason, seems to be even less likely among nations than among individuals. Warfare, then, has become the accepted means of attempting to solve nation differences. But the twentieth century has brought a change which could be the decisive element for real progress in international affairs. As many would caution, it could also be the element to end all civilization. I mean, of course, the nuclear weapon.”

 

Packard quotes Arnold Toynbee as saying that with the advent of nuclear power “the whole human race has been united on a military plane, the choice confronting us may be one between going all the way to unity, or going under.”

 

“Packard says that “I, for one, believe we should take the optimistic view, now that we have the chance, and should attempt to go all the way to unity—by that I mean to Universal Peace. I believe the threat of the nuclear weapon may turn out to be the super authority, which will final move nations into self-enlightened action—something which could never be done before.”

 

“Everyone agrees that this is the century of science, that scientific achievement has been accelerating at a tremendous pace and will continue to do so. This can also become the century of social and political progress. Some progress has already been made, but we have not yet determined the outcome. The outcome will be determined when we recognize that final and permanent change for the better in all human affairs comes not from strife between people, or groups of people,  attempting to force acceptance of their views; not from power imposed by a super authority, but only from self-enlightened action of all concerned whether they be individuals or nations. This is the challenge and the responsibility of the free society.”

 

 

 

6/1/64, Typewritten text of Packard’s speech at Commencement Ceremony for Colorado College.

6/1/64,  Typewritten draft of this address with handwritten notes by Packard.

6/1/64, Copy of the Calendar of Events for the Commencement

6/1/64, List of Senior Honors and Awards

11/14/64, Letter to Packard from Lloyd E. Worner, President Colorado College, asking Packard to be their Commencement speaker.

12/3/64, Copy of letter from Packard to Lloyd E. Worner saying he can be available for the Commencement.

1/3/64, Letter to Packard from Lloyd E. Worner thanking him for accepting the invitation.

3/10/64, Copy of letter to Lloyd E. Worner from Margaret Paull, Packard’s secretary, saying Packard will be available to meet with Worner on March 18^th.

3/27/64, Note to Packard from Lloyd E. Worner saying he enjoyed the visit to the HP plant.

3/26/64, Letter to Packard from Lorena A. Berger asking for Packard’s measurements for an academic costume.

4/20/64, Copy of a letter from Packard to Lloyd E. Worner giving arrival time in Colorado Springs.

4/30/64, Letter to Packard from Lloyd E. Worner giving schedules.

5/12/64, Letter to Packard from George A. Miller of Colorado College asking for a copy of Packard’s address for publicity purposes.

5/21/64, Letter from Margaret Paull to George A. Miller sending a copy of Packard’s forthcoming talk.

5/11/64, Letter to Packard from K. J. Curran, Dean of the College giving details on visit schedule.

6/5/64, Note to Packard from Ray Wilbur saying he and wife enjoyed Packard’s talk.

6/8/64, Note from Lloyd E. Worner to Packard thanking him for a pledge and for participating in the Commencement.

6/22/64, Handwritten letter to Packard from Karl K. Zimmermann, giving congratulations.

Undated letter to Packard from E. F. Turner of Sunnyvale asking for a copy of Packard’s talk, and sending a copy of a paper he had written.

Several newspaper clippings about the Commencement and Packard’s address.

2/28/67, Letter to Packard from Frances G. Robinson, Press and Publications Service, asking for permission to reprint Packard’s address on 6/1/64 at Colorado College.

 

Box 2, Folder 63 – General Speeches

 

September 16, 1964, Industry’s New Challenge, The Management of Creativity,

September 16, 1964 – Harvard Business School Club of Northern California, South San Francisco

September 22, 1964 – Aerojet General Management Club, Azusa

September 23, 1964 – WEMA, San Diego

Packard gave the same talk to these three organizations on the dates indicated. The title on his talk was also announced as “Observations on Management”

9/23/64, Typewritten text of Packard address to WEMA on this date.

 

Packard congratulates the members of the audience on efforts to make San Diego “one of the very important centers in the electronics field”, saying they “deserve a great deal of credit and recognition for this. He tells them that he would like to talk about some things of a general nature, but which he thinks are important.

 

Looking at the problems that face the electronics industry, Packard feels that “in spite of the political influences and other things that may affect our business, the final analysis of  how well our own firms do depends on how good a management job we do as individuals” adding that  “I am not very much inclined to pass the blame on to somebody else…. So I am going to discuss this matter of management and some of the things I think need emphasis.”

 

“Traditional concepts of management” Packard says, …were directed toward the job of managing men, materials, and money in order to determine where responsibilities should be assigned. However, over the past couple of decades Packard feels there has been a change…”Essentially it is that the management job has become a larger one than simply handling manpower, materials, and money. It has become one of…how to nurture creativity…how to manage our ideas…and how to develop people who have ideas. In other words, ideas are really a vitally important ingredient in our industry….The emphasis is on how to “manage creativity” rather than how to manage basic production which used to be so important a few years ago.”

 

Supporting this thought Packard looks at some employment statistics – “Since 1947, the industrial output has nearly doubled. During this period, the number of productive people—the so-called blue collar workers—has dropped slightly, from about 13 million to 12 million. At the same time, the number of scientists and engineers in the country has doubled. So you can see that it’s not only a situation in our own industry but in industry at large where there is more scientific manpower and more creativity. Meanwhile, the old concept of materials and labor efficiency has become less important.”

 

Packard sees the ever expanding government-supported market as leveling off and

Therefore “…we are all going to have to work harder at finding new products and new markets. The solution is here and not in getting better supports from Washington or in other ways.”

 

Packard describes how every product that they have introduced has gone through the same sales cycle – sales rising for a few years and then leveling off. He emphasizes that “…had we not, in fact, brought out new products year after year, our company would not have grown the way it has grown. Our growth has been typical of the entire electronics industry, to a greater or lesser degree, and we are faced now, I think, as an industry with the problem of how to continue new product generation. The industry is leveling off and if we are going to move ahead, we must find ways to develop new products with creativity and innovation which will fit new markets.”

 

Packard moves on to steps in implementing a product program. “Of course, the most important decision to be made in any new product program is “what are you going to develop?” If you start off developing the wrong thing, obviously, you are spinning your wheels. So we have tried to find ways of evaluating new product projects to determine whether the ones we undertake are the best of all possible projects or whether there are others which might be better. In order to do this we went back and looked at what had been the result of our average decisions and we found that, by applying a measure determined by adding up the dollars it cost us to develop a new product and relating that to the product the product produced over a five year period, we cold establish a ratio. In other words, if this product produces $5 of profit for every $1 spent on it, it was a pretty good thing. If it only produced $1 of profit, it was less attractive. So by analyzing what we had done in the past, we could teach our division engineers and people in smaller groups in the organization to make the right kind of decisions. “

 

After describing this technique Packard goes on to say that results turned out to be questionable because judgement entered in when forecasting development cost and profits; and by manipulating these figures they found that divisions were all able to forecast they would meet whatever goal management had set, be 20% growth per year or whatever.

 

“Well, I think I ought to say that some of the professional management techniques are really not very effective in this business of nurturing creativity and developing and trying to do a better job. It certainly is partly because judgment is necessary. Also, I think it’s because a good deal of the traditional management practice we are all used to has been brought about as a result of things that really have had very little relationship to the kinds of problems we are facing today. Now, management at large is based to a large degree on military tradition. You get the thing organized. You assign responsibility. You have everybody lined up in a chain-of-command, and this works just fine. That is , if you want to get a certain number of people doing something that is fairly routine….It has been a very authoritarian thing, and this basic concept of assignments of authority and responsibility and the division of labor have their place, of course. They make the job somewhat more efficient. But they don’’ seem to be the way to get at this question of how you are going to move ahead when ideas and creativity and new products are the most important ingredients for the future.

 

“One of the approaches which I think has a good deal of merit—and I think more people are coming to this view—is the general concept of management by objective. That is, instead of trying to have everything organized down to the last detail, you try and get everybody working toward the some objective in an area of freedom so they can use their judgment and imagination. This obviously places emphasis on ideas and ideas don’t generally come from groups of people or from organizational patterns—they come from individuals. The problem is how do you develop an environment in which individuals can be creative, and how do you identify and evaluate these ideas when they are brought to the front. I believe that you have to put a good deal of thought to your organizational structure in order to provide this environment.

 

“Another thing characteristic of people who are creative is that they tend to be dissatisfied—they tend to be unsettled. To put it another way, they just don’t fit into the conventional organizational structure.”

 

“We have been very fortunate in our particular business in that our products have gone to customers who in turn are knowledgeable about electronics. The electronic engineer is typically a customer for our products and we have a lot of electronic engineers in our own organization. So we have got a pretty good built-in market evaluation capability there. If we come up with a new product and a lot of our engineers think it is going to be a world beater, the chances are pretty good that all the engineers in our customers’ shops will think likewise.”

 

Packard tells of HP’s acquisition of the Sanborn Company…”trying to find ways to expand our product line into fields which are not closely related to the nation’s military program, hopefully to provide a broader base and greater stability….rather than expecting the government to bail us out, we are going to have to find solutions ourselves.

 

“In the case of our own company, we are divided into small divisions. We try and keep the company broken down into groups of five or six hundred. Our best performing divisions in general are those which are managed by people who are restless; who are innovators; who don’t fit the typical management pattern, who are not the most orderly and certainly who are not conformists. We have a time getting them to follow company policy. I can get mad at them until I look at their performance and realize we had better put up with this. Conversely, we have men who are pretty good in traditional management techniques. Now you would like to have both, and I think this shows up in the experience of many young companies which get started on a creative idea and then find that they do have to do a number of things in a straight-forward, orderly manner and that the traditional concepts of management are indeed important. So I don’t want to leave the impression that you can do things in an off-the-cuff manner…but I do think we need to work for a little balance.”

 

Packard moves on to talk about management’s involvement in activities outside the company; in the community. “In recent years, management people have become much more interested in participating in the society outside their own company, contributing to the community at large, and thinking deeply about social problems relating to their business., This has led them to an ever-greater awareness that people are important and need to be recognized as people…that an environment needs to be generated to provide the right kind of a climate for them as individuals rather than as mere additional manpower. I think that there is a good deal of maturity in the present-day approach to labor relations, both among union leaders and business leaders.“

 

“I am particularly struck as I think about this matter by an experience I had about fifteen years ago. I went to a conference at which we were talking about personnel problems and I posed the proposition that I thought we needed to think a little bit more about some of these human factors rather than merely how to make a profit for our stock holders. Just about every person in this conference jumped on me and they said anybody who thinks about anything except making the maximum profit for the stockholders has no place on a management team. It is quite interesting for me to recall that just about six months ago I attended a meeting in Chicago of the Committee for Economic Development at which some of the top business management people in the country were in attendance. We spent three days talking about how management and business could contribute to society at large, and not once during the entire meeting did anybody talk about this question of how important profits are. This isn’t to say that profits are not important, because, of course, you can’t run a business without them, but there have been distinct trends toward recognizing these broader responsibilities.

 

“We have done some things in our own company toward this end. We have tried to develop an enlightened personnel program…But we have also tried to encourage our people to take part in the community affairs.”

 

Packard then talks about the general business climate in California saying that “things are not always as attractive here as they are in other parts of the country. If there is going to be more competition for such military and space business as is available, it is going to be more important that we be competitive in the future than in the past. I think we have a much bigger job in getting the full support of our Congressmen. I think in final analysis our efficiency is going to be pretty important.

 

“Packard gives some statistics covering the last twenty years in California: population up 123%, state government expenditures up 1000%, taxes up 650%. “Now some of this expenditure, of course, was occasioned by a need to catch up with things that were left undone during the war, so you might say you should not go back to 1945. Supposing you go back to 1951. Since then the population has grown 85% and state expenditures are up 260%.” Packard tells of meeting with industrial people from the Bay Area, representing 40,000 employees, all of whom said “they were going to minimize their expansion in California and expand outside wherever they could. The interesting thing was that, although specific levels of taxation were important, everyone felt it was the attitude of the state government which was as significant as anything.

 

“Packard says they drew up a “comparison between a hypothetical unit operating in California and one operating in Colorado….We made some general definitions of a unit employing about 500 people, carrying about $1,700,000 in inventory, something like $1,000,000 in machinery and equipment, $2,000,000 in buildings and about $400,000 in sales subject to sales tax, and an annual sales volume in the neighborhood of $10,000,000.

 

“State unemployment taxes cost $46,000 more a year in California than in Colorado….Here in California, industry is called on to support both the people they employ and to support those they are unable to employ, so to speak. I Colorado, industry is asked to support the people they employ and the general taxpayer is asked to support the unemployed….Other taxes are higher in almost every respect. I won’t go through the details but it turns out that the savings in Colorado are somewhere in the neighborhood of $80,000 to $100,000, and while this is not a decisive figure, it can make a difference.”

 

“We talk about why there should be any incentive to move out of California. I think we have some pretty important things to face up to and must ask ourselves what we can do about them. The things WEMA is already doing are important. It is important that we do what we can to elect people to the state legislature or state government wherever possible who believe in fiscal responsibility because if we continue to spend money on everybody for everything, those of us who are in productive areas of industry are just going to have to pay the bill.”

 

Packard turns to military spending in the area which means “We are going to be under more pressure because virtually all of us depend to a large degree on military spending. Frankly, I don’t really think we are going to get very much benefit from political action in Washington. In fact, I think it’s going to be more difficult to keep our share of business here in California simply because there is less business to go around. Other states are working hard and there is more emphasis on low cost. These things are going to make it much more difficult here in the future to do as well as we have done in the past.

 

“On the other hand, we have, I think, one of the greatest assets of the entire country and that is in terms of our scientific and technologically trained people. As I see it, the success we each have in the future is not going to depend on how much pressure we can get in Washington or any charity from there, but rather on how well we are going to be able to manage our own affairs in taking full advantage of the talent we have and at the same time doing what we can to improve the economic climate here in the state. I think if we concentrate on these two things, we will have a pretty good chance of making the future a continuation of the very exciting times we have had in the past years.”

 

8/28/64, Letter to Packard, from  L. L. Thompson of Aerojet saying they had reviewed his qualifications, but had no opening at the time.

10/8/64, Letter to Packard from very embarrassed S. M. Stroud apologizing for the employment letter. Seems Packard’s bio relative the forthcoming dinner speech got into the wrong pile.

9/1/64, Memo from Mike Talbert of Neely Enterprises to Margaret Paull saying the place for the Aerojet Management Club meeting/dinner has been changed.

9/3/64, Letter to Packard from Stan Stroud of Aerojet thanking Packard for agreeing to speak to their group.

9/17/64, Letter to Packard from Frank H. Coyne, Jr. thanking him for speaking to the Harvard Club on September 16^th.

9/17/64, Letter to Packard from Peter Wallace thanking him for speaking to the Harvard Club.

9/23/64, Flyer, announcing Packard’s talk to WEMA on September 23.

9/25/64, Letter to Packard from H. M. Bailey, Thanking him for speaking to WEMA members.

October 1964, copy of The Westerner,  a WEMA publication.

 

 

 

Box 2, Folder 64 – General Speeches

 

October 16, 1964, The Electronic Industry, 1964, The Business Council, Hot Springs, Virginia

 

10/16/64, Typewritten copy of the text of this talk. Packard was a member of a panel and this is a straight-forward description of the industry; what they make, their growth rate, and future prospects.

 

Packard says that the compared to other major industries Electronics is a young industry – just four decades old. He defines it as “having to do with devices utilizing the flow of electrons in vacuum or in semi-conductors – but the boundaries of the electronic industry are not precise. It overlaps into nearly a score of the Department of Commerce Standard Industrial classifications. Many products of the electronic industry are incorporated into other products – both within the industry and also products of other industries. This makes it difficult to develop accurate statistics on the industry. But accepting these uncertainties electronics can be considered as a 17 billion dollar industry in 1964. This would make it about the seventh largest manufacturing industry in the United States, after Food, Transportation Equipment, Petroleum, Chemicals, primary and fabricated Metals, and Machinery.

 

“Nearly 900,000 people are employed, and it is important to note that about 135,000 of these are scientists and engineers. This means that innovation is perhaps the industry’s most important product. Many of the industry’s products are devices which were unknown twenty-five years ago. Some of them were thought then to have been impossible to develop or make, and of course, many had not even been thought of at all. The industry generates new business firms at a high rate, because a man with a new idea and only a few dollars is often all that is needed.

 

“The growth of the industry has been very rapid since 1950. The growth was accelerated by the Korean War, followed by a great push to strengthen our strategic military capability with missiles, a massive air defense system, and finally the space program. There has been a slow-down in the rate of growth since 1962. The figures are as follows:

 

Growth rate for industry, 1958-1962   –   13% per year

Growth rate for industry,  1962-1963  –     9% per year

Estimated growth rate for 1964           –     about 5%

 

Packard then discusses the three separate markets that make up the industry. “The largest market is to the Federal Government. In 1964 this market will account for about 9.9 billion dollars worth of products. This is nearly 60% of the industry’s total output, and this market will grow about 4% this year. It is composed as follows:

1964 Sales                   1963 Sales

Dept. of Defense                    $8.0 Billion                 $8.1 Billion

NASA                                     $1.7 Billion                 $1.2 Billion                             FAA                                        $160 Million               $160 Million

AEC                                        $40 Million                 $40 Million”

 

“The changes in this market have caused some problems for the industry during the past two years. The increase in spending from the space program has had a large portion of  Research and Development, with a small amount of hardware  production. The reduction in the Department of Defense spending has come from a shift from strategic to tactical weapons. This shift has resulted in a cancellation of some programs, and has been accompanied by changes in procurement policy. ?These changes have put pressure on profits for the industry in 1963, although there are sign of improvement this year.

 

“A sample of profits for a representative cross-section of the industry shows the following results:

 

Year                                         1962                1963                1964*

 

Profits as % of sales        $     4.8%                4.4%                4.6%

*results reported as of 10/4/64.”

 

Packard says that some firms have been hit hard by these changes. “California is an area where cutbacks have affected the economy. Because of the reduction of employment in electronics and other defense related industries, there has been no appreciable increase in industrial employment in the State for the past two years. This is against about a 7% annual increase in the total labor force.”

 

Going on to the second largest market Packard says this “is classified generally as an Industrial Market. It will account for about $4.5 billion of sales in 1964. This is something over 25% of the market, and will be about 12% ahead of last year. The industrial market breaks down to the following categories:

 

Estimated 1964 Sales              Growth Rate

 

Computers and related equipment      $1.8 Billion                             15%

 

Communication equipment                    1.2 Billion                            10 %

 

Test and Measuring equipment              600 Million                         10%

 

Industrial controls                                   400 Million                         15%

 

Medical equipment                                  200 Million                        no change

 

Miscellaneous                                           300 Million”                       —

 

“The third market, and the pioneer for the industry, is Consumer Electronics. In 1964 this market is expected to contribute about $2.6 Billion in sales, and will be about 6% ahead of last year. This market breaks down about as follows:

Estimated 1964 Sales              Growth Rate

 

TV Sets                                                           $1 Billion                                3%

(Of this Color TV

will produce a volume

of about $430 Million –

up from $250 Million a year

ago)

Phonographs                                                   $400 Million                           –

 

Radio Sets                                                       $400 Million                           –

AM and FM  $200 Million

Auto  Radios $200 Million                                                                         5%

 

Records and Tapes                                         $300 Million                          12%

 

Misc. Tape Recorders,                                     $500 Million                         10%

Electronic Organs, etc”.

 

“It is important to note the large growth in Color TV sets this year. This growth is expected to continue for the next year or two. Auto radios are up because of the good automobile market this year, but will directly follow the market. Tape recorders, electronic organs and miscellaneous consumer devices continue to grow in volume.

 

“The component market deserves special comment because it is large, $4.5 Billion estimated for 1964, but also because most of the components are consumed by the industry, about $600 Million only going outside as replacement parts, and thus adding to the industry total sales. This market breaks down as follows:

 

Estimated 1964 Sales              Growth Rate

 

Electronic Tubes                     $ 800 Million                          no change

 

Semi-Conductor Devices           600 Million                          6%

 

Connectors                                  300 Million                         10%

 

Capacitors                                   350 Million                         6%

 

Resistors                                     350 Million                         6%

 

“The balance of this market includes a wide range of devices used by the industry.

 

“Vacuum tubes continue to be the largest component market but the demand for these has leveled off. Transistors and other semi-conductor devices are growing rapidly in volume, but pressure on prices has been strong so that the dollar growth for this market is not as large as the growth in unit volume.

 

Packard talks a bit about Micro-miniature devices-…”devices utilizing a large number of active semi-conductor devices and passive elements in one package…..

These devices are expected to account for over $400 Million in sales in 1964, double the 1963 volume, and this market should grow rapidly in the future, replacing some of the demand for more conventional components.

 

“In general, the industry is going well after having faced some changes in the guying habits of its major customer over the past two years. Despite much talk about diversification into non-military fields, the military market will continue to be the largest for some time to come. This country still needs many better weapons and military devices than it now has….The most realistic estimates of this situation seem to indicate there is not likely to be much change either way in the level of Federal expenditures for the next year or two. Over the long range they are more likely to continue upward..

 

“In the industrial market the future of the industry will depend almost entirely on its ability to create new products. There is a broadening base of technology to build on, and an expanding market as well. In this area electronics is certain to continue to grow much faster than the economy as a whole.

 

“In the consumer field new innovations may contribute to growth in the market, but there are no obvious break-throughs on the horizon. This market will probably have about the same characteristics as the consumer market for other industries – as it has had in the past.

 

“In summary, although the industry has seen some changes during the past two years, it has weathered them well. Innovation has been the ingredient which has determined the course of the industry in the past – innovation will continue to do so to the future. The industry still looks to the future with the optimism of its youth.”

 

10/16/64, typewritten draft of the above speech with many handwritten cotes by Packard

 

10/16/64, Draft of above speech handwritten by Packard.

 

10/16/64, Several sheets of reference material used by Packard for the above speech.

 

10/22/64, Letter to Packard from F. R. Kappel, Chairman, Business Council, thanking him for his talk.

 

 

Box 2, Folder 65 – General Speeches

 

December 1, 1964, Management’s Expanding Responsibilities, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York City.

 

12/1/64, Typewritten copy of Packard’s talk to the ASME.

 

Packard says that “This meeting has special significance for me because I am an engineer by training, and have been actively working at management for over two decades….It is encouraging to note that the number of managers with engineering training is increasing rapidly….This is as it should be in our contemporary world which is so broadly based on technology.”

 

“In the beginning of its development as a specialized activity management was primarily concerned with increasing the operating efficiency of the enterprises with which it was involved….early practitioners were often called efficiency experts.

 

“As management has developed,…it has become clear that the profession has responsibilities beyond improving the operating efficiency of the enterprises being managed. I want to explore with you today some of these broader areas where management has the opportunity of making important contributions to the welfare of society.“

 

Packard says that “Many of the [management] concepts we use today had their origins in early governmental and military organizations. Beginning in the middle ages the Church has developed some very effective management techniques, and these have been influential in helping the Church to extend its influence over wide areas of the world.”

 

“…it has been in the environment of the expanding complex industrial economy that management has become a full grown profession. Much of the leadership for this development has come from America.”

 

“The growth of Management into an effective and important profession has been important factor in the economic progress of the twentieth century.

 

“As the management profession has grown and made these important contributions to our welfare, it has also achieved a position of great influence. Professional managers, not the investors nor the financial people, are now in direct control of a large majority of the business and industrial resources of this country. In these positions they have far more direct and important influence over the 71 million job holders of the country than do the Union  leaders. By their actions in their day-to-day management affairs, and because these actions affect many people, they hold substantial power of influence over society at large.”

 

“It is a position of tremendous influence and responsibility, and it should be recognized as such by every member of the management profession.

 

“Management has, in fact, been slow to recognize and accept this position of influence.

 

“Since the early years of scientific management, the major emphasis has been on the economic efficiency of the unit involved. Considerable attention has been given to human relations over the years, and much has been learned about this subject, but this has been done generally in an attempt to increase efficiency. The underlying philosophy has been that if the manager is able to produce goods and services which the market called for, and produce them at a profit, his responsibility to society has been discharged well. No one will deny that this is indeed the most important responsibility of a manager, for if he fails in this he is hardly in a position to do anything else. In the last few decades the management profession is beginning to realize that it does indeed have responsibilities beyond the achievement of economic efficiency. Fortunately, many management people have finally recognized that they do owe something to their employees beyond an hourly wage for work performed, and that they and their business firms are somehow involved in the environment created around their affairs by the society at large.

 

“The most evident understanding of management’s broader responsibility has come about in employee relations. The change in attitude was forced by the Unions and the Government, but there is ample evidence, I believe, that the management profession has become self-enlightened in the matter. Employees are by now well recognized as human beings, not just as a commodity to be bought on the open market. Good working conditions, safety, sickness benefits, provisions for retirement income, and many other considerations for employees, are now counted high on the list.”

 

“Managers have, in recent years taken an active interest in many affairs outside the confines of their business enterprises. Interest and activity in the local community has been increasing at a healthy rate….now nearly every community in America is better in some way because professional management has considered the local environment to be important.

 

“This interest has extended far beyond financial support for community projects. It has included active participation by business people in local governmental bodies, school boards, and other such groups. These participants are a benefit to the community because of their professional skills, and in such participation they have further extended their influence.

 

“In recent years professional management people have given a helping hand to American education. They divert millions of dollars annually  from the resources that control to schools, colleges, and universities throughout the country….Today professional managers are budgeting financial contributions to colleges and universities because thy believe that strong educational institutions are necessary for the welfare of the society in which their business firms operate.

 

“They expect to increase the flow of talented, educated young men and women to their companies. They hope their companies will benefit from the research programs at the universities. Underlying these specific expectations is the belief that strong, independent educational institutions are essential to the survival of a free society.

 

“These are just a few examples of how professional management in our free enterprise society is beginning to recognize that it has a great stake in the character of the society of which it is a part, that it can and should have a major role in determining what kind of society that will be.”

 

Packard points out that “Management as an important activity is not limited to a free enterprise or capitalist economy by any means. The manager is indispensible [sic] in a socialist or communist society as well….What, then makes management in a free society different? Management freedom allows the manager to make decisions and take objective actions based on his knowledge. He is not just a lieutenant executing orders. A business enterprise operating in the free market provides the best opportunity to develop and apply management judgement, and the best evaluation of performance, for in the end only performance counts. The profit system is the best motivation we have been able to devise. From this freedom comes a great diversity of enterprises, large and small, specialized and broad, and if any do not do their job well, another one will grow which will. Freedom generates diversity, and in diversity there is great strength.

 

“It is the very essence of a profession that its members have the freedom to apply their knowledge and their skills as they alone think best. Otherwise, they are not professionals, they are technicians. Freedom is essential to the survival of any profession, and management is no exception.”

 

“Although we can agree that American management has performed well, that freedom is essential for good management performance, we all know that this freedom is being gradually eroded. Government has constrained management action in many ways. Strong groups have grown up, particularly Unions, which have been successful in limiting management freedom, and are pushing further in this direction. Why has this come about in face of the fact that in providing goods and services for our society this profession has done a magnificent job in our free enterprise economy? I believe the answer is very simple and obvious. An institution, and institution, will survive only in a way in which it fulfills or helps to fulfill the total needs of society. The needs of society, any society, are not adequately met with more and better products at lower prices alone. If management is to survive as a profession in a free society, it must look further to its responsibilities. It must do more to insure that the economic units which it controls not only fulfill the material needs, more and better products at lower prices, but also that these units had better meet some of the other needs and aspirations of society. Whether it does so or not may determine whether we will even have a free society in the future.

 

“Fortunately, some progress has already been made. There is much more to do, and I can hope today only to give you a few suggestions.

 

“One of the most pressing problems in recent years that of unemployment in an otherwise healthy economy. With our expanding population the problem is certain to become more serious. While there is some disagreement about the figures, about the number of employable people who are unemployed, there are two groups which are very important.

 

“The first group is the young people. These young people who are unable to find jobs are important for our future, and there are too many of them. Unless our free enterprise economy finds ways to meet their needs and aspirations, they will pose a serious threat to its survival. There are already signs of unrest which could grow to serious proportions.

 

“The second group consists of those who have been displaced by the changing economy. Automation has generated unemployment for people with limited skills, even though it may have created more new jobs than it destroyed old.

 

Packard describes the pressures for government to solve these problems: “make work” projects, mandatory double pay for overtime, or shorter working hours. “If the management profession fails to accept a major responsibility for this problem, it is bound to result in further loss of management freedom.

 

“What, then, are proper areas for the profession to take action? One way is for managers to take a more active role in the education and retraining of these groups of unemployed people. We know there are many jobs available. How many of these unemployed youth and displaced workers would be already out of the ranks of the unemployed if only they had adequate education and training. Who should know better what this education and training should be, and how to accomplish it, than the people whose job it is to direct people in useful and productive activities. Here, then, is one challenge which the profession must accept with more dedication.

 

“The problem of Civil Rights is, in addition to other things, a special case of the unemployed. It is certainly preferable that equal employment opportunity be insured by enlightened management, rather than by governmental edict or social pressure. Some management freedom has already been lost by a lack of understanding and action. It is time all management people bring the strength of their knowledge and their position of influence to bear on these troubles.

 

“A commitment to, and an involvement in, the educational activities of our society is certainly a proper role for the management profession. This should involve continuing allocation of financial support from the economic resources of business concerns. It should involve participation of management people with those responsible for both government supported and privately supported educational activities, in whatever ways as may be effective.

 

“Management must be more concerned about the proper utilization of people in our society as a whole, as well as the proper utilization of people in their individual enterprises.”

 

“To the extent management influence and management action contribute to economic stability, management freedom in the future will be enhanced.”

 

Packard then looks to the future saying that “We cannot possibly meet the needs of the future without growth, and we need more economic growth than we have in the past. This poses a very serious challenge for management.”

 

Packard feels we no doubt will be able to fulfill the material needs without increasing the number of working people – maybe need even less. However, he sees a problem with “the millions of people in the rest of the world who do not have what they need. It seems unlikely that these needs can be met from the productive resources of America except to a limited extent, and then only as a catalyst to help other people produce what they need themselves “

 

“The horizons of management cannot be limited to the boundaries of the free Western World. If the industrialized countries do not have the responsibility to supply all of the material needs of the undeveloped world, they do have the responsibility of helping them supply their own needs.

 

“Financial and material help to undeveloped countries has not been very effective

This is because it takes more than money and materials to produce a viable economy. It takes management capability, as well. Here, then, is another proper and most important challenge for the management profession. Assistance to people in undeveloped areas of the world, to obtain the knowledge and skills of management, will probably contribute as much to their economic welfare as any other act of assistance which could be devised.

 

“Management has indeed grown into a great profession. Operating in the environment of the free enterprise economy it has brought forth the largest and most impressive array of goods and services the world has ever seen. The profession has already begun to direct its attention to may of the other needs and aspirations of society. It has revolutionized the life of the working man, reducing his drudgery, and increasing his leisure and security. Management people have contributed to the progress of the communities which they direct. Education is better because of the interest and involvement of professional management people. A good start has been made in providing a foundation for a management profession in the developing countries.

 

“We can all be pleased with and proud of the progress which has been made since the early days of the ‘efficiency expert’. These are the achievements of management in an environment of freedom. If we can preserve this environment of freedom, the opportunities for professional management are unlimited.”

 

 

6/65, Copy of printed text of Packard’s speech. From Mechanical Engineering publication.

3/4/64, Letter to Packard from Charles M. Merrick, Department of Industrial Engineering, Lafayette College, asking if Packard would be willing to speak to the ASME winter meeting in NYC.

3/18/64, Copy of letter from Packard to Charles M. Merrick saying he would be pleased to be asked to speak.

3/25/64, Letter to Packard from Charles M Merrick thinking Packard for his willingness to speak and saying the invitation will be forthcoming from the Meetings Committee.

3/27/64, Letter to Packard from James C. Skinner confirming Packard’s participation as speaker.

4/1/64, Letter to Charles M. Merrick from Margaret Paull sending biographical data.

4/3/64, Letter to Margaret Paull from Charles M. Merrick thanking her for biographical material on Packard.

4/10/64, Letter to Packard from Charles M. Merrick giving information on previous speakers.

4/13/64, Letter to Packard from T. S. Fetter, Jr. extending the formal invitation to speak to the ASME on December 1, 1964.

4/21/64, Copy of letter to T. S. Fetter, Jr. from Packard sending formal acceptance of the invitation to speak.

6/23/64, Letter to Packard from Charles M Merrick offering assistance on planning Packard’s talk.

7/2/64, Letter from Packard to Charles M. Merrick thanking him for his offer of assistance.

7/20/64, Letter to Packard from A. Bruce Conlin, Jr. asking for information on Packard’s talk for advance publicity purposes.

11/9/64, Letter to Packard from Marvin D. Frankel asking for an advance copy of Packard’s talk.

11/20/64, Copy of letter to Marvin D. Frankel from Margaret Paull sending a summary of Packard’s intended talk. The summary is attached.

11/18/64, Letter to Packard from Donald E. Farr asking for advance information of Packard’s talk.

11/20/64, Letter to Donald E. Farr from Margaret Paull sending requested data.

12/4/64, Letter to Packard from Russell M. H. Berg, Assistant Advertising Manager of Scientific American magazine requesting two copies of Packard’s talk.

12/8/64, Copy of letter to Russell M. H. Berg sending the requested copies.

12/8/64, Letter to Packard from N. A. Moerman  saying he has noted some shortcomings among managers.

12/9/64, Letter to Packard from David G. Barry requesting a copy of Packard’s talk.

12/11/64, Letter to Packard from Donald E. Farr of ASME thanking him for his presentation and expressing regret for such a small audience.

12/15/64, Letter to Packard from D. G. Currin requesting a copy of Packard’s talk.

12/18/64,  Letter to Packard from O. B. Schier, II ASME thanking him for his participation.

Box 1, Folder 23 – HP Management

 

January 10, 1964, Management Conference, Monterey

 

1/10/64, Typewritten address by Dave Packard.

Packard says we are “Here to look at our company from an overall point of view.

…we are one company and must have common objectives.”

 

“The ultimate goal of everyone here in this room tonight is to see that the entire company is successful, not just that your own area of responsibility is successful.”

 

Packard expresses disappointment with 1963 results.

“The most important problem we have is to develop a more effective working relationship between groups, to combine our strength so that clearly we can be stronger together.”

 

He asks managers to look at everything they have been doing and ask themselves two questions:

1. Will this maximize the performance of my division or area of responsibility?

2. Will this maximize the performance of the entire corporate family?

 

Packard says the two most important factors that define the performance of HP are:

1. Adequate profits

2. Satisfactory growth

 

He sees the challenge for 1964 as improving profit performance and the rate of growth. And “Because in the long run it will be easier to maintain good margins with new products and new markets, and because this is probably the only way we can insure growth for the future, we plan to spend most of our time here this weekend discussing this aspect of our affairs.”

 

He points to the excellent record of some of the organizations and concludes if everyone did as well “we would turn in a whale of a job.”

 

“I don’t see why we should settle for less,” he says.

 

Packard shows several slides reflecting performance. He says he will not propose detailed cost reductions, but “it should not be impossible to cut at least 1 million dollars off our costs before taxes.”

 

Packard feels increasing sales is more important in the long run and says most of the time at the conference will be spent on this problem. He gives examples of sales levels that were good and some that were not what they should be. “The job is to make all of our new product projects turn out as well as some of these have done…it will take hard work and good judgment, but it can be done!”

The folder contains an agenda and supporting papers.