Published: Jan 1951
| ||Format||Pages||Price|| |
|PDF Version (172K)||5||$25||  ADD TO CART|
|Complete Source PDF (5.9M)||5||$55||  ADD TO CART|
By adding to this symposium some remarks on “Management's Responsibility for Insistence on Non-Destructive Testing in the Development of New Engineering Products and Processes,” it is hoped to leave with you a balanced picture of non-destructive testing. It is hoped also that at least some, whether they be associated with a factory, or with a testing, research, or development laboratory, will look again over all aspects of their company's business to see if non-destructive testing is being exploited to the full, in all the varied ways in which it can be used. The title chosen may sound as though the author were going to set himself up as an expert and start advising other people on how to manage their business, so the author must be careful not to get himself labeled with the platitudinous title of management adviser. As on many other subjects, what a man says about management is no better or no worse than the experience on which it is based. In this case, the author would back what he says with thirteen years of experience, five of them in the lusty infant industries in Canada, four of them in the sturdy, adolescent wartime industries of California, and then the last five years in association with the more conservative, more mature industries of the East, particularly with those which are concerned with the production of naval weapons. Moreover, throughout these thirteen years the experience that leads to understanding management's responsibility for exploiting non-destructive testing, has been concentrated by being called in by manufacturers just at the critical times when they were struggling with some problem to which non-destructive testing might apply. Even in the author's official position (which until recently was concerned with evaluation) it has been his job to study how engineering teams have done their work. This experience has provided more variety than if he had been devoted to just one or two problems in which he might have acquired a bias and said, “Well, it has worked this way for me; it will work for everybody else.”
Ball, Leslie W.
Chief, Naval Ordnance Laboratory, White Oak, Md.
Paper ID: STP46824S