The Project Gutenberg eBook, Manpower, by Lincoln Clarke Andrews

Note: | Images of the original pages are available through Internet Archive/American Libraries. See https://archive.org/details/manpower00andrrich

MANPOWER

BY THE SAME AUTHOR

MILITARY MANPOWER
Psychology as Applied to the
Training of Men and the Increase
of their Effectiveness.

E. P. DUTTON & COMPANY

MANPOWER

BY
LINCOLN C. ANDREWS

AUTHOR OF
"Military Manpower," "Basic Course for Cavalry," etc.

Logo

NEW YORK

E. P. DUTTON & COMPANY

681 FIFTH AVENUE

Copyright, 1920
By E. P. DUTTON & COMPANY

All Rights Reserved

Printed in the United States of America

In appreciation of the splendid work of the civilians who qualified as military leaders during the war, I dedicate this book to the officers and non-commissioned officers of civil life. Charged with directing the work of others, they are responsible for both accomplishment and spirit, and their ability to inspire loyalty and cheerful service therefore means quite as much for the nation's welfare now as leadership ever meant in war.

CONTENTS

| Foreword | ix
CHAPTER |  | PAGE
I | Using Human Tools | 1
II | Psychological Elements of Organization | 34
III | The Principles of Leadership | 53

FOREWORD

Some years ago, for the instruction of National Guard officers, I undertook the then unique task of analyzing the psychology of military training and leadership, and of putting into written form the principles of the art of handling men. The necessity for quickly training great numbers of inexperienced men as leaders in war proved my chapters on Leadership and Training to be both practical and helpful to thousands of civilians fitting themselves for positions of command. Many of these, business and professional men, have suggested that I rewrite these chapters, adapting my ideas and methods to use in civil life. We believe that the fundamental principles for handling men are universal in application, and that it will be of service to the community to put these principles into form for study by those whose responsibility it is to direct the work of others.

The term "leadership" in this restricted sense has been applied to the art of handling men. It has for its purpose the object of arousing and directing that latent force which exists in every man and doubles his accomplishment under the impulsion of loyalty, pride and interest when they are aroused by a skillful leader. Practical leadership is an art, not an exact science. No two leaders succeed in exactly the same way. One may not hope to acquire this art by learning specific rules to guide his conduct. A good leader of men is one whose impulses are right; and these impulses come from a genuine acceptance of principles, from one's own belief, feelings and experiences. It is a question therefore of personal understanding and sincerity of purpose to play the game fairly; of having a sympathetic understanding of the human animal and of what the laws of life make him do under certain circumstances; and finally of having an appreciation of one's own personality and how it affects others. It becomes a live, vital matter, to which one's own personal experiences bring the most valuable contributions. Its infinite variety of elements lends an unending interest to one's daily tasks, while success in dealing with its practical problems brings constant gratification, especially in seeing the development of stronger character and increased efficiency in one's subordinates.

The war has enriched our democracy in the awakened individuality of millions of citizens and in the hundreds of thousands of young men whom it has returned to civil life experienced in the responsibilities and possibilities of group leadership. Both these are to be potent influences in the future, and may be made a great national asset if properly directed. The measure of a nation, in peace as now in war, is found in the soul and purpose of all its people. The world has been taught that machines and the cold products of science cannot win in war. They test almost to breaking the endurance of man, but in the end superior manpower emerges the victor. It is the fiber of the bodies and nerves and souls of its manhood which meets the final test and proves the issue. Preparation for war, preparation to meet any test of our nation's claim to worthiness, demands that we give thought to the quality of that fiber. If we are to assure our nation's future success in any endeavor, we must guard her manpower now. To this end everyone who is charged with the control of others should appreciate his responsibility and his opportunity. He may easily so handle his men as not only to increase their efficiency in the work at hand, but so as to ensure that they leave their daily tasks in a frame of mind which will make them happier and better citizens—stronger in character, higher in purpose, more loyal upholders of our democratic institutions. In that thought I have written this book, addressed to all who are responsible for the work of others.

I am indebted for particular ideas to an article in the Infantry Journal of April, 1918, by Professor William E. Hocking, of Harvard University; to a lecture by Admiral Sims, U. S. Navy, published in the same journal in February, 1918; to the series of lectures given by Bishop Brent at Harvard University and published under the title "Leadership"; and to "Industry and Humanity" by W. L. Mackenzie King.

Lincoln C. Andrews.

New York,
June 15, 1920.

CHAPTER I
Using Human Tools

"Aw, what do I care!" says the man who is working under a poor leader. "I'd do anything for him!" explains the happy man who has a good chief. A poor leader may even so antagonize his men that each will actually try to do the least that he can and still hold his job; while a good leader may take the same men through the same tasks and so handle them as to inspire a spirit which will make every man try to do his very best. Manpower is thus seen to be a direct function of leadership. And the difference between the results from good leadership and from poor is often astonishing. The wonder is that we have so long neglected this psychological factor for increasing accomplishment. It is probably because we thoughtlessly accepted the idea that leaders have to be "born," and did not stop to realize that this kind of leadership is in reality an art which may be readily acquired by anyone who has enough native character.

Recent experience has taught us that this art may be acquired—so we need no longer sit with folded hands in admiration of the "born leader." What is instinctive in him may be analyzed, reduced to principles, and made applicable to ourselves. It was done for the army, and by study many an inexperienced man made himself a successful leader of troops in the late war. It may be quite as easily done in any other field of activity.

A knowledge of this art is of practical value in every phase of human endeavor—in bringing up children, in school, college and hospital, in the office and in the field, and most particularly in industry where men are grouped for the purposes of material production. Applied to any large business organization, let every leader from the big chief to the lowest sub-foreman practice the same principles of leadership, and there will soon permeate the whole machine a spirit of loyalty, teamwork and esprit which will drive it with a marvelous degree of efficiency.

It appears that industry is quite awake to this fact to-day. Industrial literature abounds with considerations of the humanity of labor. Employers have come to realize that the purchase of labor is a contract for future delivery, and that what they get from it will depend not so much on the bare delivery of the labor they have purchased, as on the continuing spirit in which it is daily and hourly delivered. The employer knows that he wants the loyal, enthusiastic, co-operative service of his employees, and that he cannot get it for money alone. He therefore adopts such organization and policy in his business as will make possible the loyal co-operation of all, and then attempts to have his men so handled as to get this result.

The latter consideration is vital, for the best of policies may be ruined by the meanness or incompetence of subordinate executives. The morale officer of one of our largest corporations has recently stated that he has no trouble with the employers or with the men, but that he has all kinds of trouble with the superintendents and foremen, who seem unable to understand how to handle the men. Knowledge of leadership is essential not alone for the chief, but even more for his subordinates who are in direct contact with his men.

It is easy to say that leaders must so handle their men as to inspire loyalty and enthusiastic service—but most of them will have to be taught how to do this. That was the failure in army training. The manuals all prescribed that the officer must so handle his men as to build up discipline and a high morale, but nowhere were there any instructions as to how to do it. The art was handed along by tradition, often incorrectly. War brought the need for quickly training hundreds of thousands of leaders, and it was found necessary both here and in foreign armies to reduce this art of handling men to written principles which the young aspirants could study and learn to apply. This was found very efficient in the army. It may well be equally efficient in civil life. The ghastly wastes from poor leadership and consequent inefficient work, the heartburnings and discontent and lack of high purpose which are so common in every field to-day, certainly call for some attention if we are to meet successfully the tests which the next few years have in store. We have got to quit looking for cure-alls and get down to work; and work efficiently and happily, knowing again the homely joy of doing things well and the satisfaction of accomplishment.

Our leaders must be "good leaders." This does not mean only employers and their subordinates, or only labor leaders. It means every man in the nation who is responsible for the control and work of others. These men are all leaders in our sense, each one responsible for the effects of his leadership on the members of his group, be it large or small. Let these men sense their responsibility, realize that the quality of their leadership has far reaching effects upon character as well as upon immediate accomplishment, and they may easily by personal example and thoughtful conduct of office arouse a tide of loyal service which will sweep discontent and palliatives into oblivion and fairly flood the country with sanity, prosperity and happy living.

As a first step toward this, no matter what his business or profession, each leader should realize that in controlling the work of his men he is handling human tools—sentient human beings, like himself. Here is a craftsmanship worthy of study. One may not hope successfully to handle these tools, hit or miss, without special thought or training. Yet many have never thought of this, or considered what it means to them personally as leaders. If they would do this alone, they would find themselves self-prompted to such conduct of office as would give far better results. When a man is charged with directing the efforts of certain individuals to a given end, these individuals become instruments in his hand for the accomplishment of this purpose. They are his tools. He will find them sensitive, difficult instruments, capable of splendid accomplishment if skillfully handled, but blunt and ineffective in unskilled hands. Every leader should realize and continually think of this fact: My principal tools are human beings and I must think how to handle them as such.

If a man has won promotion to leadership, no matter in what field of activity—in sport, shop, office or the field—he may no longer win success by skill in using the tools he has been using. It is now his job to direct others in using them. These others, these human beings such as he was, are now to be his tools. And as he won his promotion by training his body, brain and nerves to use his original tools to best advantage, so now he will succeed as leader by learning to use skillfully these new human ones.

As a first step toward learning these tools, the leader should get at least a crude conception of what this human being really is, and how he is controlled in his daily walk. Let us therefore for a moment consider man the animal. We find him in his beginnings running naked and alone with the beasts in the primeval forest—without knowledge of community life, even of family life, and not knowing the use of human speech. But for his "will to improve" he was apparently no more highly endowed by nature than some of his fellow species. Yet that will to improve has in the processes of time enabled him to develop within himself his present marvelous organization of nerve centers and co-ordinated control, and through the power of his self-invented language to store his brain cells with the wisdom of the ages. Thus enabled to analyze and to reason, he has progressed step by step until he has reached his present mastery of the forces of nature. To-day he may fly in the air higher than the eagle, may work at will beneath the ocean, may sit at ease and listen to the natural voice of a friend through thousands of miles of distance, or may analyze the composition of the heavenly bodies and predict with accuracy their every movement. And what the race has thus accomplished in development through the ages, each man is privileged to accomplish in his lifetime. For he is born into the world with brain cells empty and with less nerve control than a kitten, but endowed with hereditary capacity and that wonderful will to improve, which enable him to talk and to read in early childhood, and to develop his faculties in time to a degree limited only by the determined purpose of his ambition.

Such is man in the outward manifestations of his prowess. Meantime he is a creature almost pathetically responsive to his inherent instincts and in his daily walk largely controlled by habit. It was the beneficent intention of Nature to leave man's mind free for the contemplation of higher things, free to form visions of better things and to reason out the means for attaining them. She therefore relieved his mind of the trivial cares of deciding just what to do in the thousands of cases for action in his daily life, and designed him to do all these normal things in response to impulses from natural instincts, or in unconscious obedience to the direction of habits which he commences to form in infancy and continues to form throughout his development.

So we find man a creature of almost unlimited capacity, but pathetically sensitive to his environment and treatment because so helplessly responsive to instincts and habits. And this capable yet sensitive animal, man, is to be an instrument in the hands of another, a man like himself, except that he has qualified to be the leader. How reasonable that this leader should have to give serious thought to this situation and seek to understand nature's powerful influences in guiding the actions of both himself and his men. What folly for him to expect to be able to handle them blindly, hit or miss, without consideration of man's peculiarities and the fundamental things that control him.

Perhaps the most important of these fundamentals for the leader to realize is the deep-seated desire of every individual to maintain his self-respect and to have his right to self-respect recognized by those about him. The biggest step man ever took in the attainment of civilization was that of the ancient fathers when they discarded the worship of Sun and Fire, and conceived a God endowed with human attributes. They thus gave man the right to claim that he was "made in the image of God." On that man founded his philosophy of life and has more and more demanded and fought for and sometimes won a recognition of his claim to self-respect. Made in the image of God; he resented being lashed as a slave in the galleys or driven as one in the chain gangs; he felt the indignity of being a serf; and he came to realize the inconsistency of being arbitrarily governed. He has thus slowly fought his way upward toward his ideal, and has won his right to self-respect in government and in community living, to the profit of both.

Out of this evolution came democracy; and the second fundamental for the leader is to appreciate that in handling men to-day he is no longer handling serfs or hirelings. His men are citizens of democracy—made or in the making. Many leaders have not realized this, or thought out what it should mean in determining their methods of control. In reality it is the only foundation for any intelligent modern system of discipline. Democracy requires of each citizen that he be a self-respecting, self-thinking, responsible individual, capable of making decisions and acting on them in his civil capacity. These qualities of citizenship are demanded for participation in community affairs and are publicly appealed to for political purposes. They are of the atmosphere in which each man lives as a member of the community. It is only reasonable that the self-same individuals who operate under the principles of democracy in all their general affairs should do better work under democratic rather than autocratic control. The rights of individuality and of self-direction have been hardly won and are dearly held. They do much toward making the democratic citizen the able man he is to-day, and are in reality a splendid basis for his control.

The highest type of army discipline is developed on a thorough recognition of these very qualities in the men. It is practiced by all who have appreciated the meanings of the modern social and political development of the individual, and learned how to benefit by its advantages for getting efficiency. There still exist, however, many unthinking officers who get their ideas of discipline from the traditional rules formerly evolved for the control of serfs and mercenaries. But their day is rapidly passing, as the modern principle is more and more widely accepted that the man in ranks is an intelligent, self-respecting individual, that he may be interested equally with the leader in the success of the cause, and that in large measure he is capable of adding to its success out of his own individual effort and intelligence.

The following definition of democracy by Professor Carver presents clearly the two elements which must be given consideration: "Two things and two things only are essential to real democracy. The first is an open road to talent, that is to say that every man shall have an opportunity to rise to positions of power and responsibility in proportion to his ability regardless of birth, privilege, caste or other social barriers. The son of the peasant may become the ruler in government or the employer in business by sheer force of his own merit, if he happens to possess merit. The second essential of pure democracy is that they who are in positions of power and responsibility shall be made sensitive to the needs, the desires and the interests of those over whom they exercise power and responsibility." Such democracy may well be recognized in his dealings if one wants success with his men. The road to advancement must lie wide open to ability and ambition, without a suspicion of favoritism and with encouragement for any individual who may aspire to follow it. Likewise the way for the honest expression of individual opinion and feeling must be open from the ranks to the leader without prejudice and with consideration. This recognizes their rights and develops their powers as individuals interested in a common cause. Such conception of rights in dealing with men is practical, is truly democratic and is highly efficient. It has worked to best advantage in army discipline, it is working successfully in many business organizations, and it is a sure foundation for efficient management in any group working for any purpose. When the interior administration of states' prisons is successfully run on the basis of democratic principles, it would seem possible to apply them to the control of almost any other group of men.

The governing idea is therefore for the leader to build up the self-respect of his men and their sense of individual responsibility, and thus to control their actions. He does not want them to be dogs; he must never treat them like dogs. He wants them to show intelligence; he must show confidence that they have intelligence. He wants them able to make decisions and to act on them for the common good; he therefore tells them what is to be done and why, not how to do it, and thus develops their resourcefulness and initiative. He wants their co-operation in loyal teamwork; he therefore asks their ideas as to methods, encourages their suggestions, and assumes that they are intelligently interested in the common success and able to bring something of value toward winning it. In short he considers them to be active partners with himself in the working out of a common purpose, and treats them as such.

The only possible excuse—not reason, but excuse—for the old-fashioned "roughneck" foreman with his discipline inspired by fear is the existence of his gang of ignorant immigrant laborers, uninterested in civilization and decent living, apparently willing to live like dogs and to be treated as such. Even these could be better handled by better methods. Furthermore the nation has learned that such citizens do not pay and intends by education and restriction of immigration to free herself of them. This will mean more intelligence among laborers, and that the foreman of the future will have to be able to boss not a group of ignorant foreigners but a group of thinking citizens, many of whom will be properly striving to win the job of being the boss themselves. This will mean that to hold his job he has got to be a good foreman, know his work, and above all know how to handle men decently. Being a foreman is going to be a real job, for which real men will fit themselves in order to make good.

A third fundamental consideration is to appreciate how modern conditions have made the possession of personal character an essential to successful leadership. The development of the individual, self-conscious that he is a reasoning being with the rights and responsibilities of self-determination, has put into the discard the divine right of kings and the infallibility of sphinx-like utterances from those in authority. The man who rules to-day does it through personal contacts with his subordinates. He must therefore really have the personal character. It is of course inherent in us to endow the holder of an office with those attributes of dignity and personal character which should go with it. But personal contacts are going to pierce this hereditary veil, and will soon expose the man for what he really is. And he cannot make good unless we find him possessed of character—find him a man who always keeps his word, who lives up to the principles of the square deal, and who appreciates that he is dealing with humans and is accordingly considerate. Such qualities preclude his showing injustice, deceit, indifference, or brutality. They thus eliminate fear and suspicion from the minds of those about him and give free play to their better instincts, which makes for getting their best efforts either as followers or as co-workers. It is clear then that it is vitally important to give careful thought in the selection of leaders to their personal characters; and that this possession of character must come to be the sine qua non for candidates for office, political, civil, or industrial. For all this applies quite as forcibly to the leaders of labor as to any other. Here as elsewhere only those can win in the end whose character and purpose are pure; who believe in the square deal; who are unselfishly honest in the administration of office; who consider the human rights of their followers and give them opportunity to grow and develop through the free exercise of their constructive instincts. Democratic leadership is constructive. It builds individual character in its followers, and stands secure on that foundation.

A fourth fundamental is to appreciate the big part played in man's control by his own personal instincts and habits. "Man is a reasoning creature. God's image." Yes; but he is also the willing slave of instinctive impulses and personal habits. He uses his reason to determine the course he will pursue, not to regulate the multitudinous details of his actions in carrying it on. As planned by nature, these minor actions are directed by natural impulses and personal habits. Impulses and habits—they rule almost our every act. It is remarkable when we stop to think of it and realize how few things we do actually as the result of thinking. Thus in a well-ordered life a man may get up in the morning, bathe, shave, dress, and go to breakfast without having to make a conscious decision. Instead of having to decide which shoe to put on first, he even laces and ties his shoes without thinking, and thus may occupy his mind with thoughts of the day's work. Habit guides him without thought through all these necessary steps which he must take daily.

The interesting fact to the leader is not alone that these habits control so absolutely, but that any habit may be easily and unconsciously formed by repetition of the act or thought, and that a habit once formed is overcome only by conscious effort and even by determined action of the will. The leader uses this for controlling his men. By insisting on certain things always being done in certain ways, he establishes in them habits of daily conduct which make his routine administration of duties free from constant care of details. A wise leader finds the reason for many of the difficulties and seeming derelictions of his men in the fact that they were the acts of previously formed habits not yet eliminated. For this reason also he prefers to train green men rather than old ones. He knows he can readily inculcate in them the habits he wants them to have, and without the great difficulty of eradicating the previously formed habits which he does not like.

Equally common with habits in their control of the actions of man, and equally important as a consideration for the leader, are the impulses to action that come from natural instincts. Of course it is true that man's will and determination are stronger than his instincts, and that if they are set to any given purpose they can force every instinctive impulse from his field of consciousness and hold his actions to the predetermined course. But such control of man's actions is fatiguing to the man, and does not give the results that come when his mind is happily at ease and free to entertain the impulses from the constructive instincts with which nature has bountifully endowed him for the good of the race. Thus necessity may make a man determine to do his work in spite of brutal treatment and injured self-respect, and he will carry through the day's work well enough to hold his position, but not much better. Good work, anything like the maximum of a man's accomplishment, cannot be produced in that spirit. Such work comes only with the free play of man's better instincts. It should be clear then that the leader who controls through appeal to these instincts will get better results than he who rules by force or the compulsion of circumstance. A good leader must therefore give thought to these things, until he comes to feel instinctively how men react to the ordinary things of life. They are matters of frequent reference in discussing the principles of leadership.

Among these instincts, those of the greatest interest to the leader are naturally the instincts of leadership—the instinct to lead others and the instinct to follow others when we think they know the answer better than we. The manifestations of both these instincts are very common in our daily life, which shows their availability and value to the leader as agents for controlling men. He should therefore understand why they exist and how to appeal to them. Why is it that mankind is always wanting to proselyte, and preach, and teach, and step to the front with suggestions? And why is it that one so readily follows another who presents any proposition which seems reasonable? These instincts were implanted in man to make him play his part in the world's progress. The whole scheme of the universe, physical and spiritual, is one of development and progress—of making everything engage in a constant effort to rise to a higher plane. Man was intended to be the foremost instrument of this purpose to advance civilization. His instincts were given him to ensure progress, to help the race win along, to lead others where he felt he knew best what was to be done, to follow where he felt that another knew better than he. To want to lead is therefore a natural instinct and a good one; and any man may take honest pride in striving to qualify as a good leader.

It is an important point that the instinct to follow is likewise an instinct for progress, and therefore that the would-be leader must make his men feel that he best knows the way, that his leadership will bring the best results. This is a fundamental thought in an understanding of leadership; and it explains why knowledge of his job is essential to a leader, and why bluster and arrogance seem so ridiculous. It is clear then that a man is appointed leader because it is believed that he can get the best results; and his men will measure his ability as such by the good work accomplished under his guidance. Inefficiency, lost time and energy, indecision and stupidity, undermine his hold on the men; while the opposites inspire them to enthusiastic following.

Another thought of importance in this connection is the significance of the word "leader." It means that this man is the foremost of the group, of his companions. A leader is not a lord or dictator; he is one with his men—the leading one—knowing their pulse and their passions, leading because of superior preparation, experience and ability, not driving through brute force. He should keep his kinship with these fellows whom he leads, not allow himself to feel that he has become a human being of a different class to lord it over them. Great leaders like Lincoln are careful to retain, and to appear to retain, the simpler attributes of their fellows, to continue the close touch and sympathy that spell an understanding of human nature.

Nothing so surely ruins the success of the newly appointed leader as a suggestion of pomp and vainglory in his demeanor. A case of swollen ego has wrecked many careers. It is quickly noted by the men as an evidence of smallness of soul and limited experience. Modesty, quiet dignity, even humility, are characteristics of greatness of character and broad experience. It is dangerous for the leader to admit his self-importance even to himself. Magnifying his own importance is likely to make him take credit to himself that should have gone to his men, make him consider his own welfare when he should consider theirs, and end by betraying him as unfit for the leadership.

The last of these fundamental considerations of man, and by far the most important to the personal success of any leader, is an appreciation of what his own personality means for success or failure in the effect it has upon his fellows. In some way it should be possible to make each man realize the truth of this, and thus give it due consideration. The leader responds to the fact that he must learn how to use his human-being tools, yet often ignores the equally important fact that he has to use these tools through the instrumentality of his own personality. His ability and success will largely depend on how this personality of his impresses others, on how it affects these sentient tools. His purpose and character, his personal bearing and manner, the tones of his voice, his habits and way of looking at things—all the manifestations of his personality are more or less important influences in determining his ability to handle others. Yet the average of leaders not only accepts himself complacently as he is, but actually ignores the advantages of even finding out what he is, let alone trying to improve himself.

The progress of the race depends upon the development of the individual—albeit in co-operation with his fellows. In consideration of this fact nature apparently designed man to accept complacently his own personality and thus be content to use and develop it without being discouraged because he was not as some other man. It is certainly true that we rarely find a man who would exchange his personality for that of another. But nature never intended this complacency to go to the point of ignoring all possibility of improvement, and even of failing to use understandingly the personality one does have. The great trouble with mankind is that they generally see themselves only as they are reflected in the near-by mirror. They rarely get the perspective of themselves as they really exist in the life around them; and so they miss the benefit of measuring their egos by comparison with the realities of life. It would help us all "to see ourselves as others see us." We could then learn each how to use his personality advantageously from seeing how it affected others, and we would then lose some of our arrogance from seeing what unimportant individuals we really are after all. It is good for the soul of any man to visit some height like the tower of the Woolworth building and thence view humanity on the earth below him, hurrying to and fro on its self-important business. These humans then appear of about the size and importance of ants, and the spectator is lead to realize the unimportance of any one individual man in comparison with the world about him, and to wonder just how big he himself really appears to the distant Eye of Omnipotence. He may thus develop a wholesome humility which may lead him to fit himself to play his part more reasonably.

Giving thought to oneself and to the meanings of those things that affect the relations and control of men is essential to acquiring leadership. It is what we ourselves believe and feel and live—what comes out of our own inner consciousness—that will make it possible for us to appear before others as their leader. Even the inspired Leader withdrew into the wilderness for long inner communion before He essayed the responsibilities of leadership. We should hardly expect to lead even in our small way without some preparation. And this preparation will not be in learning rules to guide us, but in attaining such an understanding of the principles and realities as will make us do the right thing naturally. For above all a leader must be genuine,—his own true self, not an imitation of some other, be that other ever so successful.

There remains for consideration the special case of handling men in those industrial situations where labor unions exist. Though it be true that an application of the principles of leadership will give better results even in the presence of "labor troubles," how infinitely better the results if there exist mutual understanding, confidence and co-operation. There is, however, no thought here of telling any management how to run its business. It is recognized that each business concern has its own problem to solve in accordance with its own peculiar conditions. The questions of welfare, labor turnover, supervision of personnel, self-expression, sharing of profits or savings, etc., have been analyzed and discussed in fullest detail. It is beyond our scope to add anything in these fields. But even where management has adopted the broadest policy looking to the loyal co-operation of its employees, its successful operation will still depend on how the men are handled by those directly in contact with them. We are concerned with that one phase; and for its better understanding in those special cases where labor unions are involved, let us briefly consider the origin and purposes of these unions. When fundamental motives are clear, it becomes possible to understand their manifestations and guide them for the greater good of all concerned. An understanding of the psychology of labor unions is therefore vastly important to employer, to subordinate bosses, and to labor leaders themselves. We may not attempt to cover this subject, but only to suggest certain fundamental thoughts which should be helpful.

In the evolution of the race, the processes of time ultimately taught primeval man to leave the isolation of his cave and form a community with his fellows for better protection against the beasts that threatened his existence and for mutual assistance in carrying on the slow developments of civilization. Thus the interdependence of man and the advantages of co-operation were first demonstrated, and organization had its beginnings.

The processes of modern industry, through its introduction of machinery and the consequent development of its vast modern enterprises, took the tools of his trade from the personal hands of the laborer into company ownership, stripped him of all but his bare power to work, and cut him off from the former close personal relationship with his employer. So the laboring man found himself again an isolated individual, this time in the competitive markets of labor, where he fought alone for his existence against the cold impersonal organizations which bought his services in the cheapest market and discarded them at will. And as once long ago he found his salvation and opportunity for development through combination with his fellows, so now he again learned that his future could be secured only through combined effort. Thus came organized labor to protect with force if necessary the human rights of its members and to assure their equal opportunity for development in the progress of the race.

We thus see that this organization of labor with its potential power to fight was but a natural logical step in the evolution of modern industry—as natural and as necessary as were the organizations and combinations of capital. Both are the products of evolution. And as is generally true, the application of the laws of evolution to individual cases often caused hardship and distress and even loss of life, but without changing their inexorable course in the purpose of progress.

It was the accepted philosophy of the time that labor was a commodity to be taken to any market at the will of the laborer and sold to the highest bidder, who was likewise free to buy labor at the lowest figure and to employ it only at his pleasure. The rapid increase in the size of enterprises having eliminated the personal relationship between the employer and his men without finding anything to replace it, it was natural that labor became little more than a chattel and that all consideration of the human equation was forgotten in the excitement and keen competition of managing these enterprises of such novel magnitude and unknown potentialities. Meantime public opinion failed to appreciate that the welfare and social development of these laborers was a matter of vital concern to the community, and that the rights and responsibilities of the management of these big concerns were equally matters of grave importance to community welfare. In short, public opinion had to be taught that the community is a party to industry, and must be concerned with how industry conducts its affairs.

It was therefore a naturally accepted condition that labor should be treated as any other soulless commodity. And it is fair to assume that it would have long continued to be but for the valiant spirit of the laborer demanding recognition of his rights as equally a son of God and a self-respecting, responsible member of the democratic community. These rights are now recognized. Splendid minds have given their best efforts toward evolving the means and methods for the conduct of big business on bases which admit full recognition of these rights, with opportunity for the fuller development of the laborer through the free play of his nobler instincts. Many progressive firms have found a way for adopting a policy embodying these ideas—others are seeking a practical solution of this problem as it is presented to them by the peculiar conditions of their particular business. Many are so organized that union leaders themselves find that everything is being done which they could ask. Public opinion has largely accepted the thesis of labor, and feels that its laboring citizenry must be given opportunity to develop. It is futile then for either capital or labor to fight against either of these organizations, and unreasonable to consider either of them the product of man's viciousness or ignorance. It were far better that both parties accept the inevitable fact of their existence and learn to develop their vast possibilities for increasing efficiency. There is no just cause for recriminations—unless for the slowness of human intelligence to grasp the true conditions.

So it appears that the fight of the unions is almost won, and this phase of evolution nearing completion. But it is evident that even so unions must persist. They are demanded by strong human instincts and make for fuller development and better service. Organization and co-operation, more and more comprehensive, are pronounced characteristics of modern development. Therefore the present unions may well be continued with the purpose of social betterments and of increasing the efficiency of labor, meantime designed to continue the fight only where employers fail to find the way themselves to give labor its opportunity to work and grow to advantage. Where well organized, each union may certainly render great service to its members, to industry, and to the State, by interesting itself in the development and welfare of all men engaged in its line of work, and by keeping available for immediate reference complete industrial and social data of all this personnel. Such statistical work requires time and expense, but it gives the unions the benefit of feeling that they are rendering a valuable service to the community as well as to themselves.

A union of the future, certainly a natural and efficient one, will be the union within each separate enterprise of the two elements essential to its success—management and laborers. And this union will find its greatest usefulness in close liaison with the third party to industrial effort—the community. For the efficient conduct of the community's business of providing law and order, schools, sanitation, transportation, banking, shopping, etc., is as essential to the life of industry as is industry's production and proper management to the life of the community.

Many such unions exist already, a most notable example being the Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen. Most notable because of its great size, the variety of interests and human types involved, and the vast area covered in its operations. Originally organized for the patriotic purposes of getting out spruce for the war, it soon became a practical co-operative union of employers and employees. Their combined intelligence and effort met the war needs in a tremendously increased production, and have since met the strains of reconstruction without a break. It thus made the unique record of stabilizing labor conditions while doing rush war production instead of upsetting them as was done in many other enterprises. All this resulted from the fact that representatives of both employers and laborers were required to sit around a common council table and there discuss and settle all questions of the conduct of the work. In doing this, both parties learned that they really spoke the same language and that success and good feeling were the natural result of working together. They therefore continued the organization on a permanent basis, with the added element of keeping in touch with local community affairs.

These co-operative unit unions should be of great psychological benefit and become strong political influences, particularly in affairs of local government. The topics of informal discussion among the men and of talks from their leaders may be no longer matters of antagonism toward their employer but rather those of common industrial and community interest. And as industry is sure some day to realize how dependent it is on the integrity, wisdom and statesmanship of the public officials chosen by the people to make and administer the laws, so it will surely come to take an active part in selecting these public officials and in determining the policies they are to further. Well for industry then if it be organized and accustomed to the co-operative functioning of capital and labor. No political appeal can then be made to class distinctions, and industry can then bring into the political field the same strong co-operative purpose for the common good that it is accustomed to exercise in its management of business.

In these unions employee and employer come to find that both are laborers in the common cause, each according to his skill and training doing his own part in the industrial machine and receiving respect and credit in accordance with how well he does it. Both come to appreciate the true meanings of democracy, that opportunity lies equally open to all on their merits, and that men are classed in accordance with their fitness for positions. Here they come to realize that demagogic appeals to class are unreasonable and often of questionable motive, as the fact is brought home to them that employers are mostly but graduates from the ranks of labor—or more accurately, are but leaders of the class.

The word "class" with its European meaning is quite out of place in discussing American conditions. Classifications we have, based on accomplishment, etc., but there are no insurmountable barriers between them. All doors stand wide open for any individual if he but have the will to attain the necessary qualifications. And there are back doors which stand equally wide open, from which the unfit are being daily ejected to find their true level according to their individual worth. Such are the laws of democracy and of progress, and all schemes to thwart them must sooner or later end in failure.

As agents of good citizenship these unions could well be a power for good to the community by becoming schools in Americanization and in the practice of democratic government. Good citizenship is as vital a consideration for the industrial state as it is for the political—in fact their interests are so closely interwoven that they must stand or fall together. We know now that cheap labor does not make cheap production, and often does make cheap political government. It is in reality both expensive and dangerous to the community, and we should do without it. And as it is our pride to establish before the political world the worth of our political institutions; so should we solve our industrial problems and show to the industrial world the advantages of democracy operating practically in industry. Let us show that the spirit and aroused skill and ingenuity of our loyally co-operating labor will reduce the costs of production while largely increasing its output, to the advantage of mankind and the credit of our nation founded on individual freedom.

CHAPTER II
Psychological Elements of Organization

If even two persons are going to work together for a common purpose, they will do better if they "organize" for it. The more clearly they define their purpose, their policy and methods, and the responsibilities and functions each is to assume;—the more they will gain in efficiency by avoiding friction, lost motion, and the deadening mental effect of misunderstandings and questionings. As the number engaged increases, the advantages of organization increase, until when many are engaged organization becomes a necessity. And no matter what the purpose, from building a cathedral to robbing a bank—in conducting a school, office, hospital, or factory—the success of the affair will depend largely on the efficiency of its organization and the extent to which all concerned understand its purpose, its policy and methods, and the responsibilities and functions of all engaged.

Organization is of course the responsibility of the governing head. The more attention and skill he shows here, the less he will need give to all the varied requirements of his position. Our present interest in organization lies in such a sketch as will show its framework, and thus enable us to analyze such of its psychological elements as affect the question of handling the men who compose it.

The Framework.—No matter how large the number of men brought together for any purpose, proper organization groups them into divisions and subdivisions in accordance with the nature of their work. This grouping is continued until in each case the smallest subdivision contains no more individuals than one man can control in that particular work through direct personal contact and supervision. A chief, or leader, is put in charge of each division and subdivision. He transmits instructions from higher authority, and is held personally responsible for the control, work, discipline and efficiency of everyone under him. Thus organization lines everyone up in his own place, gives him a definite part to play under a prescribed chief, and thus enables the whole body to function smoothly like a machine in exact response to the policies and control of the governing head.

In military organization, no matter how large the army, the will of its high command quickly passes from superior to subordinate until in the end it has reached the squad leaders and they have transmitted it to the men in ranks. The whole vast machine may thus move uniformly, accurately responsive to the master mind. So in any large business; department heads, superintendents, foremen and subforemen furnish the line of control from the head to all his men no matter how numerous or how far removed. These subordinates represent his policies, his will, and his spirit. How important that they understand them clearly and execute them fairly and efficiently.

It is impossible for one mind to encompass all the details of a large undertaking, and furthermore too much attention to detail crowds out the possibility of vision and future planning. Hence the necessity for organization and for delegating to subordinate leaders the authority and initiative of the chief. For this reason we say that the big man as an executive is he who picks good subordinates, develops them into his responsible and responsive agents, and then gives them wide initiative. And as army officers must be trained for their positions and particularly in the art of handling men, so these subordinate leaders must be so schooled as to assure to the chief that policies and instructions are being carried out properly, and that the men are being handled to the best advantage.

Psychological Elements.—The chief thus finds in the organization of his undertaking a machine with which he is to work out his purpose. And this machine, in all its component parts, is built up of live sentient human beings, capable of splendid work if properly handled. Maximum results depend therefore on the chief's understanding of human nature, and on his applying this understanding to the practical management of the undertaking. Thus the psychological elements assume importance. The wise chief therefore clearly defines his purpose, and his policies and methods for accomplishing it. He provides regulations which define the responsibilities and functions of the various members of the organization, and sees to it that all understand and observe them. As the affair progresses he keeps the requirements of organization ever in mind, makes frequent changes in personnel and methods as developments require, and continually watches the working of the psychological elements which make his organization a going concern. This means to see that all are observing the requirements of subordination and command; that there is intelligent teamwork; and above all that there exists throughout the whole organization a fine spirit of discipline and morale. All these important elements lie directly in the hands of his subordinate leaders, who are responsible under him for their existence and proper use throughout the organization. These leaders must therefore know how to handle their positions so as to develop and maintain these important elements in their subordinates. This introduces the last and most important of the elements, leadership, which must be understood by all subordinate leaders. The importance of maintaining all these elements so vital to the success of an organization explains why his qualifications for leadership are so carefully considered in determining a subordinate's fitness for his position, and why his training in leadership may be necessary.

Subordination means that everyone shall continually recognize the fact that each individual in his own office has his own particular responsibilities and privileges, and that these must be observed by all both above and below him. Particularly must each superior take pains always to recognize the rights and responsibilities of his subordinates and to give full play to their powers in the proper exercise of the functions of their grades. If the superintendent saw a man going wrong he would properly correct the foreman, not the man himself; if he was so fortunate as to see something praiseworthy he would commend the foreman, or at least be sure that the foreman was present and shared the praise. This makes the men realize that the foreman is held responsible for their work, good or bad, that he is really their leader, thus strengthening his authority over them. It also shows the foreman that superior authority recognized him as the boss and holds him responsible for results, thus developing his initiative, his legitimate pride of office, and his keen interest in the performance of his men.

While for the sake of this psychological effect these minor corrections and commendations are thus made in the presence of the men involved, if the foreman needs serious correction for mistaken policy, slackness, poor judgment, anything which corrected in the hearing of his men would necessarily lower their respect for him, he should be corrected in private and given the opportunity to win the added respect of his men by appearing to make the correction on his own initiative. Where the subordinate does not respond to these methods, he is lacking in the essentials of teamwork and leadership and not up to his job.

To prevent friction, the function of each of these steps in subordination from the chief down to his men in the ranks should be well defined, and thoroughly understood by all members of the entire force. And as these steps form the quick, sure means of transmitting the will of the chief to his men, so in the ideal case they would be the equally sure means of transmitting to the chief the sentiment, opinions, and suggestions of his men. In any case these steps form the rungs of the ladder by which any man may aspire to climb to advancement in the organization, and there should be an ever present atmosphere of encouragement for every man who will strive to fit himself to do the work of the man next above him. Such an atmosphere frees in the man the instincts of ambition and construction and thus promotes interest, inventiveness and constructive criticism and suggestion.

Teamwork.—The meaning of teamwork and its importance to the success of an undertaking are easily understood, but its practical application to our daily affairs is not always so easily brought about. Too often selfish interests seem to stand in the way, and it is necessary in some way to make the interests of the team appear of greater importance to the individual than his own. It can generally be shown that the greater success of each is dependent on the success of the whole, and if the leader always gives merit where it is due, he should be able to establish this understanding. It should help the leader, particularly in getting this spirit of co-operation into his men, if he realizes how this too is one of the great laws of nature. Bishop Brent says "Bible history—and for that matter all history—begins with a garden and closes with a city." This is because the developments of progress necessarily depend on the co-operative efforts of mankind, and thus force men to live and work together. It is true that progress results from the development of the individual; but not in isolation. He must work in close relations with his fellows. A man can do little alone, but in combination men perform miracles of achievement. So they have got to work together, have got to practice the give and take of common membership in community living, and of common responsibility for accomplishing the progress of the race. This means fellowship and teamwork all along the line. It means that each man has a part to play and is entitled to respect and consideration in accordance with how he plays it rather than what it is; and it means that no man is entitled to consider solely his own selfish interests, but must faithfully play his part in the team with his fellows. Our ideals of fairness and decency in work and play are built on this foundation.

Good teamwork assures two states of mind in the individual which are most helpful for efficient work. No matter in what isolation or obscurity the individual has to work he feels sure that his work is a necessary and important part of the whole and that it will receive due appreciation; and he is also borne up by feeling sure that each of his fellows is doing his own part with equal faithfulness and likewise counting on him to do his. In many phases of work as well as in sport this latter feeling is a great incentive to doing one's best. Teamwork is of course intimately connected with leadership; and will be frequently mentioned in discussing the latter.

Command.—It is very important to get a clear conception of the modern theory of command, or way of directing what subordinates shall do. It is important because rather new and not always understood, and particularly because it is the one guiding principle for the leader in all his conduct of office. Command no longer depends solely on the implicit obedience of subordinates, but gets its best results from developing in them the two essential qualities of loyalty and intelligent initiative, and then trusting them to play their part in the proposed work. This is a development of the last half century, an intelligent response to changed conditions. It is based on the modern development of the individual as a responsible unit in the social and political community, and more particularly on the fact that the bigness of modern-time enterprises makes impracticable the older-time dictatorial control by a single head. Implicit obedience to exact orders can be successful only when the man who gives the order is on the spot and fully acquainted with the existing conditions at the time, and this is impossible for all the details of large enterprises. The "I order, you obey" and the "you're not paid to think" stuff is entirely inadequate for big affairs, where opportunities for subordinates to do good work must constantly occur beyond the vision of the big chief and go unimproved if the subordinate has to wait for the chief's instructions before acting, and where circumstances will often have arisen without the chief's knowledge which would make it disadvantageous to carry out certain instructions which he had given.

So modern command recognizes that the man who is on the spot is in the best position to judge what to do, and that if he has been properly instructed, we will get better results from his acting on his own judgment than from his blindly obeying orders. Sad as it is for romance the man who to-day led a "Charge of the Light Brigade" would be considered stupid, and probably relieved as unfit for command. Subordinates are now required to know what is going on about them, and to use intelligent judgment. Positive orders are of course as rigidly obeyed as ever, but they are not given unless the superior is on the spot in person and knows all the conditions. In the general case the subordinate is instructed as to the plan of action and the part he is to play in it, and then expected to carry on to the best advantage. For this purpose army training is now designed, not only to cultivate the man's exact obedience to positive orders, but even more to develop his powers of observation and analysis so he may sense conditions; his powers of reason so he may arrive at a logical decision as to what should be done; and his strength of character so he may willingly accept and cheerfully bear the full responsibility of acting on his own initiative. Can anyone find a better formula for training to play one's part in any of life's activities!

This system of command is thoroughly in keeping with the democratic character, and is eminently adapted for use in civil undertakings. The keynote for any successful management is the development and use of loyalty and intelligent initiative in subordinates. Initiative without loyalty would be dangerous, but from the combination flow the big results.

Discipline.—The discipline of any group is the direct responsibility of its particular leader. Many men shrink from this responsibility through distaste for administering discipline as they understand it. And the old ideas of discipline based on fear and punishments are indeed calculated to be repugnant to any democrat of sensibilities. But let him once understand what discipline really is, and how the highest type of discipline is brought about through employing the better qualities of mankind, and his responsibility for it may then become a matter of keen interest and satisfaction.

It will make an understanding of discipline much easier to realize how common a thing it is in everyday life. It is perhaps the most common, for it controls us in practically all our personal affairs. Even the cave man has to observe the discipline imposed by the laws of nature; while civilized man must bow more or less cheerfully to social and community regulations ranging in seriousness from some convention as to wearing his hat up to the Eighteenth Constitutional Amendment. We are always the objects of some discipline; that of the home, of school, church, office, the hotel or the street car. The decent man and the happy one is he who accepts this discipline cheerfully—or else flees from the strictures of community living. How absurd therefore is the common conception that army discipline is such a unique affair, and that to be a disciplinarian is necessarily so difficult. In fact the most perfect example of real efficient discipline, and the example most worthy our emulation, is the discipline which a wise father inspires in his son. Here we see the unswerving loyalty, quick, cheerful obedience, and readiness to fight for the honor of his chief that are the characteristics of good discipline and the sure rewards of good leadership.

Group discipline may be defined as the spirit which pervades the members of a group—the controlling spirit which governs the impulses of the individuals and makes them try to do right and give their best in the common cause. It is as essential to the successful working of an organized machine of humans as is live steam to the working of a cold engine. Its existence in any group is recognized by a ready, cheerful obedience to instructions, by respect for those in authority, by keenness for the common success, and by a high sense of individual duty. It has been well called the "soul" of armies. This means that it is the responsive animating spirit which leads men to splendid deeds of heroism, gives them heart for cheerful endurance of untold hardships, makes them freely surrender individual wills to the will of the leader, and binds them into a loyal fellowship, aspiring, sacrificing, working together for a common cause.

Given a policy of unfailing justice, and no matter for what purpose men are brought together, this spirit of discipline may be made to pervade the whole group. It is the direct result of good leadership, and comes naturally from knowing how to handle men. It cannot exist under poor leadership. Its relative value for attaining results has been measured by Napoleon as seventy-five per cent of all the elements that go to make success in battle. In any undertaking demanding the continued application of the powers of man, its value must be rated very high. An organization that lacks discipline may not hope for efficiency. And as poor leadership thus denies efficiency to an organization, so may its efficiency be increased in direct proportion to the quality of leadership shown by those in control, especially by those in direct contact with the men.

The object of discipline is therefore seen to be an increase in the total of results. So do not let the mind get fixed on discipline as the end sought by leadership; it is but a means to the attainment of this real object—better results. As in the army many an officer failed of success because he centered his attention on being a disciplinarian and forgot that the object of all training and discipline was success in action, so in any activity, the leader must not let the importance of discipline in itself obscure his judgment when deciding any step toward attaining or maintaining it. It is not the end, but is to be used as a means toward attaining the real end—one hundred per cent results.

Morale is the final development of the highest type of discipline, and is thus the prize reward for good leadership. Based fundamentally on a belief in the cause for which we are working, it can never be inspired in an atmosphere of injustice or suspicion. Having morale means that no matter what obstacle or difficulty we face, we meet it absolutely confident of our ability to overcome it. Confidence—a justified confidence—is therefore the cornerstone of morale. Discipline and experience have made each man confident of his own fitness and ability, confident of the intelligent leadership of his chief, and confident of the ability and loyal co-operation of his fellow-mates in the team. To establish his men's confidence in these three things must therefore be a constant consideration in the mind of the leader. This consideration influences his every decision as to what to do and what to say, and how to do and say it. He uses the words and the method best adapted to work toward these results, well knowing that his men are influenced by his every act toward either confidence in or distrust of his leadership, their own ability, or the worth of their fellows. He thus builds up through honest, intelligent confidence that morale which is going to make his team ready to meet anything.

The manifestations of discipline and morale, and the various appeals to inspire them, differ in accordance with the work to be done by the members of the group and with the personalities of both the leader and his men. But all spring from an application of the same principles—and making this application to the specific case in hand becomes the interesting study and exercise of wit for the leader concerned. It is for him to arouse just the kind of spirit he needs for the special work and with the particular men he has. The spirit which holds the stoker faithful to his task in the bowels of the ship is different in form from that which animates the gun crew on the deck above—yet both spring from the same sources.

Leadership.—The development of man as an individual, his inherent qualities of manliness, high purpose, and a self-respecting individuality which still recognizes its responsibility as a citizen of the community—all these developed qualities make him potentially a splendid tool in the hands of a skillful master, and a dangerous one in the hands of a bungler. To handle these tools skillfully has therefore become a recognized art. It will be only when this art is generally known and practiced by our leaders that the nation may hope to benefit by anything like the full measure of its manpower.

This art of handling men is called leadership; and during the late war was made a study for practical application in all armies. On his excellence in the practice of this art depended every military leader's ability to deliver that superior manpower of his men which made his unit victorious. In the past this used to be the function of the few "born leaders" who seemed to know instinctively how to inspire others to give their uttermost. But these born leaders were too few to meet modern requirements, so we were forced to make their natural art a matter of analysis and instruction.

This art is based on the fact that there is in every man a tremendous latent force which may be aroused and used by a skillful leader who knows how to inspire the man's loyalty, pride, and ambition to do his utmost for the glory of his group and the honor of his cherished leader. The poor leader leaves all this enthusiastic service and devotion dormant in his men, and therefore commands only mediocrity. His men do just well enough to conform to cold requirements. The letter of the law is their sole guide, and they may even seek means to evade that. Such leadership paralyzes efficiency, and does actual harm to the character of the man who must operate under it. Denied the privilege of giving free play to his constructive instincts, he becomes prey to those which breed on discouragement and discontent, and the end of this man is far worse than the beginning.

Not so with good leadership. It wins its efficiency and material reward, not at the expense of manhood, but by appeal to the very instincts whose free play gives pleasure to the inner man and results in the upbuilding of his character and his faculties. The end thus finds him a better man and citizen for the kind of work he has done. It is this dual result which so highly commends the practice of this art. The most mercenary may well adopt it for the material gain it will bring; the altruist may adopt it for the inner joy of seeing the character and manliness of his men growing under his hands. And in the end even the leader who accepted it for material reasons will find self-satisfaction in that he must feel that the community is better for his living in it.

Leadership is an art, not an exact science. Its seat is in a man's soul rather than in his brain. To attempt to teach it we appeal broadly to a man's understanding and appreciation of what the laws of life require. It is a comprehensive subject which may be far from completely covered in one chapter. But fortunately one need not attain anything like perfection in order to be recognized as a good leader and to win a fine response from his men. So much is man a creature of the better instincts, so responsive is he to fair and decent treatment, that if his leader but be genuine in his practice of but a few of these principles of leadership, his men will deny his weaknesses and failures, and give him their loyalty and service without measure.

CHAPTER III
The Principles of Leadership

Our object in this chapter is to get at the practical elements of leadership; to find out what leadership requires in one's own personal qualities and in the methods of dealing with men. In doing this the first consideration is to understand the object of leadership. To get a clear conception of the object of an undertaking should always be the first step in its execution, for men work to better advantage and leaders lead to better advantage, when the object of their efforts is clearly defined in their minds. One would think that the Allies had been fighting the war to the best of their ability; yet recall the tremendous impetus given their efforts, when, in answer to the President's question, they had clearly defined their object in fighting.

The Object of Leadership then is so to handle one's men as to build up and maintain a high spirit of discipline and morale, of individual initiative, of loyalty and of teamwork; and so to direct this spirit as to win the highest efficiency for the accomplishment of the purpose in view. In short its object is to develop the psychological elements of the machine of organization, and thus increase its efficiency by doubling its manpower. So the object of every step in this discussion, the psychologic object of every step in leadership, is to secure better discipline and morale, more intelligent initiative, keener loyalty and better teamwork. The student must keep these objects ever in mind in both study and practice, as furnishing a purpose or guide in all that is said or done. The accomplishment of these objects is a constant inspiration to a good leader; by his comments and criticisms during the progress of the work, by his every act in administration, he seeks to build up morale and initiative and all these essential qualities in the characters of his men.

As to the Personal Qualities required in the leader, we only ask that each man use intelligently the ones that he has. It is not intended to enumerate all the high qualities of the great leaders of history, and then expect the reader to adopt them as his own. None of us begin to have all of these qualities, or any of them in perfection. But all of us do have some sense of justice and fairness, are possessed of a degree of manliness and self-control, and can use our judgment and will power. The point is to learn the value of our various qualities, and to cultivate them by intelligent use. We are all human—let us admit it and act accordingly. And that would be a very good first step toward success in leadership, for there is no other one thing so often heard of a good leader from the sincere lips of his admiring men as that "he is a real human being." An appreciation of the meaning of that fact alone should serve as an inspiration and an excellent guide.

Many men of but mediocre ability have successfully carried through one big job after another simply because they had the faculty for inspiring the loyalty, initiative and best endeavors of their subordinates. Many others of stronger character and higher mental attainments have failed to do so because they failed to inspire, and even antagonized, their subordinates. And while this seeming lack of tact may have been due to natural deficiency, in nine cases out of ten it was due to the fact that they had accepted as their guide some old-time rule about how to enforce discipline, or else that they had never given thought to the subject of handling men and realized its importance. It is not difficult to learn how to avoid their mistakes, and to acquire the art of those who know how to inspire the enthusiastic efforts of others.

It is understood then that we are not discussing the high qualities of the superman, or striving to attain to the leadership of a Lincoln. It must also be understood that not all these points will apply to any one case of leadership, in which many of them might be unreasonable. But all are based on the same philosophy of human control, and are consistent with the modern spirit of individualism which has become a prime consideration. So as you read something that may strike you as unreasonable in the case you have in mind, give it fair consideration as applicable to certain cases, and weigh it as a means of adding to your comprehension of the true spirit of leadership. You cannot know too much about this in the general case. The broader your knowledge and the better defined your individual opinions, the better judgment you will be able to bring to your particular problems. You are the big factor. In the end it is going to be what you believe and think and feel that is going to make you successful or not. You will never win by following any abstract rules you do not yourself feel and live by.

Qualifying for Leadership.—Any man of native character may fit himself to lead successfully. Hundreds of thousands of young Americans thus fitted themselves in the late war to lead their fellows as officers, commissioned and non-commissioned. Many had had no previous experience of command to guide them, had never given a direction even to a servant. Yet by application they rapidly learned how to handle themselves more or less successfully as leaders and their men as loyal followers. No one expects perfection. All history records but one Leader without fault. It is impracticable to follow rules or to assume qualities that are not natural. The thing to do is to realize that leadership may be developed, to absorb its ordinary fundamentals into your system, and to study yourself as applying them to the problems of your position.

Your own personality is the one big thing for you. Learn to appreciate its strong points and its weak ones, its possibilities for doing the right thing and the wrong, and its probable effect on others. Get it well in hand through practicing self-control, and make it work intelligently in accordance with your wishes. You will make mistakes—the best men do. The point is to have sense enough to recognize the mistake, to correct it and try to avoid repeating it. You watch yourself and you watch others, asking in each case if the best thing was done to get the desired result. There is generally one best thing to say or do, and at least a dozen wrong ones. The chances are largely in favor of using the wrong one, but by giving it thought you learn to pick the right until in the end it becomes quite instinctive for you to do so. We can sum it all up in just about this: that you begin to think seriously about yourself in your job, and determine that you are going to be natural, genuine, fair and self-controlled; that you realize that your instruments are human beings and that you have got to control them through your own personality; and that therefore you determine to study your personality and your tools so you may use them intelligently. Observation and personal application of its results are the great things.

No two leaders may act exactly alike, for each must use his own personality. One may be naturally cold, short-spoken and stern, the other suave and gentle, yet both be equally good leaders. But when you analyze their treatment of their men you will find that both observe the same fundamental principles of justice, fairness and regard for their individual development.

And as the personalities of leaders must differ, so even more will those of the men. To control them you must have a working knowledge of human nature—for while all mankind respond more or less alike to well-known instincts and habits, there are times when you have to consider the individual. Here is where observation, experience and thinking about it prepare you to act intelligently. As a good horseman soon comes to handle a thoroughbred or a cold blood with equal assurance and success, so the leader of men gets to know instinctively what touch to give the reins or spurs in order to get the result he wants. And if in any given case you are not sure what to do, think what would make you respond cheerfully if you were in his place, and what would make you "buck." Let this decide what you will do. It will generally be the right thing, for at bottom we are all pretty much the same.

Above all you must be genuine. You must use the personality God gave you—only use it naturally and with earnest purpose to play the game fairly. If by nature you are gentle and tactful, thank God, and do not try to be a bear, because you have seen and admired some big burly man who was a successful leader. The genuineness and earnestness of your personal efforts to do the right thing will go further than the best possible imitation of some other, be he ever so good.

Self-Control.—You are probably shrinking from the thought of taking yourself in hand in preparation for leadership. But it is quite natural that you should thus train yourselves, for self-control is the one first step toward ability to control others. And you will the more eagerly accomplish your own self-discipline, as you observe human nature and note the blessings of the man who is self-disciplined and the curse both to himself and his fellows of the man who is not. Those parents who allow a child to grow up to manhood undisciplined put a great burden upon the community in which he is to move, and above all a great handicap upon the man himself. Selfish, petulant, flaming into passion at any opposition, egoism coloring everything in life for him, he is a poor member of the team in sport or business, and is more often tolerated by his fellows than heartily welcomed. He has many hard lessons to learn before he comes to appreciate true values in the life about him, and thus become a truly worth-while member of society. Far from being fit to lead others, he is generally the most difficult problem for the leader, who now has to do the work that the parents should have done in the man's childhood.

You may assume that you have the requisite native character for leadership, or you would not be in position to use it. It remains for you to prove its worth and improve its natural qualities. You will not do this by any grandstand plays, or even by prayer. You will do it by continued thoughtfulness in meeting the human problems of your position, and by a discipline of self which will make and keep you fit for your duties.

Consideration for Rights of Others.—It is a good thing for any citizen to make himself realize that he is part of a community whose members are entitled to some consideration as well as himself. This certainly is important for the man who is responsible for the conduct of others. Everyone hates a hog as a candidate for fellowship in sport, business or community living. You see him elbowing women and old men aside as he crowds himself to the front at a ticket window; and so through a busy day always jamming and trampling others to get the best for himself. He gains a questionable satisfaction for his swollen ego, but at the cost of the scorn of his fellows who have thought enough about life to realize that his type is a curse to community living and far from desirable as a characteristic of the race.

Put Yourself in His Place.—If you want to put something over with a man you may take an ax or a hammer and drive it into him—in which case you leave him sore and rebellious—or by putting yourself mentally in his place you may so express yourself as to win his cheerful acquiescence—even if, as may often happen, he does not end by thinking he originated the idea himself. The latter method is called being tactful—and compared to the former gets tenfold results, not to mention adding to the joy of life for all concerned. In presenting an idea by this method you give your attention to the form and manner in which you present it, rather than concentrate all your thought on the idea alone, let him take it as he will. It requires only a bit of consideration of what are the probable feelings and thoughts of the other, a realization of his point of view and how you would feel in his place. The leader who has won his promotion from below has an advantage in having experienced the point of view of his men. Yet he often throws it away and exhibits a case of swollen head by bellowing his "Hey you!" in absolute disregard of the outraged feelings which he must know this always engenders.

It is so much more efficient to be reasonably tactful—to be considerate. To do it one may sacrifice a bit of vainglory, may not appear to himself and his fellows as such a lord of creation, but he will get better results, make life more worth living for all, and win for himself a place in the estimation of others which may well return him tenfold of advantage in some future contingency. It is never the really big man whose arrogance hurts the feelings of the less fortunate or forbids him to show respect and consideration to each man who does well his appointed task in no matter what capacity. This arrogance is found rather in the toad who is trying to make others think he is an ox—and the humbler a man's station the more likely he is to recognize a toad when he meets one, and the more pain it causes him to have to bow to its bovine pretensions.

Loyalty and Initiative.—We have seen how the leader is responsible for developing these qualities in his subordinates. He wins their loyalty to him by gaining their admiration of the personal qualities he displays; and their loyalty to the larger organization and the cause, by his own example and by timely comments. He develops their intelligent initiative by the policy and methods he employs in handling them in their work. He constantly encourages individual effort, taking pains to commend every display of interest, inventiveness, ingenuity, or improvement. He keeps the group informed of what it is trying to do as a whole, so each may understand the object of his particular part and seek opportunity to do it better. He tells the man what to do, not how to do it, and praises whatever shows original effort and decision. By constructive criticism and explanation he encourages the man so that he wants to do it better next time. In short he encourages his men to observe, to think, to decide, and to act on their decisions. So long as their spirit is loyal, the best results come from such service, and he must be patient in developing these faculties.

Development of the Men's Powers.—How natural it is to be impatient with the man who is bungling his early efforts. How often the master grabs the thing and does it himself rather than wait for inexperienced hands to find the way. The parent says petulantly, "I'd rather do it myself than see John struggling with it." The boss cares more to have a certain thing done exactly as he would do it than he does for all the good that might come from the developed skill and resourcefulness of his men. Of course these are all wrong. Your way is not always the best way. One way is often as good as another, and improvements come out of the interested inventiveness of the worker. Your object is to get the best efforts of your men, and good work is not done in an atmosphere of humiliation and discouragement. You must avoid the natural display of temper at awkwardness and the cutting remarks which indicate that you think the man a hopeless idiot. If he really is that you have a different problem and should avoid wasting your time and that of the others in efforts to use him. You are developing men and their powers. The constructive and inventive instincts thrive in an atmosphere of encouragement, and opportunity to employ them keeps the worker cheerfully at his task. You get a double reward from this system of control—the satisfaction of seeing your subordinates grow in ability under your hands, and the satisfaction of increased output or accomplishment under your management.

Popularity.—Should a leader strive for "popularity" with his men? By all means, if he is man enough to win it on his merits, for it is a large element in establishing their loyalty. But it is very easy for the beginner to have the wrong idea as to how popularity is won. He must clearly understand that it is not gained through easy-going methods, overlooking faults and neglects, playing favorites, sympathy with growling and kicking about the way things have to be done, nor in any of those things which go to undermine discipline and morale. Such popularity is properly called cheap. It takes no manliness to get it, it has no value once you have it. Such leadership is worse than worthless, it does actual damage. It will be exposed for the sham it is by the first occasion for endurance, by the first thing that comes to test the real grit and ability of the group. Then one of two things must happen—failure, or some better man will jump out of the crowd, take the leadership from these weak hands, and lead the men through the emergency.

We have seen this illustrated often enough in the army, where authority has held in his peacetime position of leadership some weakling who faded into the ranks in the actual tests of service, while some strong quiet character stepped to the front and successfully assumed the responsibilities of leadership. It is the duty of all management to discover and remove these weak leaders. It is equally the duty of every leader to study himself and his methods, and to make sure that both of them display the qualities which will justify his holding the leadership and will give it such character as to make it proof against any emergency demands.

The popularity that counts, that makes men say they would follow so-and-so through anything, makes them brag about their chief and proud to serve under him, is founded on admiration for his real ability, confidence in his fairness and justice, and in the courage and strength of his character. He has won this popularity by being absolutely fair and square to all, by seeing that both privileges and extra hardships are equitably divided among his men, by holding everyone to a strict performance of duty, by reward of merit where due and recognition of delinquency where it exists, by avoiding anything like deceit or duplicity in his conduct of office, by never appearing to ignore any of his men as of no consequence in the group, by showing a sincere personal interest in the welfare of his men as individuals and above all by such use of his own head in planning and forethought as to save his men unnecessary work or trouble and yet increase their efficiency, thus making them realize that he really has the ability to lead them.

Appearance—As to Dignity.—The leader holds his position on the assumption that out of the whole group he is the best all-around man for the job. He must retain this reputation for excellence, and should add to it by further performance. First of all in appearance—in how he carries himself before his men. The nature of the work may determine the amount of dignity which must go with the office, but in every case there is a certain dignity which all men must find in their leaders to which they may instinctively give their respect. This is just about the amount of dignity that comes naturally from earnestness and sincerity of purpose. It is not a virtue to be assumed, a superficial garment to be put on for the work. It has nothing to do with haughtiness or stiffness—unless it be an assumed dignity which is often thus manifested. "It comes simply from seeing things in their right proportion—big things big, small things small," and really has more of humility than of pride. It forbids you to patronize your men, to appear to condescend to them in your dealings, and it does admit your sharing both their earnest concerns and their fun. Professor Hocking says "To make a quick transition from fun to business, and carry your men with you instantly, is the test of real dignity. The two opposites of dignity are permanent solemnity and permanent triviality." Both have a bad effect on humans.

As to Example.—Remember also in the matter of appearance that you are an example. Imitation is a great teacher—the sole teacher of our infancy, not to be despised in our manhood. Your men are going to be very much as you are—if you are really their leader. Your example of cheerfulness, promptness, loyalty to superiors, cleanliness, courtesy, energy and interest, will find response in that of the men. I have seen this carried to the extent of copying the cut of the hair, the angle of the hat and other personal peculiarities. The power of example is a potent force, and very useful in establishing loyalty.

An important example for you to give is one of earnestness of purpose and interest in the work. The accomplishment of the work must appear to be a vital matter to you. Listlessness and indifference on your part will be quickly reflected by the men, while they will equally respond to a reasonable amount of smartness and earnestness on your part. You can imagine the amount of earnestness we used to put into our English lessons at West Point where we had an old instructor who closed his eyes and dozed while each cadet recited. There was great keenness to get into his classes but it stopped there. You should appear to care so much for your work that you are indifferent to the little things that affect your own comfort. If the men see you taking advantage of your position to enjoy comforts denied to them it induces a state of mind that interferes with good work. A good example of this was the conduct of a captain of cavalry in the Philippines who, being required to conduct drill during the heat of the day, took up his position under the shade of a solitary tree on the plain and drilled his troop in a circle around him. That drill did not add much to the excellence of the troop or to their loyalty for the captain.

As to Ability.—Again you want to impress the men as being one who knows at once what is to be done in each case that arises, who makes quick decisions, and who carries through what he has undertaken, without changing his mind. We will discuss this more in detail later, enough here to say that by figuring out ahead of time all the details of a certain undertaking and carefully planning for it, you can carry it through with an apparent readiness of decision and resource that will be surprising; and a few such successes will establish your reputation as an able leader.

Knowledge of Details.—Your position presupposes that you know the work better than does any other man in the group. Generally speaking you should be able to do each man's part at least as well as the man, able to know when he is working to best advantage, able to recognize particularly good performance to commend it, able to correct improper methods and point the way to improvement. This superior knowledge gives you the self-confidence to appear before the men as their leader and to give them instructions and orders which you know are reasonable. The men instinctively feel and recognize this superiority, and naturally give it respect and obedience.

Of course no one man may reasonably claim to know everything, nor to be more skillful in every detail than certain specialists. This fact is frankly recognized by all the group, and is used to stir the pride of individuals in their particular superior performance, and also as a reason for expecting all to make suggestions for any improvements they may have thought out.

Suggestions from the Men.—These suggestions are to be really encouraged, and given fair consideration when made. If accepted, credit is to be given to the man, if rejected, he is to be told why it is not found good. It is a mistake to feel that the leader loses caste in accepting or even listening to suggestions from his subordinates. "Nobody can tell me how to run this job" is a narrow policy, destroying individual initiative—and it is not true anyway. The very statement shows that the leader does not fully know his job, for everyone is capable of improvement, and any job is better done for the combined interest and resourcefulness of everyone connected with it.

Prestige.—The leader loses none of his prestige in hearing and considering the thoughts of his subordinates. In the end the decision is his and on that they all have to act. And it does not hurt his leadership to have to say frankly "I don't know. I'll have to look into that." If he finds that he has taken a wrong course, it does not hurt even to admit frankly that he was mistaken, especially if his action has happened to do an injustice to one of his men. Mistakes are readily forgiven, but not meanness or injustice. Remember always that the men admire manliness in their leader and demand justice from him. These qualities are better than infallibility, for after all they like to feel that you are human. And above all they will not respect a bluffer. It is hopeless to try to bluff when you do not know. Someone will know and expose you, and away goes the respect of your men.

Asking Men's Opinions.—I have known successful leaders to make it a rule to ask, whenever one of their men came to them with some question or trouble, "What do you think about it? What would you advise doing?" The man has generally been thinking about this for some time before he presented it. If it is a question about the work he has probably in mind some solution which he thinks an improvement and this is his way of getting it considered. By thus asking his opinion you encourage his personal interest in the general success, enlist his co-operation, give opportunity for that self-expression which means so much to every self-respecting man, and not least of all you gain time for consideration of your own answer while he is presenting his. This is often a particularly good way to handle the case of a man brought before you for some dereliction of duty. Ask him what he would do, if he were boss, with a man who had committed the same offense. It is astonishing how this makes him realize the whole situation, which he probably had not thought of before, and nine times out of ten he will suggest a more severe punishment than you would give, and come out of the experience a much more responsive member of the group than he was before.

A Representative of Authority.—In any business undertaking the immediate leader of a group is to his men the direct representative of the authority which holds them to their tasks; of the purpose and policy which inspire their endeavors; and of the management which directs the enterprise. These men will largely get their impressions of the justice and fairness of this authority from that displayed by their leader; they will judge the worthiness of its purpose and policy from his enthusiasm and loyalty; and will estimate the efficiency of its management by that which their leader daily displays. Management considered all this when it selected you as a leader, it is now for you to consider it constantly in dealing with your men. The more ignorant the man, the more nearly are you his sole representative of these elements, and the more important that you treat him fairly and wisely. He may be a poor immigrant unable to understand our language and wholly dependent on how your treatment impresses him for his conceptions of the fairness of our management and the worth of our industrial life and institutions. It is up to you to make him a contented useful laborer and happy citizen—and not to drive him to the ranks of revolution by making him believe that authority is unjust and our institutions unworthy his loyalty.

The Head of the Family.—A good leader is always a jealous guardian of the personal rights of his men. It is only over his dead body that an injustice is done to any of them or to his group as a whole. He is their champion in every contact with the larger organization, and they look up to him for it. The group instinct is one of the strong self-protective instincts. In the multitudinous groupings of the modern community, the individual chooses those groups which he believes offer him the best protection and to them gives his loyalty. The leader but takes advantage of this psychological fact when he makes his men realize that he is constantly on the lookout for their interests. He may row at them himself (in a fatherly way), but he allows no one else to do so. He sees that they get what is coming to them. If hardship has to be borne, he sees that it is borne justly, and shares it with them. If food is short and shelter poor, as often happens on field and engineering jobs, he does not rest until he has exhausted every effort to improve them, and in sharing them is very careful to show himself no favor. He fights for their fair name, and for full recognition of their merit. If one of his men has a trouble, it becomes his trouble until it is adjusted. He thus establishes the feeling that it is a family matter, and that he is the head of the family. (Incidentally he is sure to be rewarded, for the men will soon be taking a keen interest in the welfare of the head of their family.) And in the end the men come to speak of it as "our" group—not Smith's or Brown's but "our" gang, for each realizes that his interests are equal in it with any others. And until his men do thus speak of the outfit as ours rather than his, the leader may know that he has not yet got the co-operative spirit which he desires.

The Group Spirit.—Any group of individuals working together for a common purpose are going to establish unconsciously a group spirit of some kind. This has got to happen. The leader knows that success largely depends on what this spirit shall be, and takes pains to make it a helpful one. By getting to know the men and "how they feel about it," he keeps in close touch with the spirit that runs through them all, and by suggestions here and there he does much to build it up in the way it should go and make the men feel a membership in his team. When he has got to know this spirit well, he can count on his men to respond in a certain way to certain appeals or impulses, and he thus makes this group spirit a tool in his hand for getting results. In time of hardship or strain he plays on this spirit to arouse new energy or endurance, and jaded muscles spring anew to life, just as martial music will put renewed life and spring into the lagging steps of tired soldiers. Thus always spirit may make men endure and dare and carry through far beyond the normal accomplishment. Thus the thoroughbred will run unfalteringly till his mighty heart breaks with the strain, while there need be no fear of killing the ambitionless cold bred, who slows down and quits at the early warnings of fatigue.

So the good leader is constantly on the lookout for means to build up this splendid spirit in his group. By word and deed, and particularly by thoughtful conduct of the work in hand, he fosters the spirit of putting things across and never being defeated, which is going to carry them through to success when called upon. His men come to realize that what he requires of them is always reasonable and that it makes for efficiency; they find that he is always considering their welfare before his own and taking the greater pride in their success for the team; and they come to realize that while he so directs their work as to make it as interesting for them as he can, he will never accept failure for them or himself, but insist on carrying through to successful accomplishment. It is possible thus to establish so strong a group spirit for doing good work and generally winning out that the men themselves will get after the laggards and expose the worthless for elimination as unfit for membership in the team.

This Spirit Requires Efficiency.—Such results are possible to the leader in direct proportion to his knowledge of his job and his ability to conduct the work with efficiency and without wasted time or energy. Men naturally hate inefficiency. They become critical, caustic in their remarks, and finally disgusted under a leader who wastes their time and efforts, who hesitates over decisions and wonders whether to do this or that and how to do either, who hasn't the tools and material right at hand, who is always picking the wrong man for a piece of work, and who holds up the work of all while he fusses with the clumsy efforts of some "dub." Such a leader will never build up any good spirit. That comes only from the reverse of this picture of incompetence.

Work for the Leader.—But not all leaders may be gods to be always right and sure in their management of affairs. True, but by looking ahead, by planning and preparing for each new task, by headwork and overtime work, they can so fit themselves for each task that they can carry their men through it with such efficient direction that they will seem to their men to be almost godlike. Of course this means work for the leader. But the notion is foolish that work grows less as one ascends the ladder of promotion. In reality the leader who is half as good as he should be in his position is generally earning far more than his pay. His task is no easy one. Ambition for accomplishment, pride in success, joy of meeting manly responsibility, and not that enjoyment of an easy berth which some assume it to be, are the motives which hold the leader to his job.

Where Leadership Really Shows.—As we watch a skillful boss directing his men through a job, tools and material all at hand, every man moving efficiently, all the parts working smoothly toward the result, how natural it is to exclaim, "What teamwork!" and "What a leader!" But out of years of experience I tell you that this leader seems so good, not because God especially endowed him with skill, but because he has previously sat down and planned out how he was going to handle this especial job, and because he took pains to see to it ahead of time that everything was prepared for the work. His superior leadership shows not in the work he is here doing, but in the work he did beforehand in building up the discipline and teamwork of his men and in making preparation for handling this especial job efficiently. That is why he may now appear so quietly sure of himself and his men, and that is the real task for leadership—fitting self, men, and team ahead of time so they may work smoothly to the best advantage without waste or friction.

Assuring the Confidence of the Men.—It is a common fault of leaders to take too much for granted and assume that men understand conditions without bothering to explain them. Remember that a man cannot give good work if his mind is harboring fear, distrust, or even questionings as to his rights, his duties or his assurance of receiving impartial justice and fair dealing. Confidence and a knowledge of the conditions under which he works will keep his mind free from these disturbing invaders. Instead of assuring this mental freedom, many leaders are so poor as positively to inject fear and anxiety. Perhaps nothing can do more to free his mind at once for useful impulses than to provide him with printed rules and regulations which clearly define the policy of the undertaking as regards administration and control; the rights, duties and mutual relations of its members; and particularly the method by which each may secure immediate consideration by superior authority in case of real or fancied invasion of his right to justice and impartial treatment. We all know that in industry the man's distrust of the impartiality and honesty of his boss is often justified, and we can see the advantages of letting the man know his rights and giving him easy sure access to higher authority. The vastness of modern organizations has too often made management forget its responsibility in the matter of discipline and fair treatment among its employees. These laborers find themselves to-day in a case not unlike that of our forefathers who had to force from their tyrant king a written acknowledgement of their rights—yet rights so simple and fundamental as would seem to go without saying, and to require safeguarding only from a selfish, unfeeling brute. To none will we sell, to none will we deny or delay, right or justice may well be borrowed from Magna Charta and published as a fundamental rule for the interior administration of many modern enterprises.

Assuring Justice.—The possession of authority makes a wise man consider the rights of others, lest he do a grave injustice. It is likely to have a far different effect on a man of narrow soul and intellect. He often becomes selfish, mean and arrogant, indifferent to the feelings and rights of others, partial to favorites whom he chooses for selfish reasons. He thus denies justice and forfeits his right to leadership. Such men as bosses in industry are often the cause of serious labor troubles, and are always the cause of reduced production. By deceit and duplicity they may long conceal these qualities from higher authority, while they continue to negative the most humane policies of management. For this reason, when troubles show in any group of men, first seek the source in the defective leadership of their boss. It is for this same reason that successful management finds means to check up the methods of its subordinates, and has it clearly understood by all that every man has ready access to higher authority for the presentation of any grievance.

Joy of Doing Work Well.—A man naturally takes real delight in doing a piece of work well, in the successful play of his constructive instincts. He gets an actual pleasure from doing well whatever he puts his hand to. This was another of Nature's wise endowments when she determined that man should be her main instrument for progress in the world. Whatever a man is doing in an agreeable frame of mind, he finds himself naturally striving for perfection—the farmer looks back with pleasurable reward to see that he has turned a clean, straight furrow, the carpenter and mechanic get an inward glow from the perfect fitting of a joint, and it was not poetic fancy which made David Grey take such delight in digging that drainage ditch under a hot summer sun. These joys from fine execution of work are the result of a natural instinct, and form one of the best means for getting results if the leader knows how to use them.

When you see a man taking no interest in his work and not trying to get good results, perhaps even purposely doing poor work, you may be sure that something is fundamentally wrong. Some stronger instinct has been aroused whose force forbids the operation of this happy one for construction. Our strongest instincts are those which regard our self-protection, and one of these may be causing the trouble. If conditions are such as to make the man fearful of his welfare, of his livelihood or of injustice, contrary instincts are likely to overcome or at least confuse the instinct to do well. So we may expect superior results only under a system which assures fairness and justice, and under a leader who honestly practices them.

The Curse of Conscious Deadbeating.—A common complaint of labor is that the end of work finds the man too tired to do anything else that day. This is true, however, not because of the amount of work he has done but because of the small amount of interest and ambition which he has been allowed to put into it. Man is so designed that he is happiest in doing hard work and good work if he may but take the right spirit to it. This is the curse of the lack of trust between employer and employees, and the consequent labor union policies which deny to their members the privilege of giving full play to their constructive instincts. These policies establish a standard of mediocrity, and thus do daily violence to the character of those capable ambitious men who, instead of being free to give their best, are thus forced to work consciously as "deadbeats." No wonder that these men are tired at night and that they have no heart for outside interests. They are working in a spirit which saps their manhood and injures their self-respect as members of the community. You may see this evidenced in their hang-dog faces as they "soldier" on their jobs. Nothing but honest belief in the necessity for this policy of loafing could hold them loyal to it. Even this will not always do it; for men often become more interested in the success of "their business," their undertaking, than they are for the time being in the observance of union regulations. When no particular danger threatens or issue is at stake, a clever boss may so appeal to the constructive instincts as to make them dominate the self-protective ones.

Public opinion is likely to play an important part in the above question. The community is interested in anything which so materially affects the character of its citizens and the output of its industries. It may come to a decision; and demand certain action which it believes will correct a situation it finds so injurious. And it may do this without a true conception of the facts, so that its dictum is as likely to offend the best interests of the laborer as of the employer. Far better that the leaders of both should themselves solve their common problem for their own common interest—and many have done this.

This question must be a serious consideration for leaders of labor. For only that leadership can last which makes for progress. Its purpose must be clear and honest, and must satisfy the constructive instincts. Otherwise its following will fall away, to seek some other which offers this satisfaction. Appeals to passion and prejudice will carry men a long way in a short time, but sooner or later comes the time for serious thinking. Then these men must be convinced that their course makes for progress and greater ultimate good. And unless the leadership has had a broad vision based on realities, they will discover its fallacy or selfishness, and so abandon it.

Depending on a Man.—You can make a man feel so strongly that you are trusting him to play fair in a certain matter, "put it up to him" in such a way, that his sense of manhood and good sportsmanship will make him feel that he owes it to you to make good. This is a strong influence on conduct—too strong to be used constantly. It may easily become burdensome to ordinary mortals, who generally want more freedom from the promptings of conscience. The point is to use it only in special cases, and thus get its good effect both in results obtained and on the man's character. When you do use it, do so quite naturally and easily without too much fuss or talking, and certainly without formally "putting him on his honor." There should be no apparent question of your confidence being justified—it is so sure that you do not have to talk about it. Here is an illustration: I found in my command at Camp Grant a husky soldier who was a prisoner serving a three months sentence, and considered a surly, insubordinate brute who would never be disciplined. Soon thereafter his major brought him to me with a most unusual request for authority to let the man go to Chicago to be with his wife during a serious operation. The man stated his case—too proud and obstinate to ask any favors. I discovered that he felt that his first punishment had been a rank injustice, and that he had thereafter been so sore as willfully to defy authority. I asked how long he would need to be in Chicago—he did not know. I took the chance and authorized the major to let him go in perfect freedom and stay as long as the man found necessary. He was back long before we expected him and in an entirely new frame of mind. He soon had the remainder of his sentence remitted for good behavior, and before we left for France he had become a non-commissioned officer and one of the best subordinate leaders for arousing loyal service. Another good citizen made—or at least saved from the hell he was driving into. If he survived the war he is to-day proud of the service he once hated for its injustice—and some day no doubt he will be championing his major for mayor of the city.

Proprietorship and Self-Expression.—Other strong instincts which the leader should take advantage of are those of proprietorship and of self-expression. To get the full benefit of his instinct to do his work well, the man should be made to feel that he has a personal interest in this job that he is doing, and that in actually doing it he is using his own skill, resourcefulness and inventiveness. So the leader watches for the chance, and drops a remark to show that he sees how well the man has done some step he has taken, and no harm if others overhear the remark! The leader is equally careful to speak of it as Smith's job, to praise the way Smith handled it, to commend the excellent condition of Smith's tools, and thus by rewarding Smith's little success and making it appear to be the result of his individual work on his own job with his own machine or tools, he encourages in all the feeling that each is doing his own work in his own way and will get credit accordingly.

It is also well to remember that these same constructive instincts in the men have another meaning for you as their leader. They will cause the men to resent it when they find themselves doing useless work, wasting energy and even approaching failure as a result of your poor judgment, hesitation in making decisions, and blundering through lack of forethought. This makes you see the necessity for knowing your job, and carefully preparing yourself to handle its details.

Knowing the Purpose of Work.—Human nature demands that before men can put their best efforts into work they must know the object of it. Purpose is the big guiding motive in all life, and we are so made that we seek for the purpose in all our efforts, and finding it and believing in it, we naturally give it our best endeavors. It is stated that one of the three greatest faults in handling labor to-day is the fact that the men do not know what they are doing, or why. Yet it is plain that a man must have some interest in his task before he can put much heart or intelligence into it. It is quite possible in assigning a task to make sure that the man understands the object of it, what part it is and its importance in the general work of the team. Then no matter how prosaic this part may be, as the man works he may build a mental picture of the completed whole, see his part fitting into it, and employ his constructive instincts in making his part perfect. Meanwhile, the necessity of thus clearly defining the object of the work to the man reacts advantageously on the leader. It requires him to have a clear conception of this object, and thus enables him to hew truer to the line in carrying on the work.

To illustrate the value of knowing why, imagine two men each for a different day carrying buckets of water from a stream to dump into a tank on a near hilltop. One knows that every drop of this water is precious for the necessary irrigation of a garden he can see beyond the hill; the other has no idea why the water is carried—someone may be trying to dry up the stream for all he knows. Not only would the former carry more water, but he would take more pleasure in his work and be trying to invent some means for increasing the amount transported; and when night came he would be far less tired. This illustrates a truth which applies to all human activities, and it is the leader's job to take advantage of it for the good effect it will have on his men and on the work to be accomplished.

In starting any new work, new undertaking, or new policy, the one most efficient thing to do is to assemble the whole group of men concerned and explain to them what you and they together are going to try to do; how they are organized for it, and the part each is to take; and finally such a picture of the whole to be accomplished as may serve as an inspiration, or at least appeal to their reason. Do not let it ever be said of your men that they are working in ignorance of what they are trying to do, and thus debarred from putting intelligent interest and co-operation into their respective parts.

Relationship Between Leader and Men.—The relationship which should exist between the leader and his men is a difficult thing to explain accurately. It depends largely on the leader's personality, and accordingly each must work this out for himself. This is almost always a matter of difficulty and embarrassment for beginners, who are apt to go to an unhappy extreme either in surrounding themselves with an atmosphere of isolation and autocracy or in showing too much familiarity and even frivolity. Let them first remember that the leader is not an autocrat or dictator, but the foremost of his companions. This position puts responsibility and authority in his hands, and a certain restraint on the perfect freedom of his relations with the others. He may still be called by his first name in perfect good fellowship; may be even affectionately nick-named; may and should be in relations of mutual and absolutely impartial friendship and confidence with his men; yet there must remain in reserve a something of superiority and true dignity which they recognize and which makes it natural for them to respect him and obey his instructions. He may be intimate, but must not be familiar. He should be courteous and thoughtful for their interests, but must never be patronizing.

You will notice if you take pains to observe, that a real gentleman or lady is always courteous to those in subordinate positions. The real superior has no anxiety about his prestige and is quietly at ease in dealing with subordinates. Those who bully them are thus showing that they have not had long experience in exercising authority. The true spirit of America believes in the dignity of labor. Our nation was built in the actual sweat of our forebears, who hewed the forests and tilled the soil with their own hands and did not attempt to enslave the labor of the natives as did the pioneers who colonized the countries further south. That spirit survives and makes it natural for us to respect those who do their parts well in whatever activity fortune has placed them. So the leader and his men, the employer and the laborer, are all companions in labor, and each shows respect for the ability and accomplishment of the other.

That is the spirit of the relationship between leader and men by which he is to regulate his conduct. You can see how this spirit is sure to be offended by anything like patronizing or exhibitions of either pompous authority or childish familiarity. Both men and leader are each entitled to the serious consideration of the other, and to respect in direct proportion to the ability each shows in performing his own part on the team; and each will be judged by this test. As an officer in one of the new war organizations put it to his men in explaining the spirit he sought in training, "We are all on the same team. It happens that I am in the pitcher's box now, but some day each one of us will have to come to the bat."

Reception of New Men.—The ultimate success of a new man joining an outfit depends of course on the real stuff that is in him. But much can be done to hasten this success. It has been the practice of the ages to haze the newcomer, and thus bring out this real stuff if it is there. But this is not approved in modern practice, which aims to get good results quicker through encouragement and by showing him how rather than baffing him on the head with a marlin spike for not knowing. Both schools of training have their adherents, and youth—excepting the hazee—is generally in favor of hazing. There is something to be said in favor of enough judicious hazing to remove any tendencies toward "freshness" which might interfere with the new man's progress, and enough to implant in him an appreciation of the seriousness of life where that is lacking. But the difficulty is to make the hazing judicious—to avoid overdoing it, or doing it where not needed.

So this becomes another care for the leader, who must see that each new man gets the right start if possible. You can be sure that most new men want to make good. Encourage them along that line and try to prevent the occurrence of anything which will switch them to the other track. To most of them an early exhibition of your friendly personal interest in how they are coming on will be a great help and incentive to better work. There will be many things that they do not understand, and some real or fancied troubles. This is your chance to establish a relation of confidence in which they form the habit of bringing these troubles to you for solution, instead of letting them rankle in their minds and act as deterrents to the good impulses for work. This gives you many opportunities for improving the group spirit and may some day be the means of clearing up real grievances which might otherwise lead to serious trouble.

The man's future depends largely on the start he gets, on his first impressions of the spirit and policies of the outfit, and on the habits he personally forms. The smarter he finds the outfit to be, the more pride he will take in belonging to it. The closer attention he is forced to give to the exact performance of little details the sooner he will get the habit of doing things exactly right, and the sooner he will become a helpful member of the team. You can teach new tricks to new men much more easily than you can to old ones, whose well-formed habits you must break before you can implant the new ones. New men are a valuable asset to a live leader, for he can come nearer making them the kind of men he wants.

Take Time to Hear Men.—The leader must have time to listen to his men. He must not be too busy to take up this matter or that which anyone of them may properly bring to him for consideration. It is easy to look important and say "I haven't got time," but each time the leader does it he drives one more nail in the coffin of the team spirit whose life he should really be cherishing. The chances are that he declines the interview because he fears that he does not know the answer. But it is far better to take that chance, make the man feel that he was right in coming to you, and listen to his proposition, even if in the end you have to admit that you do not know. You must "have time," if you want the loyal co-operation of your subordinates. I know an officer who took charge of and straightened out a tangled organization in Paris, and the first thing he did was to tack outside his office door, "I have got time to hear you." It is much harder to get your subordinates to give you the frank timely expressions you need, than it is to avoid being bothered by too many of them.

The busiest leader can and should so arrange his affairs and his policy that every subordinate may know that he may personally see the chief if the occasion warrants. In the midst of all the cares of building the Panama Canal, General Goethals still set aside one morning each week for his men; and among all those thousands of employees every Jamaican and Hottentot had the comfort during the week of knowing he could see the big boss in person on Sunday. His gang boss also knew that the Hottentot could go to see the general, which had a salutary effect on his methods—so in the end not so many actually went after all. Let everyone know that anyone having troubles is to bring them direct to you and the troubles will rapidly diminish, and your time be well repaid in added efficiency.

Talking to Men.—There is much for the leader to consider in the matter of talking to his subordinates. He may not talk enough, or he may talk too much. He must explain to all the object, organization, and policy of any new undertaking. He thus gets better results and saves a lot of talking later. On the other hand a reputation for constantly "sounding off" as they say on the street and especially for preaching, would practically ruin him. A leader should observe the rule not to talk unless he has something worth saying, and that nothing is worth saying unless it is worth being listened to. The habit of talking without demanding the close attention of those supposed to be interested is bad business, and makes trouble and misunderstandings later. Yet many leaders are guilty of it, and expect to repeat their instructions over and over before they are understood. This is partly their fault and partly that of the listeners—but the leaders are responsible for both. In the first place the leader must talk directly to the point. If he has not this ability, he must self train in it, which he may daily do to advantage, both at home and abroad. Let him first think what he has to say, even exactly how he is going to say it—then say it and stop. He will not talk as much, but it will go farther. There are many men so unaccustomed to saying things which really count, that they become embarrassed and confused when they find themselves the object of close attention. Yet the leader must meet this, for holding the close attention of the men is the second and equally important part of his responsibility in talking successfully.

Demanding Attention of All.—When you have anything to say, to one man or to many, get full attention first, and insist on having it while you are talking. We so often see the impossible situation of a leader making remarks which he considers important and the men of his group plainly giving attention to other matters, even engaging in side conversations. When you have to talk to a number of men, call them all about you, in front of you where you can see all their faces, and as near you as practicable so you may speak if possible in a conversational tone. You will have to give this constant attention, for the devil prompts some men always to slip around behind you, while others always take the most distant seats and await the Biblical invitation to come forward. With the men thus before you, you can now make sure that your points tell. If an interruption occurs, immediately stop talking until all can give attention again. If your remarks are for everybody, everybody should hear them, and you are responsible that they do. Make that a rule, stick to it yourself, and you should have no trouble.

Talking to Individuals.—In talking to an individual, try to be so clear and definite that you will not have to repeat, and let it be understood that you expect such attention from him that repetition will not be necessary. Of course, you sometimes have to deal with a mind so untrained in concentration that it cannot take things in and retain them, and you will have to be patient in making yourself understood. The meanest type of mind is that which keeps thinking, while you are talking, of what it is going to say when it gets a chance, and gives your remarks just enough attention to note when a pause comes so it may begin to talk. This kind of man is a curse in any walk of life, and not to be tolerated in business. The art of listening is a valuable one. Everyone should cultivate the habit of concentrated attention to what is being said, if it means anything to him. It is particularly valuable in receiving instructions, and promotion is more likely to come to one of whom his superior can report that "He gives his full attention when you tell him anything, and you never have to repeat."

Example Better Than Talk.—In the line of not talking too much, it is well to remember that American spirit is not aroused by Napoleonic addresses before the fight. If the leader wants keenness and enthusiasm in doing a piece of work, he arouses them rather by example than by words. It is here that actions speak louder than words. You cannot put your men "on their toes" by telling them that you want them there. You must bring the "follow me" spirit to the work, and put so much cheerful energy and vitality into it that your spirit is contagious. By keen direction, happy suggestion, possibly a bit of competition, and most of all by example you put your men on their toes unconsciously, and hold them there till the task is done. Then you may all talk about how good it was, and share the credit.

Proper Subjects for Talk.—On the other hand there are things that you must talk about. Your subordinates must understand your methods and policies, for you want their co-operation in carrying them out. Remember that while you are dealing with intelligent men, they still are not wizards to be able to divine your thoughts. So do not assume a manner of aloofness and superiority, or wrap yourself and the work in an atmosphere of mystery. Explain in frank, homely, man-to-man talks what you are getting at and how you intend to get at it. The atmosphere you want is one of mutual understanding and confidence. You get it, however, not by saying you have it, but by showing that you have it in the way you treat the men.

Another subject for you to explain is the spirit of discipline, its objects and its necessity. Many men have never thought about it, never realized the necessity for obedience and the advantages of cheerful obedience, never heard of teamwork or thought of loyalty to comrades. As occasions arise you can explain these things in a way to make them interesting and very real influences on the men's conduct. In this way you may do much toward building up the group spirit you want. In a given case of violation of rules or dereliction of duty it is often possible to explain to all your men how this offense damages the discipline and reputation of the group, and thus get better results than you would from inflicting punishment.

You should also take occasion from time to time to explain the affairs of the larger organization, to tell the men what it is trying to do and how it is getting on with it. Tell them anything to increase their knowledge of the whole scheme and their interest in its success, for both these add to loyalty and morale. You want the men to have the stimulation that comes from a live interest in the general result, so keep "the cards on the table," and make the men participants with you in the developments of the work. We Americans are all "from Missouri," and need to be shown. But when we once understand what is wanted, we jump in heartily and put it over.

Talks by the Big Chief.—The head of any organization will get far better results if he will make occasions for assembling all his subordinate leaders in a body and talking to them of his policies, his plans, and of how things are going in general. The day has passed when the source of authority is supposed to be clothed in awe-inspiring majesty, whence issue commands for servile obedience. That chief who denies close relationship to his subordinate leaders, who does not take them into his confidence and let them know his plans and how he proposes to carry them out, creates to-day the suspicion either that he is not sure of himself in his job or that his plans and purposes will not bear the light. The big man does not fear close scrutiny and does seek co-operation and suggestion. The successful business head to-day makes himself the captain of a team whose members co-operate intelligently for the team's success. For this purpose he brings them together in a body where shoulder to shoulder they feel their comradeship in a common cause; where they all get the inspiration of their captain's personal leadership, and absorb enthusiasm from his personal presentation of his hopes and plans. All are thus filled with a common purpose and return to their tasks each better fitted and more highly determined to play his part to the best advantage of the larger organization. Thus the most successful American commanders, like General Summerall, took time and pains to go about before a battle and explain in person to assembled groups of their commands the general plan of the coming action and the exact part this particular group was to play. There was no effort at oratorical appeal to passion or patriotism, simply a recognition of the American's ability and willingness to do his full part if he only knows what it is. It never failed to work, and it will work as well in civil affairs.

Mutual Acquaintance Among Subordinates.—Another important thing is to get these subordinates together in such a way that they will get to know each other personally. They are really partners in the same enterprise, and a knowledge of each other's personal equations is quite indispensable to their successful teamwork. Personal acquaintance and even better, friendship, will add tremendously to their efficiency. The various departments of an organization are more or less interdependent, and Smith will give quicker and better attention to the needs of Jones if he knows him and especially if he thinks him a good fellow. Thus in battle the covering fire of the artillery is far more efficient when its commander knows that his friend Bill is out there commanding the infantry. Therefore army control takes pains to bring those two commanders into personal relationship before the battle. So in business the head should make occasions for getting his subordinates together in friendly personal relations. They will be pleased to find that they all speak pretty much the same language, though some may not have thought so before. This closer association removes the affectation of some and the extreme humility of others, and exposes them all for what they really are, fellow members of the same purpose; equally sincere in striving for its success, and equally to be judged on their sole merits of performance. This has been tried out successfully in many industrial enterprises, with happy surprise for the holier-than-thou skeptics. It is sure to be of advantage if the management goes into it with sincerity of purpose.

Supervision of Workers.—It is plain that the leader's job is one of supervision and direction. It is his business to see that each member of the team does his part to the best advantage for the general result, and so to know the individual capacities of his men that he can assign the right man to each task. This, as in fact do all the other duties of leadership, requires him to be continually watching the individual performances of his men, commending, correcting, and co-ordinating their efforts. This forbids his actually taking part in the work himself, not because to do so would be beneath his dignity, but because to become involved in doing the actual work would distract his attention from the duties of supervision, and many things would be going on without his knowledge. If the boss shows himself anxious to use the pick or shovel, there is always some man willing to lend him the tools and watch his efforts with assumed interest. I recall the case of an officer charged with building a piece of government road in the mountains of California. No one could have been more faithful, he set a wonderful example of energy, but expended it all on personally working the road plow. Meantime the contractor was putting in blind culverts and otherwise so slighting his work that most of the road slid down the mountain that winter.

There are always some members of the team who need to be held up to their work. For the leader to allow them to "get away with it" in shirking their parts of the task, would naturally cause chagrin to the others. The leader is responsible for the spirit of teamwork, which requires that each man may feel sure that all the others are equally faithful in doing each his part, and he must therefore see to it that they are. Of course conditions may arise, as when the task is unfamiliar or peculiarly difficult, when the leader may jump in for a minute to show the men how or to set the pace—but he should never put himself in as an actual performer of the work.

Choosing Men for Tasks.—The duties of a leader constantly require him to be picking some man to do this task or that. In the minds of his men this is always a test of both his ability and fairness—and he wants to prove that he has both. He does this by picking the right man for the job—the right man not alone because he is the best qualified but because everything considered it is best for the team that he be chosen. This requires that the leader know their capacities and their spirit, and that he shall have kept general track of their conduct and work. Each group generally has certain cheerful, willing souls who seem almost to invite the task. The leader who is not sure his orders will be obeyed will always pick one of these men to avoid the possibility of disobedience. The shiftless leader will pick one because it is the easiest course. Both would be wrong. They would thus fail in fairness, and, by putting extra work on the more willing, put a premium on being mean spirited and so injure the group discipline. They would do better to choose the lazy or sullen ones for the extra work, thus putting the premium on cheerfulness, and showing that they had a sense of justice and an ability to run the team.

Cheerfulness, a Responsibility.—It is plain that men cannot do good work in an atmosphere of gloom. In fact in happy Burma, "The Land of Mandalay," the people refuse to work at all unless things are cheerful; and the best labor boss there is he who can crack the most jokes and keep his men chuckling. That has its application even in handling stoical Anglo-Saxons—"Angry Saxons" as one of our colored soldiers called it. Elastic muscles, alert minds, superior energy and endurance come from cheerful spirits and happy hearts. That group is unfortunate which does not contain at least one indomitable soul (generally Irish) who will joke and jolly the crowd along through hardships and to far greater accomplishment. You know why the bo's'n always leads the sailors in a swinging song or in cheering as they haul the heavy sheet. He puts this spirit into them for the greater exertions they will make. One group of marching soldiers will sing and joke themselves happily into camp, when other grim and silent ones will barely drag themselves in for their fatigue. Yet true as all this is there are leaders who sacrifice it by such surly, inconsiderate, dominating control as to keep their men sore and heavy-hearted, discouraged with themselves and the work, and indifferent to results. These leaders create an atmosphere of impenetrable gloom, and then expect the impossible in demanding good work. Cheerfulness and hopefulness must always emanate from the leader—no possible hardship or obstacle may justify his failing to radiate these helpful qualities. They shine out from a character too strong and resourceful to be overcome by any obstacle, too confident of the excellence of his men and their ability to overcome it to be other than cheerful in meeting it. You will find occasions when it will test your own courage, physical fitness and vitality to do this; for you must give of your spirit to put spirit into the men, and by the sheer force of your cheerful dominance over the adversity, lead them through to a happy conclusion.

Growling Permissible.—As to growling and "kicking agin the government," it all depends on who does it and how he does it. A certain amount of thus letting off steam seems good for the soul of man—and so far should not be denied to your men. You may ignore it, make light of it, and even sometimes get a good laugh out of it and so clear the atmosphere. It is doubtful if you may ever indulge yourself in it in the hearing of the men. And if it smack of real disloyalty, then you may not tolerate it, for it will undermine their morale, and injure that determined spirit of putting things over at all costs. You must know your men so you may use good sense about taking their vaporings too seriously, and still prevent anything like real disloyalty. As members of a group men lose much of their individual responsibility and become more or less like children. You consider this in judging their real feelings as they talk together.

I recall the case of a French lieutenant whose platoon, just out of a severe fight, was ordered to go back into it in fifteen minutes. He sat complacently smoking while his resting men audibly growled about it and told each other the dire things that would take place before they would go in again. He knew his men and let them growl it out, and when the time was up not one of them hesitated to obey his order to fall in and swing back into the fight. In his place a hot-headed youngster could easily have started a mutiny. And equally true, a few vicious disloyal spirits among those men would have made it wrong for the lieutenant to have allowed them to growl and threaten. Such situations require a level head and a knowledge of the true spirit of the men—and are interesting tests of one's qualifications as a leader.

Loyalty by Example.—One of the basic things the leader has to develop in his men is loyalty—and loyalty not alone to him and to the team, but to the larger organization. To this end he may do much by the power of his own example in cheerfully carrying out the instructions from higher authority. If you are told to do some disagreeable thing, do not try for cheap popularity by saying to the men "so and so has ordered this, and we have got to do it." Accept the full responsibility of your subordinate office, and take your men loyally and unquestioningly through the work. Your team is a member of the larger team, and should play its part therein as loyally and keenly as you want the individuals to play their parts in your team. You should try to arouse their pride in having their team do its part well, their interest in the success of the larger team, and their belief in the ability of its leader.

When to Question Instructions.—Any questioning before your men of the wisdom of instructions from higher authority, any grumbling from you about their unfairness, would injure this fine spirit of loyalty and of co-operation in the larger team. It would show you up as unworthy of your responsible position in the organization and thus hurt the men's respect for you. If you have an honest question of the fairness or wisdom of the instructions go to higher authority first and fight it out yourself in the interests of your men, without any question of loyalty. That is part of your business both as guardian of your men's welfare, and as a loyal member of the larger organization. It is a delicate matter, involving your own sense of subordination, and your judgment as to what is really best. It can never be done in a spirit of brag or bluster, but only quietly in a spirit of loyalty, true subordination, and desire for the best interests of the whole. Occasions for such action are happily very rare—if your larger organization is in reasonably good hands.

Receiving Instructions.—When you receive instructions from higher authority be sure you get their true meaning before you begin to act. The subordinate with the quick, cheerful, "Yes, sir," and away to the task, leaves a pleasant sensation until we discover that he has bungled the job because he did not half understand what we wanted. Take time to understand, but do not quibble about little details nor fuss about the way in which the instructions are expressed. You are expected to use your own sense and ingenuity in executing these instructions, so be sure that you have grasped their spirit and purpose, and then go to their execution with an enthusiasm and loyalty which will carry the same spirit to the men.

How to Encourage Suggestions.—We have spoken of the value of encouraging subordinates to make suggestions for improvements, etc., of how they may add to the general efficiency, and how they certainly increase the man's pleasure in his work and thus his personal efficiency through giving play to his constructive instincts and his natural desire for self-expression. The point now is how these suggestions are to be encouraged. Certainly not by superficial methods. For example, an organization which had accepted the idea of the value of suggestions from the men tried simply to buy them off-hand by inaugurating a bi-weekly prize rewarding contest in giving suggestions. It was their notion that for a prize of five dollars some employee was going to tell them how to make two blades of grass grow in place of one. This method missed all appreciation of the fundamental principles involved and of course ended in a farce.

These suggestions we want spring naturally from the interest and partnership you have made the men feel in the organization; from the ideas for improvement which they then evolve as they carry on at their work, thinking how it might be done better or how the team might get bigger results. The only encouragement they need is first this atmosphere of partnership; and second, a boss who has sense enough to give their suggestions fair consideration. The leader who has not the time or patience to listen to suggestions can never get the best efforts of the men, and is doing the enterprise real damage.

Every man should feel sure that his suggestion will be fairly considered and, if his idea has real value, that he will be given full credit all the way up the line to the big chief. And the way to do this is to take the man in person to higher authority and have him personally explain his idea. This makes very real to him and his fellows his importance as a member of the team. If in a big business concern the man were actually called before the board of directors to explain the details of some improvement he had thought out, nothing could do more to establish a sense of partnership in the undertaking. Appreciating their value, you can make as much as you will of every opportunity thus to increase the men's interest in the work and their sense of co-operation.

Advantage of Ambition.—Ambition for advancement is another of the human instincts to be considered by the leader both in connection with his own career and in handling his subordinates. Every one should feel that he may progress as far as his actual ability warrants—and he certainly may, for good leaders are still rare and to be desired and the truest saying of life is that there is plenty of room at the top. But subordinates must realize that selfish ambition cannot win, that it is only by playing for the team and working for the best interests of the whole outfit that one can win his superior's recommendation for promotion. The unselfish ambition of an individual thus improves both his chances for promotion and the work of the team. Industrial progress and individual promotion both spring from individual effort to increase output or to decrease expenditure of energy. It is generally true throughout industry that "the great stream of intelligence, inventiveness and adaptation flows from the bottom up and not from the top down, and that the top is continually being recruited from the bottom," as employers daily graduate from the classes of laborers. This latter is so common a fact that it is frequently overlooked. It is so wholesome a fact, so characteristic of our democratic institutions and so helpful a thought in times of unrest and discouragement, that it should be emphasized and frequently brought to mind.

Never Deny an Earned Promotion.—An earned promotion should never be denied a man when his opportunity does come, simply because his superior feels that he cannot spare this man's services. As unjust as that is, it is often done, and always to the cost of the group spirit. In reality there are very few men in life so important to their positions that they cannot be replaced—and often to surprising advantage. No matter what pains are necessary to train the man's replacement, it is far better to let him go than it is to keep him and thus lower the morale of all by showing that your selfishness or laziness is going to stand in the way of a deserved promotion. This situation is often avoided by the excellent rule that each man in the organization shall always have at least one other who has qualified to take his place.

How to Win Promotion.—It is not practical here to detail the ways to win advancement,—magazine articles are always giving happy suggestions in this field,—but these are general hints: A man does not win by bragging about his abilities, or by anything that smacks of "freshness." The way to get the superior's attention to your merit is to make the merit conspicuous. You may be sure that management is always seeking the man who can produce, and that superior results will soon catch its eye. So go at each task cheerfully, and above all make it clear that your one big interest is the success of the outfit. One thing that so often denies promotion to a keen man is the statement of his superior that "Jones is keen all right, but he thinks nine times for Jones and once for the company." This is too bad, when the same amount of work and ability unselfishly directed might so easily have carried him ahead.

Value of True Merit.—But the saddest thing is to see a man get sore at heart and quit trying because he thinks that his merit is not recognized. Make the merit big enough, and it is sure to win. Someone will find it out, and buy your superior services. Ralph Parlette well explains this in his so human pamphlet, "It's Up to You," in which he illustrates human experience by what happens when you shake a jar containing a mixture of beans and nuts: The little beans rattle down, the smallest to the very bottom, and the larger nuts shake up, the largest to the very top. Thus we find our place and hold it in life's struggle according not to our wishes but to our actual size. Friendly influence may elevate the little bean to high position, but the jolts of experience soon rattle him back to the place he fits without rattling; adversity may have crowded the big nut to the bottom, but the same jolts will see him shaking up again to the top. It is not luck that takes one up or down, it is size—and the answer to ambition is grow bigger. There is so much true human nature in them that a few sentences are quoted: "Everybody wants to go up. But everybody is not willing to pay the price by first growing bigger so that he can shake higher. So many want to be boosted up. Everybody is doing one of three things: holding his place, rattling down, or shaking up. Whatever place we shake into, if we want to hold our place, we must hold our size. We must fill the place, for if we shrink up smaller than the place, we rattle. Nobody can stay long where he rattles. And you observe that in order to hold our size, we must keep on growing enough to supply the loss by evaporation. Evaporation is going on all the time, in lives as well as in liquids. A plum becomes a prune by evaporation. I wish human plums became as valuable when they become prunes."

Joy of Accomplishment.—Akin to man's natural delight in doing things well is the motive for accomplishment, and the pleasure he gets from seeing a thing completed. We all know people who are more or less ruled by this passion, who "get their teeth set" as we say in doing something, and can be interested in nothing else until they have done it. One of America's most successful business men recently replied when asked what he considered the best thing in life, "The satisfaction that comes from accomplishment." This may be enjoyed by every individual no matter in what walk of life, for it means the satisfaction to be had from the accomplishment of the tasks in our own daily life and work. The housewife has it from the contemplation of her glistening shelf of preserves, the farmer gets it from his crops and the schoolboy from his work and play—when he completes a set task, or first swims across the river.

The leader may often appeal to this instinct to increase accomplishment. It helps explain the advantage of letting the men know what they are doing as they work, and especially of letting them know from time to time what they have accomplished toward the general result. This is the reason that the posting of progress charts does so much to arouse interest in factory and shop work, and is another reason for including the workman in a knowledge of the general progress of the whole organization.

Everyone is supposed to have some underlying purpose, some goal in life—as Bishop Brent says, "even the loafer may be supposed to have the purpose to live as easily as possible." But we do not have to await the satisfaction of having attained this distant goal. We get more satisfaction en route from the successful completion of each of the small steps that bring us a bit nearer the goal, and count that day good in which we have taken one. So the leader may encourage the faith and assure the continued efforts of his subordinates by showing them from time to time where they have made successful progress toward the desired end.

Indifference and Discouragement are the natural enemies of this instinct for accomplishment, which may invade our minds and prevent the operation of this instinct. They come from failure, or what seems like failure when long-continued efforts show no results; and from getting stale through the constant repetition of the same task, without variety or the stimulation of new ideas. The leader must combat these enemies by introducing other thoughts to replace them. He must encourage the discouraged and interest those who are bored. He may often stimulate interest in even monotonous work by commenting on the perfection of its execution and the amount of its daily output. It is possible to relieve the monotony of long hours at the same tedious machine by letting two men alternate tasks, if it can be done without offending the instinct of proprietorship which makes a man resent having another touch "his machine." Here is the leader's chance for ingenuity—he knows what is needed, it is up to him to supply it. Learning other jobs in fitting himself for promotion, brief opportunities for supervising the work of others, getting better acquainted with the general work of the whole outfit—are possible suggestions.

Justice and Fairness.—Justice and fairness are generally considered the first essentials for handling men successfully, and yet how often we see leaders who give them no consideration. Human nature demands fair play, and gives its best response only in that atmosphere. No matter what our religious beliefs, we have to recognize that our best advances in civilization and community living have been based on the philosophy of life taught by the Son of the carpenter of Nazareth; a philosophy which recognizes how the natural impulses of mankind react to fair dealing and decent treatment.

The eminently successful Endicott Johnson corporation is run on the basic proposition that ninety per cent of mankind are good and will make good when confidence is shown in their good intentions. The working rules for their organization are accordingly made to fit the big majority rather than the ten per cent minority. And this policy works—though it be revolutionary. Rules are generally made to fit the few weaklings who are not man enough to play fair in the team—and the big majority have accordingly had to be cramped in their freedom because of the meanness or ignorance of these few. This has been a common fault in army administration. One ignorant trooper injures a horse by running him on a hard road, and an indifferent commander at once forbids all soldiers ever to ride at a gallop. One man is disorderly in town, and all men are forbidden to visit the town. This may be an easy way to avoid trouble, but it is distinctly arbitrary and unjust—and indicative of unfitness for leadership.

This same spirit of indifference to the well being of the good men in making efforts to control the shiftless is to be found in every business and walk of life. The point is that better results may often be obtained by showing confidence in good intentions, allowing more freedom of action, and controlling the meaner spirits through education, elimination, and the spirit and example of their comrades. The leader should remember that fitness for command is proven by ability to arouse a spirit that makes the men want to give one hundred per cent results. It is not shown by control through arbitrary methods—any "dub" can make rules which practically reduce his men to a state of serfdom.

This is but one phase of showing fairness. The leader will have all kinds of situations to meet in which he must show it. It is impossible to anticipate them with rules, but you may meet them successfully by a continuing determination not to act in passion or impatience, and to judge each case fairly with thought for the effect on all. In doing this, you will arrive at the best solutions by giving full consideration to the Golden Rule about "doing unto others"; and by remembering that your final decisions must have for their object the development of the individual's character and the group's discipline.

Surplus Spirit.—There are now and then men of so much virility of body and spirit that they are unable to expend enough of it on the ordinary day's affairs—and the surplus often gets them into trouble. A good leader tries to accommodate them with enough hard work and play to keep them comfortably steady, while the poor leader, blind to human nature, punishes their derelictions without effort at remedy, and gives them a reputation for deviltry, and even for worthlessness. Yet these very men were capable of tremendous exertions for good had they been properly directed. War always astonishes the community by bringing such cases of reputed worthlessness to the fore in often brilliant performance. These men found in the demands of war enough to engage all their surplus energies; and because of this very store of surplus energy they were able to outdo their fellows. Giving men work to "keep them out of trouble" is as wise a saying as it is homely—and is well worth remembering when you find some man looking for trouble. It is a well known trick in the army to call up some wild lad who is always getting into mischief, arouse his pride by finding some element of his personality to praise and rely on, and then put him in charge of a squad of men or even appoint him a corporal. Nine times out of ten he will react to this responsibility by giving unusual service. The difficulty is to find opportunity so to promote a seemingly bad man as not to establish an unfortunate standard of performance for winning promotion. Such are the interesting things in leadership.

Self-Respect Essential.—The leader has to guard his own self-respect and that of his men. Self-respect is absolutely essential to having self-confidence, and self-confidence is absolutely essential for either leader or man to play his part successfully. If work is to progress efficiently each will be constantly called upon to make decisions as to what is best to be done, and to act upon them definitely. Each must therefore have enough self-confidence to do this without running to someone to ask what to do in an effort "to pass the buck" of responsibility.

In the Leader.—First, then, the leader must maintain his own self-respect—in his daily contact with life and men, and in the conduct of his office. His relations with his superiors and co-ordinate leaders; his knowledge of his job; his self-control of temper, frivolity, pettiness, etc.; his methods of directing work and handling men—all these are to influence and to evidence his self-respect, and are thus matters for his consideration. He must realize that he stands before his men as a better man on the job than any one of them—and in this light he wants to be an inspiration, not an apology. It need not lessen his self-respect if he lacks either physical stature, or age and long experience—though both these may be helpful. Superior knowledge and moral qualities determine one's fitness for leadership, and enlist the men's loyalty and obedience. How often in the war, especially in the French army, we saw grizzled old fighters loyally following youngsters just out of the training schools because they had confidence in the knowledge these boys had gained. In our draft army training it was not uncommon to see a squad of big Northwestern lumbermen following a keen-eyed little corporal as though they thought him a second Napoleon. It is not the size or age of the body but what emanates from the soul within it, that makes the leader of men.

In the Men.—And second, the leader has to cherish the self-respect of his individual subordinates, be they leaders of smaller groups or the men themselves. He needs their intelligent co-operation and must often depend on their individual judgment and their willingness to carry on without specific instructions. And unless these men believe in themselves and feel that he believes in them they will be afraid to decide what to do, and afraid to do it, for fear of failure and its consequences. So by showing confidence in them, by never ignoring them as individuals, by encouraging and commending good as well as correcting error, the leader develops the self-respect of his men as a sure basis for the self-confidence and strength of character they need in order to meet his requirements.

Courage, Fear and Self-Control.—In many fields of activity a leader is likely to be called upon to meet emergencies requiring a cool head and a stout heart. Some men shrink from assuming the responsibilities of leadership in these fields lest they lack the nerve and show fear when the test comes. It should be helpful to them to understand something about these emotions, why they come and how they are controlled. We may assume that everyone feels fear, for the self-protective instincts are perhaps the strongest, and fear is Nature's instinctive warning of the imminence of danger or of consequences which threaten our well being. The purpose of this warning is to make us take steps to meet the danger, and it thus leads us to action. Then we forget the fear, as it generally disappears when we have gotten into action. A developed mind and character, bodily health, and a determined purpose, all combine to enable one to avoid showing fear or letting it improperly influence his actions. No one would willingly follow a leader who lacked a courageous character, nor could a leader hope to carry on successfully if he was self-conscious of his own moral weakness. So we say that both the leader and his men must have confidence that the leader possesses courage and force of character, so he will be self-controlled and capable of calm reasonable judgments in the crises of his work. The leader establishes this mutual confidence by the self-control and good judgment with which he meets the smaller emergencies of daily administration. If he becomes excited over little things, bellows and shouts because something goes wrong, he is not only failing in self-control, but is making his men question his force of character and his ability to meet a real situation. A new leader should therefore make a point of training himself in self-control under trying circumstances; he should even seek situations which try his nerve and judgment, rather than avoid trouble as the weak man does by quietly slipping around it.

Control by Power of Example.—It is the leader's function to be calm in emergency; unruffled, even sardonic if he has it in him, in the face of hardships; unperturbed and even casual in the face of danger. The psychological power of mental suggestion is now well understood, and accepted as one of the sure means for controlling men. If you are a real leader your men will take their mental attitude from what yours appears to be. In danger they will watch your movements, even facial expression, for reassurance. It is then that you drop some casual remark, "borrow the makings" and roll a cigarette, do any simple thing naturally, showing that you are at ease and confident in these abnormal circumstances; and your men regain their wavering confidence, feeling that you are not afraid. So, in time of unavoidable hardship, you must avoid showing annoyance or impatience. Your sardonic acceptance of necessary conditions will unconsciously lead to theirs, and save the nerve strain and damage to esprit which result from grumbling, and bucking, and cursing out everything in general. And in emergency you must show perfect self-control. Remember that your conduct will determine that of your men. If you are excited, they will be more so. The emergency will call for perhaps the most accurate, determined, self-controlled work, and if your heart has jumped into your throat and made your voice quaver and your ideas confused (and this will happen to the best of men), nothing but disaster can result if you communicate this to your men. You will gain time and success in the end, if you take time now to swallow your heart, and regain perfect self-control, before you say one word to betray your perturbation. Then with calm self-assured demeanor give your directions as becomes a real leader. Directions so given are a great comfort to the men, and assure steady intelligent execution. To begin shouting excited ill-advised instructions in an emergency is one of the most characteristic failures of inexperienced leadership. Try to train yourself so that you will be one of the exceptions, by acquiring the habit in any given situation of being first sure of yourself, and then calmly giving directions to your men.

You have opportunity to train for this in the ordinary affairs of life, and may thus acquire a facility for knowing what to do in an emergency and doing it with calm assurance. In any public accident or emergency there is generally some "admirable bystander" whose mind has acted instantaneously, who has jumped in and done the right thing. Question your mental processes to learn why you were not the man, and try to qualify next time.

Decision.—It is characteristic of a successful leader to make good decisions that do not have to be changed and to stick to them, and it is characteristic of the valor of ignorance to make quick ones that are generally wrong. Of course quick decisions are preferable if they are right. They are necessary in the army, though not so as a rule in civil life, where the leader may generally take time to weigh his subject before deciding. In many cases it is even best that he first take time to consult his subordinates. But in every case he must come ultimately to a definite decision as to his course, announce it clearly as his decision, and have the force of character to carry it out without showing hesitation or vacillation. The impossible man as a leader is one who cannot make up his mind; the next better is he who is influenced by the last man who talks to him; and still too poor for his job is he who having come to a decision allows himself to waver and change in the face of each new thought or development which the future presents. If you have any of those tendencies, eliminate them by watching yourself in making decisions. By practice in the small affairs of your daily life cultivate your power to grasp the essential facts of a situation, to arrive promptly at a decision, and to stick to it in spite of unessentials which may come along to make a change seem better.

Value of Thinking.—The more you think about the details and possibilities of your job, the more you keep your mind on your work, the better you will be prepared to make good decisions quickly. "Because I am always thinking about it" was Napoleon's answer when asked how he was able to make such prompt accurate decisions in the art of war. We teach the advance guard commander as he marches to be thinking constantly what he will do if the enemy appears in any of the various situations he meets, and thus to keep his mind prepared to make his decision quickly. So in civil affairs that leader will do best who is a thinker, who thinks of the business in hand and is mentally prepared to meet its demands for direction. It is the unexpected thing catching a man off his guard which causes his uncertainty and indecision. It is the element of surprise in an ambuscade which makes it so advantageous.

A leader should be found so resourceful and sure of his judgment that he can successfully meet these occasions for quick decision. He can get a reputation for this ability by carefully planning ahead of time for certain tasks and thus being able to make quick decisions during their execution. But to maintain this reputation he must acquire the habit of giving thought to his work, not only in anticipation of certain jobs, but continually as the work progresses. The mind which does not have to be recalled from a fishing excursion will grasp the essential details of a new situation more quickly and accurately than one that was far afield when the unexpected happened.

Personal Pride.—Pride is another quality of human nature that is very useful to the leader in controlling his men. Just as he guards each individual's self-respect and cherishes it as the necessary basis of that manly and intelligent response he expects them to give to the demands of service, so he builds up their personal pride—in themselves, in what they are doing, and in the organization. This pride is largely established through seeking out cases of superior accomplishment and commending them. Once fairly developed, pride becomes an influence to which the leader may appeal successfully for better conduct, better results, and for patient endurance of hardship. He will not get it in a day, any more than he will get discipline or morale. It comes from the performance of good work that has been recognized as such, and rests in a justified feeling of ability and worth. So do not expect to get it by simply announcing to your men that they are the finest. Bring them to an honest belief in their worth through your recognition of it by praising their good work, and by making suitable remarks to outsiders which some of them may overhear. Find something in which they excel, and brag about it moderately. If possible make an occasion to show their ability publicly. If your outfit can once get a reputation for excellence, it matters little for what, it will become more excellent—good men will seek to join it, its personnel will thus improve, and it will continue to grow better.

Pride in Organization.—Pride in the organization is a tremendous influence for keeping men up to the mark. It makes them keep each other up—and you begin to reap the rewards for having established it. You see them developing the spirit of discipline you have hoped for, and the co-operation in that teamwork which means so much. Every leader should always strive to arouse this pride. While we may not prescribe the exact steps for arousing it to fit the various conditions, your ingenuity will suggest the ways if you will make practical use of your knowledge that men take delight in doing things well and in having their excellence recognized; that the excellence of the individual should be reflected in the reputation of the team; that out of the bodily and mental development which comes from consciously doing things well, grow self-respect, laudable pride, and an assurance which strengthens the individual character; and that these are the elements of the organization spirit which you should seek to establish in your men.

Competition affecting Individuals.—The instinct of rivalry or competition, which makes a man strive to excel among his companions, is another of the leader's instruments. This is so powerful a motive that it has to be used with judgment. Once launched in a real contest most men are likely to sacrifice anything to win. I remember discovering one of my young soldiers cheating in calling the hits at the target he was marking. He was perfectly frank in admitting to me that he had called many hits improperly, and when I asked him why, he ingenuously replied, "I heard the captain say we must beat H troop, and I was trying to help." He was so honest that I had to admit that the fault was half mine, and did not punish him. As a general rule what we want from our men is a high average of performance which may be maintained without any impairment of their powers, so you must judge the case fairly before introducing the spirit of contest. You must not be using it eternally to keep the men on the jump, but only on occasions that are worth while. There are moderate things for which it may be used regularly to stimulate effort, as in making the best record for punctuality, etc. But you would not want a man to be driving himself constantly to capacity—and so you use judgment to guard against individual injury as well as to keep the spirit fresh for use on real occasions.

Team Competitions.—Competition between teams engaged in like undertakings will not only increase results, but its great advantage is that it brings the individuals of each team into close co-operation in order that their team may win, and thus gives them a better comprehension of the spirit of teamwork. As every leader is constantly trying to develop his teamwork, these rivalries are very common. But where your team competes with another in the same organization it must play fair as a member of the larger team. The same rules of co-operation and loyalty apply to the conduct of your team here, as to the individual members of your own team at home. You may not do anything for your team here which injures the other team, or lowers it in the estimation of your men. Building up peacetime infantry spirit by slurs at the artillery, and artillery spirit at the expense of the infantry, was found to have been expensive business when war linked them together in the same team and each found himself dependent for success in battle on the co-operation of the other. "Sure he's good, but we can beat him," is the true mental attitude for contests within an organization.

Care of Your Men.—Looking after your men's bodily welfare is an interesting and important part of the leader's direct responsibilities. I remember during the construction of one of the war training cantonments asking a bright-looking mechanic, who was pretending to be working at a steam heater at eleven o'clock one night, if he thought he could do good work in such long hours as he was keeping. "Certainly not, but I can make good pay." He was a decent-looking American, so I asked him how he justified such a spirit in this time of government need. "Because I am fed like a dog and lodged like one." It was true—and the ignorance or worthlessness of that contractor was thus squandering thousands of government dollars a day through needlessly disaffected labor, and delaying the completion of necessary accommodations for the soldiers. Such cases are common in every activity.

Each job presents its own problems to be solved according to the conditions. The big thing here is to realize that the welfare of his men is an important consideration for the leader who expects them to do good work. It would seem unnecessary to state that a man's mental and physical fitness have so much to do with his accomplishment, and yet so many bosses seem absolutely indifferent to a man's condition so long as he is able to drag himself to his work. In reality it should always be the first cause to investigate whenever any man shows a let down in his performance. A man cannot keep up good work on an empty or sour stomach, nor give continued careful attention to details if some trouble is constantly obtruding on his field of consciousness. This latter fact has cost many a good man an accident at his machine, and the intelligent foreman, knowing that sore feelings, grievances and mental troubles interfere with good performance, does all he can to eliminate them. In not keeping your workers in the best possible physical and mental condition, you are throwing away all kinds of potential energy—running a six-cylinder engine that is skipping many of the cylinders. How quickly the superintendent would get after a foreman who did that with a machine, yet possibly never notice that many of the human machines were as badly out of kilter.

In this question of looking after the welfare of your men there are two opposing considerations to be kept in mind. You are to build up in them self-respect, initiative, individual responsibility and self-determination, and therefore must not patronize them, coddle them, or treat them like children. On the other hand you have to recognize the characteristic of an individual in a group—he immediately shifts individual responsibility to the shoulders of the group. That is the reason why every man of a company in camp will continue to wade through the mud to reach a spring where five minutes' work by anyone would arrange stepping stones, or to dip water with difficulty from a shallow stream where a few minutes' work would dam it into a comfortable pool—and no one of them would do either of these helpful things until some leader came along and ordered it. This need for oversight is true in every activity, and the leader has to be on the lookout to see that his men do the things that are necessary for their comfort and welfare.

This is particularly necessary in out-of-doors jobs, as in engineering and construction. The man may be too tired or inexperienced to see to it himself that he has a comfortable place to sleep. The boss knows that the man's work of the morrow will depend on the restfulness of his sleep, and therefore requires him to make himself reasonably comfortable. Above all he gives constant attention to how his men are fed, especially at their breakfasts. He sees that they have the best available shelter and comfort for the noon rest. All this is simply part of his job of grooming and stoking the human engine which he is using on the work. To keep the men fit and to work them hard is his job—and the beauty of it is that the more thoroughly he does both the happier and more contented they are. For the hard play of tough muscles and the stern conquest of serious obstacles both bring pleasurable satisfaction to natural instincts in a healthy man; instincts designed to make him a cheerful and determined actor in the struggle to conquer nature and advance civilization. These instincts of pugnacity and of joy in a fight, of winning out no matter what the obstacle, are readily responsive to appeal, and most helpful to the leader who knows how to use them.

In some industries the physical and mental condition of the workers is made the care of a welfare department, which provides proper environment, sanitation, athletics, hospitals, kitchens, libraries, saving banks, country clubs, etc.—a background for successful management. But there still remains the necessity for the personal touch of the foreman in direct contact with the men. He understands all the facilities offered, their advantages, and what management intends them to do for the men—and he is there in close touch to see that the men get the right ideas and make the most of them. But beyond all that, incapable of general control, and properly in the sole hands of the immediate leader for the sake of their effect on his leadership, there are the thousand little homely things of the daily work and play in which the thoughtful foreman makes his men feel his interest in their welfare, success and happy living.

Creating and Maintaining Discipline.—The inexperienced man is likely to have more apprehension about his ability to maintain discipline than about anything else in connection with taking charge of a group of men. He wonders if they will obey him and is not sure of himself as a disciplinarian. It will help him if he gets a fair idea of how discipline is maintained. It is often said that discipline is the result of the leader's administration of rewards and punishments. This is too narrow a view. In reality the spirit we call discipline is the result of the leader's whole conduct of himself and his job, of his personality and methods, of everything he does for his men, to his men and with them. Among all these, rewards and punishments play an important part. But rewards have a great deal more to do with building up discipline than have punishments, and are given much more easily and pleasantly. In fact if the leader has established at all the spirit of leadership herein pictured he will have but rare occasions to use any punishments. This has been proven over and over again, and with all kinds of men. In every phase of human endeavor, fair treatment and the encouragement that comes from judicious appreciation of good intentions and from praise of good work soon establish a spirit which makes punishment quite out of place and unnecessary.

A concrete example of the highest type of rigid discipline based on purely democratic principles is that of a highly trained college football team. Here we have individual manliness and initiative highly developed, together with a sense of subordination, teamwork, and the requirements of leadership and discipline. Here we find instant, unquestioning, cheerful obedience to commands given in action, and an esprit and morale which make the team cheerfully tackle the toughest opponents. Where any leader may need in his group a discipline of quick implicit obedience to orders, let him consider the spirit of the football team as his model, rather than the spirit of whipped obedience which was found in the galleys of old.

Discipline from Rewards.—Probably the most effective reward is the slight word of recognition of individual effort or excellence, sometimes even a nod and smile are enough. The main thing is to show this man and the others that you see and appreciate what he is doing. So as you supervise the work of your men be on the lookout for chances to commend individuals. Do not overdo it, fulsome or unmerited praise does more harm than good. Keep it what nature intended it to be, a reward for excellence which every man likes to receive, and for which he naturally strives so long as he feels sure that he will get it when merited.

One leader will go about inspecting his workers and look only for faults and speak only to criticize something as wrong; while another will seek good work to commend it, and correct mistakes in a spirit of showing how it could be done better. The first may by tremendous effort hold his men to a certain level of accomplishment, the second will soon have them all going in a spirit of emulation. Smith does not see why he cannot do as well as Jones next door, whom he heard the boss complimenting. Appreciation of a man's excellence appeals directly to one of his strong instincts, and never fails to inspire continued effort to win further praise.

Influence of Good and Poor Men.—There are always to be found in every group certain men of stronger more cheerful characters than the average, men who make the best of things, who jolly the rest along through the hard tasks, and whose influence is thus a great asset. The leader must note these men, and do what he can to increase their influence with the others. If he has to show favor to some individual, he should pick one of these men to receive it, thus letting everyone see his appreciation of their cheerful willing spirit.

On the other hand there are often certain men of the meaner sort. They do the growling and grumbling for all, and their influence is in the direction of lowering the morale of the group. You must know these individuals also, and do what you can to convert them to cheerfulness and a will to win. Where a man's influence is bad, be sure you do nothing to strengthen his standing with his fellows. If someone must draw a disagreeable task, it is often well to let such a man have it as a reward for being a "kicker." A leader who did not think of this and made the mistake of handing the reward to such a one would hurt the morale of the whole by making the men feel that virtue was not recognized, and that their leader lacked good judgment.

You must therefore know your men and watch their work and their spirit, so you may reward the deserving, and never appear to support the undeserving. In time of hardship or strain, when the morale of your outfit is being tested, it will win through or break down depending largely on which type of men have the stronger influence. It will be well for you then if you have strengthened the hands of the strong cheerful ones and made them subordinate leaders of sentiment and opinion in your group.

Leader a Maker of Men.—The finest thing about being a leader is the chance it gives to build up the characters of the men—to take hold of the personal equation of a weaker brother, discover his difficulties and weaknesses and also his strong points and possibilities, and so to handle him as to make a man of him. This not only brings you great satisfaction and the personal reward of feeling that you are making the world some better by living in it, but it brings actual material gain to the community and to your work, in that you have made this man able to give more as a citizen and as a laborer. Many an army officer has found his one relief from the tedium of peacetime duties in thus taking a keen interest in the personalities of his men, and in making it his business to build up a reasonably strong useful character out of what may have appeared an almost hopeless wreck of humanity.

Every leader is constantly affecting the future of his men, consciously or unconsciously. His power to reward and punish makes this necessarily true. His decisions and acts of authority each tend to build up or to discourage the character of the man affected. This is what makes us shudder to see this power of leadership in the hands of ignorant, unscrupulous, brutal or even thoughtless men. The good leader realizes how by strict fairness, encouragement and guidance he may develop the powers of his men; and how by continued injustice he may break a man's spirit, destroy his manliness, and leave him a worse member of the community than he found him. He accepts this responsibility, and takes pleasure in trying to use his power for the better good of the men, the community, and the work in hand. He is in some measure a "maker of men," and with that thought in the back of his mind he studies his problem in a desire to act to the best advantage.

Discipline by Punishment.—"Punishment" is a severe word to use in connection with ordinary daily affairs, but there is no milder one whose meaning quite fits the case. It has little place in our ideas of handling ordinary situations. In fact it stands only in the background as a last resort. Thus in community life the penalties of the law stand in the background as matters of no personal interest to law-abiding citizens. Yet the existence of those penalties and of the means for administering them are essential elements of community organization, and they must be intelligently understood by the officers responsible for community welfare. In this respect the leader has the same responsibility, and it is necessary to discuss frankly how he shall use this power of punishment, in order that he may meet this responsibility successfully.

Punishment is intended to be a corrective. It must be administered for the sole good of the man and of the group, and never in a spirit of vindictiveness or revenge. By punishment we mean all the corrective measures commonly used as means of disciplining men—reprimand, docking pay, deprivation of privilege, suspension, discharge, etc. The severity of any given punishment is largely a matter of the spirit and infrequency with which it is given. It is in every case a matter of prayerful consideration for the leader, until long experience has made him quite infallible in his judgment.

It is possible to fix a set standard of punishments, such a punishment to follow such an offense, but this standard cannot be followed arbitrarily. That would ignore the big human factor and all manner of extenuating circumstances. Every case of an offense must in fairness be judged on its own merits. The leader must judge the peculiar circumstances attending it, consider the personality of the offender, and above all discover the underlying motive. It is unquestionably true that most men naturally prefer to do right, and go wrong only for some reason. Very often some sense of offended justice is behind it. In any case the punishment cannot be reasonable unless founded on a true understanding of the facts. And it must be both reasonable and just, for its one big object is the effect it will have on the man's character and the group discipline. This effect is the determining factor. It is most important that both leader and men shall always realize that whatever punishment is given, it is done for the good of all as well as for that of the individual.

Investigation of Offense.—To be able to get at the actual truth of the matter takes tact and knowledge of human nature. You will be interested in developing this ability in yourself. It will often be difficult to get the man to be frank, he cannot quite believe in your desire to be fair, and his instincts of secretiveness, pugnacity, being a good sport, etc., all stand in your way. Put yourself in his place is a good rule during the investigation. It is going to take time and patience and skill, until you have established the tradition of cards on the table and a square deal for all. By avoiding ever acting in passion and by always showing a determination to get the facts and judge fairly, you will soon be able to get at the real truth about each offense, and to learn what it really means in your organization that this man has done as he did. Then you may decide what steps to take for the best interests of all.

Do not think that this is Utopian, or that it takes too much time. It is a leader's business to have time for just such things—and you really save time by it. Do it thoroughly a few times, and you will thus discover and root out the cause for soreness and trouble and establish a spirit of fairness and decency which will soon reward you by freedom from having any offenses to handle at all.

Actual Punishment Unnecessary.—A pleasant fact is that while every offense must be taken cognizance of, it does not have to be always actually punished. It may often be made the subject of a plain talk to all of the men, explaining what such an offense means to the success of the undertaking and put so strongly that a better result may be thus obtained without giving any punishment at all. I recall an instance in one of the inexperienced war organizations, where a senior officer, detailed to handle the case of a man actually guilty of the serious offense of sleeping on post as a sentinel, made it so strong an object lesson in his talk to the company that he put the whole outfit, officers and men, on their feet in discipline, and did not punish the sentinel at all. So do not feel that "punishment must always follow and fit the crime." Use your common sense judgment, and do the thing which you believe will best promote the discipline you are trying to inspire in all. A reprimand, with an explanation of what the offense means to discipline, is generally punishment enough.

The Leader's Responsibility.—If in the end you decide that punishment must be given, give it yourself. Be very jealous of the authority over your own men. Do not let anyone interfere with it or exercise it for you if you can help it. You want them to look to you for justice and see in you the seat of authority under which they act and to which they are responsible. This means that you personally handle every case, and make it clear that the decision as to the punishment is the result of your own judgment. If the offense must be punished with more severity than you are empowered to administer, then only send it to higher authority, and with your own recommendation. It is a poor officer who lets a court martial run the discipline of his command. The good one sends a man to court for punishment only in the rarest cases, and then because he is dealing with a recalcitrant who will not respond to decent treatment, and is therefore a candidate for discharge. The same general rule should be true in administering any office in civil affairs.

Prompt Action Necessary.—As the object of both rewards and punishments is the effect they are to have on the individual and particularly on the group, action in both cases should be taken immediately following the occasion, while it is fresh in the minds of all. Let your men realize that you are right on the job of bossing, and that the conduct of each is a matter of real interest to you and to all. To overlook offenses and neglects that appear willful, causes them to multiply, and discourages the faithful workers. The word or nod of recognition of good work is immediate, and has its effect, so also does the first step in recognition or correction of an offense. This first step may be an admonition, or even a reprimand where you are sure it is justified. But the first step is generally to call the man up and ask his reason—and to ask him in a tone that assumes that he has a reason, and that you intend to give it fair consideration. You may have to defer action for further investigation, but you have taken the first step and gotten the immediate effect. It only remains to carry on to a decision as circumstances determine.

Symptoms of Poor Leadership.—We have all seen men in positions of authority who are awful examples of what a leader ought not to be. A little authority in their hands seems to upset the balance in their heads. They lose all sense of how to deal with men, become ridiculously arbitrary and loudmouthed and blustering. They try to rule by "putting the fear of God into them," by main strength and brute force. They are the boss because they have been named the boss, and "they will show them." Their first step when they see anything going wrong is to bellow "what the h—— are you doing?" in a tone that implies that the man is not only a fool but a criminal. They outrage every sensibility of manliness he may have, assume his motives are those of a thief and a liar—and then expect him to respond with good work and loyal service. Of course that is ridiculous. Such methods of control bring only sullen obedience, and even invite open rebellion. Swagger and bluster are but a thin camouflage for incompetence, and it would be a wholesome thing for these leaders to be able to realize the scorn and disgust they are implanting in the hearts of their men. Some do not know any better, and may be made good by training, others lack native strength of character and are hopeless. Neither should be left in authority as they are.

Misconduct—Fault of Leader.—Where you find recurring cases of insubordination, or indifference to good work, you will generally find that the cause for it lies in the presence of a leader who is not good enough for his job. This is true in the army, and must be true in any organization. For it is true that men generally start out on any job with the intention to make good on it, and if many go wrong in an outfit, the answer is pretty sure to be that there is something wrong with its leader. Likewise where a leader finds himself unable to maintain discipline, he may well seek for the cause within himself. We often hear the statement "I've got the worst bunch of anarchists on earth. No one could do anything with them." This is an admission of the leader's own unfitness. Men run about the same, are subject to about the same instincts and controlled by the same general principles. I have seen the same group of men who were all but mutinous under a hard-headed, narrow-minded officer become one of the best disciplined groups of the whole command under a few weeks of a new leadership which embodied principles of fairness and decency in handling men. The lesson is plain, both to the man who wants to be a good leader, and to the employer who wants his subordinates to get good results.

Giving Orders.—Many a beginner questions in his heart whether he can get the men to obey him or not. Perhaps this will be the first time in his life he has ever been in a position of authority to give orders. He has been the servant rather than the master, in the ranks of his boyhood gang rather than its captain. He has never enjoyed the habit of command, and, unless carried along by some dominating influence, is ill at ease in giving orders. This is very common on the part of young corporals in the army, and calls for experience and training before they can make good. If the youngster by tone or manner in giving the order betray that there is any doubt in his heart that it will be obeyed, he simply invites disobedience out of the Adam that is in everyone. Common exhibitions of this uncertainty are—the sickening apologetic tone and even words, high-pitched shouting of the order, accompanying profanity, repeating the order again and again, and threats as to what will happen if it is not obeyed. These are all sad exhibitions of inexperience or incompetence, and are sure to lead to trouble. See to it that you avoid every one of them, and school yourself in the correct methods. Here are some suggestions.

How to Give an Order.—In the first place do not give too many orders, give as few as possible. Remember the requirements of the modern theory of command. Here is where they apply directly. Therefore you first make sure that the order is necessary, and that the thing to be done is reasonable. Then pick a suitable man to do this particular thing, call this man by name and thus get his attention, and then in a quiet tone tell him to do so and so, just as a baseball captain tells a member of the team to cover third base. There is no question of obedience, no thought of it. Your quiet tone does not assume that the man is deaf, or a surly dog, or a criminal, but does assume that he is an intelligent, loyal member of the team of which you are captain. It will not occur to him to disobey such an order.

How Not to Give Orders.—On the other hand you will yourself stimulate his disobedience if by tone or words you insult his manliness, question his loyalty and obedience, or by threats dare him to disobey. We see this often illustrated in the affairs of daily life, where men untrained in authority are required to exercise it, and generally give orders in such a manner as to stir up trouble rather than to get cheerful obedience. This is certainly true with most street car conductors and similar holders of a brief authority. By observation you may get a dozen lessons daily in giving orders—ten how not to give them, and two how to do it to get results without friction.

I once visited as their first regular army instructor a rather new troop of National Guard cavalry that had somewhere gotten the idea that obedience to orders would result in proportion to noise. Every order was roared at the men, and generally accompanied by a volley of profanity, in a pathetic effort to exercise authority. It was an astonishing exhibition of not knowing how to handle men, and naturally did not command the respect or obedience of the meanest man in the troop. It was a pleasure to watch the keenness with which they grasped the correct doctrine of command, and to see the discipline of the whole organization develop under the change. Those same men were fast becoming real leaders and no doubt carried through to success.

It is clear then that disobedience may often be the direct result of the way in which the order was given, and you should remember this when investigating a case. While that may not justify your overlooking this particular offense, it should enable you to correct the cause of trouble and thus avoid continued offenses. You may be able to teach the subordinate to give orders correctly, or you may have to take away his authority.

The Why of an Order.—It is a good thing where possible to give the reason for doing a thing at the same time that you give the instructions. This not only enlists the man's intelligent interest in carrying them out, but often gives him a chance to do better work because he understands what the desired result is. There are of course occasions for quick action and for simple action when this would not be reasonable. So in using this idea of telling why, there are two things which you must carefully look out for: first, it must never appear that you are apologizing for giving the order. It must be clear that you are explaining what is to be done, not why it is being ordered. And second, avoid cultivating a spirit or habit which would make a man feel free to stop and ask why when simply told to do a thing, as in an emergency. So you give the reason for the action only when it is clear that the circumstances warrant it, and when it will lead to better results.

Necessity for Following up Instructions.—Equally important with giving instructions is to see that they are executed. This does not mean that you are to stand glowering at your man until he has moved. Go about your business in absolute assurance that he is carrying on; but if he does fail, be sure to note it and take action. Too many leaders feel that they have done their full part when they have given the order. To overlook even slight neglects is likely to lead to more serious ones; and for a man to be guilty of direct willful disobedience is a very serious thing in any organization, as it threatens the discipline of all and demands drastic action. Do not let it be true that you have gradually led a man into this through your shiftless leadership, whether due to your laziness, ignorance, or lack of nerve to enforce your authority.

In the matter of how instructions are carried out, a most helpful thing is to make it a rule of the organization that whenever a man is given a special task to do he is expected to report the fact as soon as it is done. You can see the advantages of this compared to the method of telling a man to do something and then letting him feel that you have no further interest in it. The man realizes that you will know how much time he takes to do it, and you realize that your duty is not fully done when the instructions are given. It gives you a chance to check up on his execution and to praise his expedition or excellence; and it gives the man a chance to try to win this praise. It is as though a father said, when giving his son a certain task, "let me know when you are through." He would get better results than he would if he left the lad alone with the feeling that his father would take no further interest in it.

Willful Disobedience.—But with all regard for everything on your part, it may yet happen that you will meet a case of direct willful disobedience in some certain matter. Some condition quite outside your knowledge or control may have caused it. If you want to handle this case wisely and save the man to the organization, you must realize how his mind is working and act accordingly. He is concentrating his faculties in opposition to this particular thing—forcing them from the normal easier channels of obedience, he has to concentrate them to the task of breaking out this new channel of disobedience. As the phrase goes, he has "his mind set on it." To win him over to obedience you must first divert his faculties from this concentration by requiring him quietly to do some simple thing like handing you some article or adjusting his clothing, anything that you are quite sure that he will do for you. Then by easy stages you may develop a state of mind which will make it possible to discuss the original trouble reasonably, thus regaining your control and saving him from grave consequences. We have a like case in horse training. Where the trainer persists in making him do some one movement a horse often becomes stubborn and refuses to move at all. The trainer then changes absolutely to some simple thing which the horse will do at command—perhaps to walk and halt and walk again. He thus re-establishes control, and then through steps that the horse will perform returns gradually to the first test of obedience and finds him tractable. It takes patience and a high order of leadership to save a man in such serious cases as this, but you will joy in having done it. "Any dub can fire a man"—you want to do better than that.

Orders Rarely Necessary.—But after all the best thing about giving orders is not to have to give them. In the general case, the better the leadership the fewer the orders given. Teamwork, co-operation, initiative and loyalty of subordinates, all these developments of intelligent leadership make orders largely unnecessary—and things are done in response to suggestions and in carrying out instructions as to what is to be done. We may envy the leader whose men jump in response to his quiet firm tone of command. But do not imagine that he picked this ability ripe for the eating from any tree of knowledge or life. He has developed a strong character and a knowledge of human nature in some practical school, learned that self-control is the first step in controlling others, and that men respond in kind to the treatment they receive.

The Tone of Voice.—Not only in giving orders but in all your verbal intercourse, the tone of your voice plays a part quite worthy of your consideration. It is a potent element of your personality in its effect on others, and easily within your control. It may interest you to the point of regarding your tones hereafter to realize the important part that human speech has played in our development from pure animalism. Centuries no doubt passed before primitive man learned the use of language. It was the one big step by which he proved his superiority over the other animals of creation and assured his progress. For language is the foundation, as it is the agent, of all knowledge; and alone made possible the mental processes necessary for our present accomplishment. Yet we see men to-day so blind to this, so indifferent to this fundamental difference between themselves and the beasts, that they allow themselves to roar and growl and whine and chatter in close similarity to certain well-known species. Others bungle the use of their voice deplorably; so one may barely catch their fading tones, or must shrink inwardly from their rasping one. Men actually attempt to win the minds of others and yet speak in tones so repellent that convention alone makes us stay to listen to them. It is a pity they do not think to hear themselves as others hear them, and thus learn not to sacrifice longer this natural asset. For half the power of speech is in the tone.

We can all recall cases where it was the tone of voice that caused the trouble. "It wasn't so much the thing he said, as the nasty way he said it" has caused many a man to go to the mat. But it is not alone in making trouble that the tone of voice can accomplish so much. We have also seen the cool, quiet tone of a leader bringing order out of chaos and re-establishing control and confidence among excited men; the virile animated tone putting "pep" into men's work; and the firm, confident tone winning obedient following through danger and hardship. The power of speech is thus seen to be tremendous—let us use it to advantage, and as becomes members of the human race.

The Mob Spirit.—As any man may have occasion to deal with the "crowd spirit" and even with the "mob spirit," it is well to have some idea of how these things come about and are controlled. In normal circumstances the members of a community as individuals are law-abiding and self-restrained in deference to public opinion and their own sense of responsibility. Some sense of common wrong may unite certain ones into a group for the common purpose of obtaining redress or instituting improvement. This group may start with no intention of committing any overt act or even of actually doing any particular thing, and yet end by being led into most unfortunate excesses.

Individuals in Crowds.—The individuals who compose the group have to a degree lost their identity and have passed much of their individual responsibility to the shoulders of the group. They thus come to find themselves feeling free to do things they would never consider doing as individuals, and being controlled by statements and suggestions which they would know to be absurd in ordinary circumstances. Thus they approach a point where they do not respond to sound reason and logical argument, but rather react to impulses which are aroused by passionate appeals, daring suggestions, almost anything that has a catching sound and is often enough repeated. And thus they may end by becoming a mob, susceptible to blind impulses and ruled by unreason.

In its beginnings this group is easily amenable to control, for the "mob will" has not yet taken form, and the individuals still retain some sense of reason, personal responsibility and fear of consequences. But the longer they remain together, the greater their numbers, the more they are harangued as a body having a common purpose, the more surely does this crowd-will take form and make possible their transformation into a mob. Therefore by temporizing with the crowd you strengthen its unity and encourage the growth of its concerted will. Action to control the situation must be prompt and decisive, and directed to an immediate dispersal of the crowd. Let the mob spirit once get really under way, feel its unity and find its peerless leader, and it may be controlled only by similar tactics to those of the demagogue who now leads it, or by the use of the armed forces of the law. These are points well worth the consideration of every citizen, whether he contemplates joining a mob or trying to prevent one.

Conclusion.—As you note that this discussion is ended, it is possible that you are wondering how I could have failed to mention so-and-so as one of the most important elements in leadership. I hope you are, for in so doing you have taken a big step in leadership in that you have yourself considered and weighed its requirements. I repeat in closing that it is only by giving personal thought to these questions and deciding upon your own personal methods and conduct that you will acquire success in handling men. Let your purpose be clear and worthy, and your policy based on square dealing; be yourself genuine, unselfish and just; make your men partners with you in the enterprise, and your personality such as to admit their loyal co-operation and following; keep in mind that your object is to increase their manpower through their developed individual manliness and character; and then work out the details as your own experience and judgment dictate.

Transcriber's note:

Obvious printer's errors have been corrected.

Inconsistent spellings and inconsistent use of hyphens have been preserved.

An entry for "Foreword" has been added to the Table of Content of this e-book.