| La lettre du GERPISA | no 101 |
Research Questions (2) - Nicolas Hatzfeld
The first theme, presented in Alain P. MIchel's post-Masters research project, involved the assembly line as it developed within Renault factories. The initial question relative to this particular project was formulated by GERPISA : How was Renault capable of having such a diversified production up to 1939, whereas assembly line production was on the wane ? Several axes of analysis have thusfar been proposed.
First of all, when does the period of assembly line work truly commence, and how exactly is it to be defined ? Indeed, assembly line work is a progressive process, ranging from the simple "alignment" of assembling a vehicle pushed from one work post to another on a track (approximately 12 work posts at 40-minute work cycles), to "short lines" using a mechanical conveyor with work cycles lasting under ten minutes, even only two minutes. If one simply takes the simple alignment as a criterion, then assembly line production at Renault exists earlier than generally imagined, indeed before the end of World War I. Hence, one must reevaluate the notion that the company lagged behind, particularly in comparison with Citroen or with United States companies : even French constructors speak of a delay as they rely on a comparison with an American model they believe is fully operational, something that Hounshell vigorously contests. Should a more restrictive definition of the assembly line be adopted, also including a mechanical movement ?
The transition from one type of assembly line to another implies an apprenticeship process. At the time, agents responsible for methods invented tools of measure and balance, and notions such as that of operation or workload have certainly evolved since then. Yet, different assembly line types coexisted for a very long time. Reasons for this can be found in the exact economic, technical, industrial, and social factors involved. Assembly lines are established early on, and their extended use must be evaluated. Do they remain small in number, as seems to be the case ? Whatever the case may be, it nevertheless is important to underline the fact that the notion of a complete continuity in production already exists at the end of the 1920s.
Work cycles constitute an essential indicator of the degree, from a flexibility standpoint, of production and the type of labor/manpower. Long work cycles provided great possibilities to diversify production on the same assembly line, however this certainly required very experienced and/or specialized workers. This is the contrary for shorter work cycles. In analyzing workshop plans and worker pay slips, Alain Michel will attempt to establish work cycles and worker qualifications in function of the assembly line type.
Another important question involves the degree of production diversity. Just what is the exact situation at Citroen or Renault ? In its production tables, Renault establishes a hierarchy going from the least to the most detailed type of production : fiscal capacity, trade name, the type of motor, the type of frame/body. From the standpoint of diversity, what is the most pertinent criterion ? In function of the chosen criterion, the number of models can vary from three to more than twenty.
Examining photographic archives of the period underlines another research axis based on what can be observed in these photos. The images are arranged and often deliberately organized with the rather significant intention of portraying actual rather than theoretical functioning. They also portray methods of communication which exist alongside organizational and equipment forms. This type of analysis thus gives rise to new hypotheses to be explored concerning complex social relations, and could contribute to the "top down" representation offered by classical studies, hence enriching our knowledge of the actual organization during this period.
The second axis of our debate focused on the question raised by Yves Cohen relative to the implementation of a project : just how is it translated into action ? Anticipation organized in various forms (project, program, preparation) is at the heart of modern production. Yves Cohen most especially focuses on the gap between the initial command and the actual implementation of production within the company, be it Ford in 1915, Citroen in 1927, or in the ex-Soviet Union. In these companies, one may find production unit employees, "spare parts hunters" or "pushers" who are responsible for finding various or missing spare parts or supplies before they are needed.
Recent developments in "action theory" allow one to perceive of action as not simply an operation that is carried out, but as a human and social act full of uncertainty. In this perspective, action is never a given. This approach is twice as valuable in historical research : on the one hand, generally speaking present-day historiography has reemphasized the standpoint of the initial command as well as the application of its policy; on the other hand, the historian, always intervening after the facts and events, must take special care to avoid analyzing them in a linear and determinist manner.
Arnold and Faurote have pointed to the existence of spare parts hunters in 1915 in the Ford company, as well as during the 1920s in French companies, though in France, these workers were situated on a lower scale than at Ford. Their activity serves as a response to a gap between the production program and actual results : during these periods, characterized by an important increase in production objectives, it is generally upstream activity that hampers assembling. Mattern, then assistant-director of production at Citroen, recounts how he "reverses the roles" in 1927. Taking charge of a certain number of upstream factories, Mattern refuses demands from the central organization or the downstream by spare parts hunters who were excessively perturbing the system. He establishes means for a rapid and precise circulation of information relative to actual upstream production and the genuine needs of downstream production. As such, he does not do away with risk factors, yet is able to limit them to the upstream factory. This account, however, does not answer all of our questions. For example, we still do not know if Mattern's neutralization of spare parts hunters is long-lasting or transient. However, it represents one of the forms adopted in the automobile industry for phasing out spare parts hunters. Indeed, the adjustment carried out was itself a source of dysfunction and tension as witnessed by the hostility accompanying it.
Yves Cohen draws a parallel between "spare parts hunters" and "pushers" in the ex-Soviet Union. The similarities existing between problems and solutions can perhaps be found in the fact that, as within the internal functioning of a capitalist company, the role of market forces were theoretically absent from intercompany relations. To what extent can we establish the parallel in order to understand both phenomena ?
This episode corresponds to a particular moment, to one form in the establishment of a production plan, that we must be careful not to judge. It is better to expose those judgments expressed by the actors themselves. Disorder and risk are indissociable from planning and its encounter with reality. This underlines the importance of questions relative to organization and flow as they were indeed carried out, for better comprehending paths chosen and the characterization of production models.